Biggest Difference Between Bad Art and Great Art by UCLA Professor Richard Walter

Biggest Difference Between Bad Art and Great Art by UCLA Professor Richard Walter

The Art, Craft, and Business Of Film and Television Writing

In this Film Courage video interview, UCLA Screenwriting Chair shares the biggest different between bad art and great art.









Stuff we use:
CAMERA – This is the camera we have used to film 90+% of our interviews (over 200 interviews and counting) It continues to be our workhorse –

LENS – Most people ask us what camera we use, no one ever asks about the lens which filmmakers always tell us is more important. This lens was a big investment for us and one we wish we could have made sooner. Started using this lens at the end of 2013 –


Rode VideoMic Pro – The Rode mic helps us capture our backup audio. It also helps us sync up our audio in post

Audio Recorder – If we had to do it all over again, this is probably the first item we would have bought –

LIGHTS – Although we like to use as much natural light as we can, we often enhance the lighting with this small portable light. We have two of them and they have saved us a number of times –

COMPUTER – Our favorite computer, we each have one and have used various models since 2010 –

*These are affiliate links, by using them you can help support this channel.

#artists #art #UCLA


  1. Agreed most art is bad, don’t agreed that because you can’t immediately engage with it does it mean it is a waste. Definitely had to think a lot about some art to eventually understand and appreciate it. Again agreed that good art will rise to the top. But a lot of great art could be dismissed if you only relied on the initial gut reaction. I think you are basically saying don’t waste your time on bad art.

  2. this guy never saw a Velazquez, a Goya, a Santiago Rusiñol, or a Ramon Casas..

    i pissed in my pants watching a real original Santiago Rusiñol painting in Sitges ( Spain).

  3. A million years from now no art created now will be great, unless reality as we know it is a simulation played back than it would entail its all great.

  4. Someone who talks about the first purpose of movies clearly is not to be boring, has never seen (or enjoyed) and Tarkovski, Jeanne Dielman or Hamaguchi, movies that are so immersive and emotional through the creation of a sense of tedium – in short, to be deliberately boring. What he’s referring to is movies as entertainment, which is absolutely true and respectable. But I’m getting tired of the consideration that only entertaining movies really count, and the other ones are just for movie nerds and intellectual snobs.

  5. the Met is boring. NYC is a graveyard of minds who think NYC is great. this guy is boring with his boring takes. yawn.

  6. My take is a bit different. Things are fundamentally different in this century than in the last. No one looks back with that type of nostalgia anymore. There’s no difference or defining traits of an era anymore. It’s superhero movies and special effects in the mainstream.

  7. People say art directors are people who only focus on the visuals…. but I beg to differ. Any director be it creative or art, need to fcking know the tools that their teams use. Since that lets you understand the project’s limitations. Unattractive directors are the ones that might have a bunch of ideas but never understand what’s do-able or not. Gotta also have some decent time management and client maneuverability. So that the scope isn’t out of proportion. Crappy ones just excuse better quality = over-time. Don’t be that guy, it’s hard being a good art/creative director.

  8. Good art needs to look like it was made by an alien or a human computer, like the Japanese Art called Anime, the calculations and ecuatioms make it look realistic.

  9. *This is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO good! He’s not being cynical — he’s just calling out the fact that there’s carelessness out there!!!! Thank you!!! This is good content!!!!*

  10. I don’t remember the imitation game. It’s must feel so uncomfortable to speak on a subject when in a position of authority and be so lacking of substance and understanding.

  11. First of all, there is no bad art, only garbage being presented as art by unscrupulous predatory opportunists. Most of the alleged art from the 20th century to the present is a cesspool of moronic stupidity, ignorance, ugliness and insanity, especially the vast majority of the cultural icons who were either conmen, delusional or both, who presented art brut as legitimate and equal to the Renaissance masters, which is like saying a toddler can be as skilled a surgeon as an adult who has devoted their entire life to their field of study and practice.

    Beware of those who are presented or present themselves as authorities, especially those with degrees which certify that they successfully completed a course of study in the kleptocratic system of corruption of academia proclaiming their conformity to the confirmation bias of the current ideological fads and trends.

  12. When people Flock in hordes to view and snap up “ Art “ only due to the Novelty & Marketing of the artists – when “ art “ is deemed new & Exciting only because a 3 year old splashed some paint on the canvas floor- when the Publicity Machine rumours the Artist of the Hour , vanished from their village for a week & went to heaven to talk to GOD- then you know the Story of Hans Christen Andersen The Emperors new clothes has become the manipulated view point by those who are behind “ Art “ Movements.
    A black X on a pink canvas is now “ art “. Its BS is what that is.
    Life has become banned. Thought had become contained. And individuality now has turned into the Trans Gendered Movement with 73 Sexes – according to them.
    Do a Pro Hart: put it all into a Canon & light the Fuse!!

  13. Most modern art substitutes weird for quality, narrow isms for scope, and trendy for depth. It also refuses to change or even talk about progressive ideas in art like those that follow

    Too many treat art as a marketing scheme. Modern art has become a trendy clique and the art now is mostly over promoted footnotes to greater art that was done 100 years ago. But art is too important to be reduced to a trendy clique.

    Post-ism, is art for a new century, not a continuation of last century trends.

    1 Mass Market Paintings like Prints. When any art form is mass marketed it enters a golden age. This has happened with books, records, and film. Let’s add paintings. Most art is in storage in museum basements. Mass Marketing allows art to tour in copies and allows artists to make royalties on copies.
    Why do you think the world gets so excited about a new great book, record, or film; but no one cares about a new great painting? All are mass produced except the painting.

    2. End a Century of Isms. Dump the genres and formulas and let all kinds of art be a part of the art world.

    3. Shift Emphasis From Trendy to Quality. Shift emphasis from the latest trendy art, to quality art in any style. Just because art is weird does not mean it is great art.

    4. Free the Art From Museums and Galleries. Get the art out of the ivory elitist museum and gallery towers and back into the world. Have city art centers open to all artists. Make art that is relevant and communicates with people. Start with the first generation of artists online.

    5. Postism is Part of a Bigger Revolution. Postism is part of the bigger art and media revolution out of Dallas, that includes art, music, lit, film, media, and a lot more.

    6. Postism online: Online artists are the new wave of art. We had all the isms of last century. Now we have a free for all, of all kinds of artists, that are not sanctioned by any museum or gallery, displaying their work. Out of that comes the next wave and revolution of artists.

    Last century the goal was to fit the ism. This century the goal is to do great art – no ism, no boundaries. Fractionalized art then, synchronized art now. Even calling something modern art is a type of ism that separates that art from the art of the past.

    The 20th century was a century of experimentation in art. Now in the 21st we can choose from all those styles and / or start one of our own.

    Then too if someone devises a way to charge and collect a penny per view on a webpage, that would allow any great artist to get money for their art and have a career without any middlemen.

    Duchamp broke ground 100 years ago – but now his clones are just shoveling dirt. Weird art is easy, you put a strip of raw bacon across an expensive violin, but it’s not good art.

    Join the art revolution and pull the art world out of last century.

    Musea since 1992.

  14. What makes art deemed as “good” or “bad” have to do with the values of the time in which its created. Some artists are out of step with their time. They get called bad at their time. But sometimes, centuries later, they’re considered great

  15. I enjoyed this video. It stirred engaging, meaningful conversation in the comment section, I loved reading everyone’s views. Wonderful

  16. This guy thinks like me. I’ve written/said that a great movie/story will change your soul or consciousness.

  17. The Sopranos was great art? Contemporary, salacious mafia soap opera.
    The Godfather was great art.

  18. I watched breaking bad and all it did was make me feel miserable. I guess I’m just not sadistic enough to appreciate art

  19. This could be a subjective experience. While true, many amazing works are also forgotten. To some extent this is an old man mind set, where we become sort of jaded by our own experiences. He seems self conscious

  20. Err, isn’t beauty in the eye of the beholder? This is just one guy’s opinion about what he thinks good or bad art is

  21. In the Heat of the Night starring Sidney Poitier. Hey that was a good movie. I loved it because it evokes an emotional response- it reminds you you’re alive. Bad art is really more of a craft- like beads on a string. Method and technique minus emotional content.

  22. What about the Hunger Games was boring? Especially the books. Breaking Bad on the other hand, which I thoroughly enjoyed, was full of cliches, inaccuracies, and stereotypical characters that the Hunger Games didn’t have.

  23. "There is nothing good or bad but thinking make it so." I find that oftentimes the reason you may not connect with a piece of work is because of the perspective you’re viewing it from. Does something have to sit in a museum and be taught to people as ‘good’ for decades to be worthwhile? I don’t believe so.

  24. Honestly art is so subjective you could have 20 people hate something and 20 people love and think it’s amazing work.. and you thinking your opinion is so important and the final straw on what is good and what is bad is just idiotic and not the universal truth

  25. The imitation game is overrated as fuck and people talk about hunger games more. This guys subjective ass take on art is objectively wrong.

  26. As an artist, it is very easy to get mad at a statement like that, but in reality, the statement is quite true. Artists have to think that way. Otherwise, we won’t push ourselves.

  27. Great art = not boring, "change you life for ever" – that is not a particularly helpful or accurate description coming from a university art professor. Just banal truisms.

  28. Funny enough, I didn’t finish this video because I watched a minute of it and then became super bored.

  29. But how does "dramatic narrative" apply when deciding that art is great or "lousy."

    That a still life can provide a grand narrative is the point of Norman Bryson in “Rhopography, Megalography, And Chardin.”

    Arguably every work of visual art has two narratives, a literal one and a visual one.

    Accordingly, art conveys two entirely different kinds of emotions. The everyday emotions evoked by the literal narrative alone cannot explain art. Literal narrative is not unique to art. Most literal narrative is not art.

    That seems to leave “aesthetic emotion” which according to the art theory of formalism a work of visual art that exhibits “significant form” will evoke. This provides a sufficient condition that alone will bring about the event of art.

    Where are the neuroscientists and cognitive psychologists for investigating this. The few times I have seen them try they have come up short. They say for example that jagged shapes put humans on edge. But important works by Picasso including Guernica and Les Demoiselles d’Avignon have jagged shapes and they don’t put me on edge.

  30. We are exposed to tremendous amounts of "good" and even "great" work and as a result we can’t appreciate it anymore. If the internet existed in the era of Da Vinci there is high chance that a lot more art like his would be produced and as a result many would miss-not pay attention to masterpieces.

  31. all the gurus tell us what a great script requires, but can’t actually produce one. strange.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.