From my favorite movies..

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

The first must-see film of the year.

To the extent anything about abstract artist Ray Johnson lends itself to the description "straight-forward", "How to Draw a Bunny" is a straight-forward documentary about the man's life. The films spends some time on building mystery over Johnson's eventual suicide at 62 but the mystery turns out to be a little less surprising than the ending of "Titanic". Otherwise the documentary traces Johnson's life from childhood through the growth of his reputation in the abstract art community presenting mostly unknown contemporaries with the exception of Christo and his wife Jean-Claude. These friends, fellow artists and others can give little insight into understanding Johnson's remote collages or his unusual behavior. Ultimately, whether you enjoy the film depends on whether you find an interest in Johnson 's art and life which limits the audience for the film severely.

see "yawns" review first of all ....I usually like this kind of arty movie/doc most of the time cause I like history.Information of any kind is learning and ART.Having said that this was trash.....as I watched this story unfold I kept saying this guy is garbage....he makes collages..he has no artistic talent himself so he uses/fuses other stuff and glues it on boards..wow great talent.....it was crap..Im sorry he died a suicide death but a mysterious death does not make a great artist..esp one who took brand names and a gallon of glue and a gay lifestyle and his friends say he was misunderstood..I think the artist himself knew what HE was all about..a life of crap art and he knew he had no talent himself....let this one pass.

This documentary provides a much different angle on the presentation of subject, and this is what makes it exciting. That we cannot ever know Johnson, especially in light of the fact that he has committed suicide, makes the entire exercise all the more intriguing. Interview after interview evinces an all-too-rare character study of someone who simply did not want to be known. The art of this concealment builds to an exhilaratingly creepy conclusion that will be familiar to anyone who has been affected by suicide. How can we think we know someone who commits this unthinkable act? The segments regarding Johnson's rope-a-dope art dealings and coyness about capital is worth the price of admission alone. His influence is everywhere in the art world to this day, and yet few will remember him.

Well not really, its all pretty much drawn out for you. This film is a very solid documentary about Ray Johnson an underground artist from NY, that never grew in popularity as his peers from the scene. The film presupposes that the "mysterious death" was not "mysterious" at all but in fact was really something that could be considered his final performance. The film is extremely linear in that sense. We get a quick summary of his childhood, we get a quick peek at the NY scene, and we get hints throughout the film how he loved the idea of messages in a bottle, or things associated with water and floating. So yes, you pretty quickly build up a theory he committed suicide and that it was a performance. The film is so absolute that their is not even a hint of doubt in anyone interviewed that his death was an accident or foul play, that the idea of this film being about solving his death, is misleading. (Which I personally was annoyed at because I misjudged what the jacket description considered the arch of the film, not the directors fault, but I was still tossed by that for a minute).The true arch of the film is also a bit shallow, "Who was Ray Johnson?" This question is answered in the first lines of the film. Friends, Gallery owners and even mailmen knew a little bit of him, but when pondering the question, everyone realizes no one really knew who the man really was. After reiterating this point again and again, we finally come to the closest realization (From I believe Billy Name) when he says, "To try and separate the man and the art is impossible when talking about Ray Johnson". Not a direct quote, but something to that effect. Ray was art, and what he did was not a creation of art but art itself. This of course then concludes the big question, "Was his death a performance?" This answer again is pretty self explanatory.This film is a good look at an artist and does a good job at detailing a man's life, but in relation to the elements that surrounded this man, we are left a bit shallow. We interview famous people from the art world, but the film never dives deeply into the art scene, or for that matter anything.There is nothing wrong with a film that stays directly on its subject and this film exceedingly does that well, but if you wanted to learn more about the art scene, this is a good film to pick up AFTER you have learned about the scene from other sources. This film only allows you to put faces to all the artists you have heard or read about before. I do recommend this film on the basis that you get a strong solid film, but do not be misled to feel that this film is revelatory in any such way.