Matt Like many people out there I'm sure, I had a loose understanding and knowledge of Basquit, but this film is very enlightening by filling in the missing gaps that I personally hadn't known about his life as told through those closest to him. The Director, who had a friendship with Basquit, does a wonderful job of interviewing people who knew him to really paint a full portrait of the mans character. Brilliant, creative, very sensitive.Basquiat of course, rose to fame from the streets even though his father was a well off accountant. His life story is sad, in the crusty, white world of art in the late seventies and early eighties in NYC, the obnoxious liberals who Basquiat was often demeaned by, because of his ethnic background which he felt, probably rightly so, like he was being viewed as some kind of primitive animal. Very sad, very moving film about a gifted artist and one of the best of the 20th century.

Snownoise The only good thing is that they edited and organized the whole segments very well but many important things are missing. First of all, it has very limited interviewees. There should be more than 10 people giving the information about Basquiat during 90 minutes. Second, there's not enough information about Basquiat's mother who could be the major influence of him, so as Andy Warhol. Third, there's no explanation about why Basquiat's art work is good basically. What they are representing through this documentary is "Basquiat is genius!" and that's all. Most of all, they claim Basquiat is a straight man. I don't really get this part and I still can't understand why they want him to be a straight man? Do they feel shame about the fact that he isn't? They somehow want Basquiat to be straight. Can't they tell by his paintings? Anyway, overall, it's a really poor documentary movie. There's no point at all. Who doesn't know Basquiat's a genius/radiant child?

Yale Freedman Basquiat's artwork transcended the culture of the streets, circa 1980. He started out as a graffiti artist and rapidly become one of the world's coolest underground painters. The interview footage, if you've never seen clips of Jean-Michel Basquiat, puts the viewer into the perspective of his artwork, and conveys how his ideas were partly influenced from past artists, partly his immediate emotions, and wholly groundbreaking. He became known for crossing out words on the canvas, which indirectly strengthened the meaning of his avant-guard, street poetry. Basquiat was an innovative painter who was ahead of his time. His drive was about being totally original; that is, the very best, when it came to originality. As far as a documentary, "Jean-Michel Basquiat: the Radiant Child," works well. As soon as the director presents the eventful rise and fame of the subject, the film takes a righteous step back to discuss Basquiat's background and influences. In addition, documentaries about a single subject should never depict a person's life in chronological order; it becomes more like a Barbara Walter's special, and we don't want that. I think the audiences's predilection for this film will depend on their fascination for the subject at hand; the chaotic life of an artist, the rise and fall of a famed celebrity. I absolutely adore these stories. They usually start and finish the same, but sometimes, events take the turn for the worse, and the icon dies at a very young age. Jean-Michel Basquiat was only 27 when he died of a hot-heroin overdose. Fame, fortune, and loneliness drove his drug addiction to an unbearable end. When you hear these stories, sometimes these celebrities make it, and sometimes, they never get to live long enough to tell it themselves. Always pray for their recovery. Basquiat's work might have become more famous as a result of his death, but there's never a price too high for a persons life; not fame, fortune, or history in the making. I think the strength of documentary filmmaking deals primarily with the subject. If the viewer is drawn to the central figure, then it's really hard to objectively critique the way a documentary is filmed. Personally, I don't think "The Radiant Child" provides strong enough direction, but more importantly, a strong passion for the subject, Jean-Michel Basquiat, and it certainly shows. "The Radiant Child" lacks the spontaneity and hipness of "Exit through the Gift Shop" (2010), but any art lover, interested in the short, yet successful life of Basquiat, will certainly enjoy this documentary. Basquiat was so daring and conceptual with his work, that when he wanted to explore a traumatic event from his childhood, he would literally paint in the manner of a five year-old child . A child; he was far from it. Radiant; he was above and beyond.

MisterWhiplash Jean-Michel Basquiat wasn't always a wonderful guy. He could be stubborn, and a "work-aholic" when it came to his art (he ultimately made over 1,000 paintings and postcards in his ten years making art), and got addicted to heroin which, if anyone brought it up around him, he would get vicious and vindictive. He died when he was 27 years old, and at a low point in his life and career following the death of his good friend Andy Warhol. But this isn't really what Tamra Davis wants to show, at least not entirely. She wants to give a fair assessment of her friend's work, a true artist in the sense that he pushed boundaries and conventions, did things his way, and got recognition and praise though somehow stayed on the fringe when it came to widespread acceptance. Like Jimi Hendrix, he was even revolutionary in his efforts at what he did, borrowing from others in a "neo-expressionist" style that was fresh, hip, but had a basic quality to it that could be understood.We get a view of his career- how he started off as an underground artist living downtown Manhattan at a time where, as one person puts it, "everybody did everything." No inspiration was lost on people who painted, had a band, made movies, wrote poetry and fiction, and made other art projects or graffiti. Basquiat, or "Samo" as he was called (such as "Same Ol' S***"), put up worded graffiti all over the city that got him some attention, and he had a band with Vincent Gallo where nobody could play an intstrument. But it was the very graffiti drawings he did, starting with postcards that he got sold to Warhol on a whim, and then with paintings by the dozen that he took off. One of the joys of the film is Davis showing us so much of the art, how much there was variety in his work even if so much seemed the same child-like drawings. For how simple and crude they appear, one sees a pattern, and there's an amazing sophistication in his work.Perhaps those who are not fans of Basquiat- and the documentary shows how there were some who looked down on his work, some of which (like the current MoMA director) have recanted- may not get a lot out of the movie. But as a film about the nature of an artist, how he works and how he interacts with people, some infamous like Warhol (their collaboration story is one of the highlights), and some not like the hangers-on at his apartment, it works very well. Some of Davis' low budget aesthetic makes it a little less than great, such as the newer interviews she's done with former curators, artists, musicians, and art dealers and buyers, are lessened in quality by bad audio and video. But perhaps (?) that was part of the point, too. She has an artist as her subject, also a close friend (Davis has some nice if uninteresting anecdotes about eating Chhinese food with Jean-Michel), and the work, and his life and his stories told from a 1986 interview done personally with him, speaks for itself.This all said, if you are a fan, or think you are, or even just enjoyed Julian Schnabel's 1996 movie, this goes more in-depth and you get a lot of great looks at his daring, provocative artwork, and his process. 8.5./10