How the **** would I know?
I think your answer hinges on whether or not you and The Mule make a point to get out and partake of the local theater scene.
I recognize that Chicagoans are lucky in that we have more theater companies per capita than any other city and that said companies are spread out ALL over the city not just in one or two theater hot-spots. Lots of great companies (and some of them with some pretty sweet pedigrees and history alas) have closed in the past 15 yrs. (like my beloved used and indie bookstores, sighs) but others have opened and in general the whole scene is still robust IMO.
Red is pretty old dude---if you/The Mule have theater buds you could always pitch it to them. Certainly doesn't require a lot of Equity actors or stage production beyond errecting the detailed Rothko studio set.
Grammar Hobo, where the **** you been? Off the top of my head I'd have to say Van Gogh is probably the artist who's had the MOST theatrical films done about him! Stretching all the way back to Kirk Douglas' hammy
Lust for Life take on Van Gogh, to as Mikita's Helmet pointed out the great Robert Altman film
Vincent and Theo---though the best IMO is the French film from back in the 90's
Van Gogh and the best documentary is Paul Cox's great film
Vincent with John Hurt voicing Van Gogh as he reads VG's letters to Theo.
Assuming we don't get into documentaries then naturally I agree with you that there could ALWAYS be more theatrical films about artists but on balance and considering the audience for the theme I'd have to say the global film industry keeps making them pretty regularly if you ask me.
There's your typical Hollywood fare like
The Girl with the Pearl Earring about Vermeer but it is pretty faithfully adapted from its source novel so it's really about a Vermeer relationship and less about his life and artistic temperament IMO. Eh, it was harmless but nothing great. I liked Collin Firth well enough as Vermeer but really, I
Vermeer so a MUCH finer film that's solely about him and his art is going to have to be done some day to make me happy. And then there's your old-time Hollywood fare like the aforementioned
Lust for Life or say
The Agony and the Ecstasy with none other than Charlton Heston hamming it up as Michelangelo, heh. You mentioned
Frida,
Basquiat, and
Pollock but there have also been in the past several decades even a fair amount of films that I can recall off the top of my head seeing:
Camille Claudel
(w/Isabelle Adjani playing her and of course since it's about Camille it naturally also features her relationship with Rodin. Loved this film back in the day and it was vanguard in at least highlighting a female artist.)
Suviving Picasso
(w/Anthony Hopkins playing Pablo. . .eh, it was decent.)
Love is the Devil
(w/Derek Jacobi playing Francis Bacon. This one I liked a lot. Depressing. But Jacobi was great alongside Daniel Craig.)
Modigliani
(w/Andy Garcia as Amedeo. This one was a letdown for me because really? Andy Garcia really can't act very well and I had high hopes *in spite* of that because Modigliani is likely one of my Top 10 favorite artists---this one is sorta okay,(but mostly weak IMO) but I have hopes some day a better biopic about him can be made)
Georgia O'Keeffe
(w/my girl Joan Allen as Georgia and my boy Jeremy Irons as Stieglitz. This one I had to rent because it wasn't a theater release---I think it was a cable movie? I liked it because of the artists involved and the actors playing them but I can't say it was a *strong* film)
Klimt
(w/John Malkovich playing Gustav. . .I will see and usually love JM in just about anything and I LOVE Klimt so this one I basically enjoyed. Worth seeing at the movies? Probably not but totally worth renting.)
Fur
(about the BRILLIANT Diane Arbus w/unfortunately Nicole Kidman playing DA. . .I pretty much despise NK in everything so I didn't dig it. And since I have major photography love this one was tragic for me.)
Goya's Ghost
(I liked this because I thought Stellan Skaarsgaard was great but it's still not a great film or anything. Basically weak.)
much better Goya flick IMO was
Goya in Bordeaux
Paradise Found
(w/Kiefer Suherland as Gauguin. Eh, passable. . .but I think more so because the scenery and the art are so fucking gorgeous and less to do with it actually being a very good film.)
. . .and so on and so on
The most recent films I saw on this topic were just earlier this year when I was trawling Netflix. I think I was looking up the filmography for Martin Freeman for some reason or another and saw that he had in the past couple of years done a 2-film set with the ALWAYS "way, way out there" and (likely) genius Peter Greenaway directing.
Nightwatching
(Obviously about Rembrandt and his massive
The Night Watch painting w/my boy Martin Freeman as Rembrandt---it was only okay for me overall but visually stunning and interesting as Greenaway films always are on the latter tip.)
. . .and then after that ^ theatrical Rembrandt film he released
Rembrandt's J'Accuse
(Also about the painting
The Night Watch but this time a highly exploratory semi-documentary of sorts which still features actors from the theatrical film playing their same characters from the painting as they did in
Nightwatching as PG attempts to literally explore the painting from the inside out not from the typical art appreciation vantage point of being outside the painting and trying to look and examine the technique and motivation inside it. He examines it's history, it's massive amount of characters, and speculates as to some murder highjinks from a forensic point of view---doing WAY interesting things with the camera. It's a little trippy---I sort of loved it for the bravado or cojones or whatever Greenaway had to atempt it. I found it wholly intriguing.)
(Don't **** with me, I will DESTROY your ginger ass!)
