I find myself neither liking nor disliking them. I am ambivalent. I have expressed this on other threads, that famous people get notoriety for doing just about anything mildly creative whether it is of good quality or poor. I have seen photos here on the forum that deserve much higher praise than anything Dennis Hopper produced. Unfortunately, no one is going to buy "Flower Fouls" by James Harr because frankly, who the heck is James Harr?? He's nobody. But a collection of casual snapshots by <enter name of famous singer/actor/politician here> will get published in a heartbeat because people think it will give them insight into that person they admire. It isn't about art. Hopper seems to be a pretty average photographer. Some shots are keepers, others are boring/poorly composed/badly exposed/out of focus.
The preceding was sponsored by the "They Call It 'My Two-Cents-Worth' For a Reason Foundation".
Completely agree.
Its strange when a celebrity or someone on the same page as Dennis here would try and present the photos in such a way, "i want to be remembered for my work with a camera", its over the top to me.
maybe he has been misquoted..
& I can enjoy some of his images, not really on this article though.
but its the intention thats weird to me, if there is some strange "i wanna be remembered" notion behind it, its not as enjoyable for me.