Was he really as good as they say?

other than him legitimately thinking "It took me 5 years to paint like Raphael" sure he's pretty good.

Best cubist, decent post-impressionist, only one who pulled off Neoclassicism well

as far as im concerned the blue, rose, african, and later years of Picasso are shit tier.

He might've thought he could've painted the Sistine Chapel if he really wanted to but he couldn't. He was good at what he was good at though.

I like about 10 percent of his paintings. He is kind of a "look ma no hands" type of artist, as he could paint in so many styles.
Im a plebiscite but when any kind of artist creates there work only to flex, I usually find the product underwhelming. He has such a large portfolio however any one would probably find a couple of paintings they really like from Picasso.

How do I become Picasso-Tier famous? That probably just comes down to connections and luck yeah?

File: picasso98_0.jpg (49KB, 554x800px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 554x800px

i like some of his paintings

>>2858268
Steal a style not created by yourself and then say you created it disregarding all that created it. This man never invented cubism and everyone says he did. Fuck this pompous, egotistical painter. His early work was excellent, then when he said "muh cubism" he ran away with it and took all the fame.

It is virtually impossible in this day and age to do what he did. There are contemporaries that will go down in history like him like Jeff Koons, but a lot of contemporaries got famous off of controversial/shock-factor art.

Do some art on justifying pedophilia, maybe you'll get somewhere, anon.

>>2858376
>tfw /ic/ was right and the key to making it was lolis