Home > Documentary >

The Art of the Steal

Watch Now

The Art of the Steal (2010)

February. 26,2010
|
7.5
| Documentary
Watch Now

A gripping tale of intrigue and mystery in the art world, this film traces the history of a collection of Post-Impressionist paintings - worth billions - which became the subject of a power struggle after the death of its owner. Dr. Albert Barnes.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Matialth
2010/02/26

Good concept, poorly executed.

More
Inadvands
2010/02/27

Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess

More
KnotStronger
2010/02/28

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

More
AshUnow
2010/03/01

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

More
runamokprods
2010/03/02

Interesting and entertaining look at how a bunch of the powerful in Philadelphia basically conspired to take one of the great modern art collections in the world away from it's home in the suburbs, , and transplant them into Philadelphia proper, against the express wishes left in Albert C. Barnes will (made in 1922). While there's no question the tactics used by those in power are sleazy, the film also ignores what I consider a key issue: Is it really such a bad thing that one of the most amazing collections of modern art be much more accessible to the public, even if it violates the will of a man with no heirs who has been dead over 50 years? At what point do old grudges - going both ways - count less than art belonging to the world? I'm not saying there are neat answers to such questions, but the film acts like there's no moral murkiness at all. Similarly the film uses questionable tactics to argue its case. For example it's constantly stating how those on the 'other side' refuse to be interviewed. Yet, it is clear that the ideology of the film-makers is known to all involved -- the film is financed by one of the leaders of the group fighting against the collections movement, and guards at a gathering of those planning the art move know not to allow in this specific film crew, even mentioning their production company name. If you knew you a film was being made whose basic premise is that you're a swindler a cheat and a thief with no respect for art, would you agree to be interviewed? Additionally, some of those who seem so calm and well reasoned while being interviewed and arguing the art should be left where it is, seem a little less impressive when you see them outside that same gathering screaming 'philistines!' at those going inside. None-the less, I still enjoyed the film, and there's no question it does a good job exposing the fact that many of our biggest public trusts and charitable institutions have a lot going on besides 'acting in the public interest', and are willing to play dirty pool to get what they want. I just find it hard to see this as a case of moral outrage to rank with the Iraq war, or starving children, or the U.S. educational crisis. It's basically rich people hating on rich people. Fun, but not as nutritious as all that.

More
davemed
2010/03/03

I say "Legal" system because Justice goes the way of the dollar more often than not ... As it did in this astonishingly sad story of greed and financed by the taxpayers once again. If you've ever wondered why the statue of Lady Justice wears that rag over her eyes, it's because of cases like this. Truly justice isn't so much blind as it is ashamed of what is conducted in its name. How appalling to see scumbag after scumbag apparently proud of the robbery of one man's treasure and the legal owner's will and wishes dissolved in the interest of questionable gain. The sickening parade of the pimping and Saturday night ho-downing by individuals that did nothing in the gathering or promotion of the arts really makes the objective observer to wonder what is wrong in Philadelphia .... Pennsylvania and this country as individual rights are trampled in the by unholy alliances of the worst of the public and private sectors in concert for the worst of our "culture". I rated this a "10", but I wish I hadn't watched it. I've never seen so many soulless individuals in one place for one unholy goal in my life .... except the Bush cabinet, perhaps.

More
penberthyp
2010/03/04

In the eleventh hour Merion township forgets it's gripes about bus traffic and realizes it might lose something valuable. After forbidding the Museum to build a 56 car parking lot in a very petty fashion the neighbors of the foundation are portrayed as victims of the move at the end of the movie. I'm sorry. Glanton may be a clod, but he was forestalling what turned out to be the inevitable move of the collection to Philadelphia. Would you rather have the art tour the world temporarily or have it moved permanently to Philadelphia? When you don't bend you break. This is a very sad loss, but I can't help feel that there is no righteous side in this saga. Poor Merion? You mismanaged your asset, ditto Lincoln University. It's sad that there was no brilliant person to manage the estate and oversee it's protection. Incompetence loses to a powerful people with tourist dollars in their eyes.

More
JoeB131
2010/03/05

This is a very well made film.All that said, I guess I am having a hard time seeing the outrage expressed by filmmakers. It isn't like the art is being sold off to rich people. It is being put in one venue and into another which is more accessible to the public.Yes, one can truly appreciate the fact that Barnes had a legitimate gripe with the cultural elite of Philadelphia (which honestly sounds like an oxymoron in itself). But in the end, he won. He was the guy with the vision and the artwork he collected, much of it dismissed in its time, are now seen as masterworks.To continue his vendetta against his adversaries (all of whom are about as dead as he is) seems a bit silly. The artworks are going to be preserved as an intact collection in a much better venue. I'm just having a hard time sharing the outrage here...

More