The Art of the Steal (film)

The Art of the Steal
Directed by	Don Argott
Produced by	Sheena M. Joyce
Editing by	Demian Fenton
Release date(s)	September 12, 2009 (2009-09-12) (TIFF) February 26, 2010 (2010-02-26) (United States)
Running time	101 minutes
Country	United States
Language	English

The Art of the Steal is a 2009 documentary film about the decades-long efforts to resolve financial problems of the Barnes Foundation, an esoteric collection of mostly Modernist and post-Impressionist artworks, resulting in the officers' decision to break Albert C. Barnes's will and relocate the collection from Lower Merion to Philadelphia. The emphasis of the film is on the breaking of Barnes' will.

Subject and making of the film

The film covers "the decades-long controversy over the museum’s fortunes and its eventual decision to abandon its longtime home for new quarters in downtown Philadelphia." The Barnes Foundation, operating a gallery located in a residential neighborhood, with restrictions on access, reproduction and touring of its works, struggled financially to survive for decades. Several years ago, it succeeded in challenging the will to enable it to send some pieces on tour to earn enough money for needed renovations to the facility to preserve the artwork and provide security. Finally its leaders decided to move to Philadelphia, which offered incentives including a highly accessible site on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway, its museum corridor.

The highly valuable collection of late-19th- and early-20th-century art includes 181 Renoirs, 69 Cézannes, 60 Matisses, 44 Picassos, and 14 Modiglianis. The 9,000-piece collection is valued at over $25 billion. The foundation could not earn enough revenue from visitors at its location to operate the facility and preserve the works.

While the film includes journalists, art historians and public figures on both sides of the long debate, many of the figures discussed in it, for example, Rebecca Rimel (CEO of the Pew Charitable Trusts, the group which purportedly benefited financially from the Barnes' move), Raymond G. Perelman (a powerful local billionaire alleged to have orchestrated the move); and Bernard C. Watson (the president of the Barnes Foundation, who was accused of giving over its control to the Philadelphia authorities), declined to be interviewed for the documentary.

The director Don Argot wanted to present an argument, not an objective piece, as he found himself identifying strongly with those who wanted to maintain the collection in its original location. His emphasis was on the breaking of the will, and he used graphics to show its clauses being challenged and overcome, one by one, which some viewers might consider "heavy handed".

Reception

In response to the film's release, Bernard C. Watson, chairman of the Barnes Foundation board of trustees and one of the figures criticized in the film, published an editorial letter in The Philadelphia Inquirer claiming the film "lacks objectivity and perspective." Derek Gillman, president and executive director of the foundation, said, "The film was full of unsubstantiated allegations and very one-sided. It was made by people who were hostile to the move and very angry about it. That’s why we didn’t cooperate with the filmmakers. It was not in our interests to do so."

“The film obviously had a message that didn’t reflect the complexities of the issues,” said Linda Eaton, director of collections at Winterthur. “Even if you agree with their conclusions, that the Barnes should stay where it is, this work is a polemic that’s structured to get people riled up, to get them excited and angry.”

She went on to say, "Changing the will is a legal issue. But changing the institution is a very different issue. Institutions can’t become fossils if they want to survive."

Critical response

Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film 3 1/2 stars and wrote, "It is perfectly clear exactly what Barnes specified in his will. It was drawn up by the best legal minds. It is clear that what happened to his collection was against his wishes. It is clear that the city fathers acted in obviation of those wishes, and were upheld in a court of appeals. What is finally clear: It doesn't matter a damn what your will says if you have $25 billion, and politicians and the establishment want it."

As of February 2011, the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported that 84% of critics gave the film positive reviews, based on 57 reviews with an average score of 7.2/10. The site's consensus of reviews was:

"Deeply esoteric and unapologetically one-sided, The Art of the Steal proves a documentary doesn't have to make an objective argument as long as it argues well."

External links

• Official website
• The Art of the Steal at AllRovi
• The Art of the Steal at Box Office Mojo
• The Art of the Steal at the Internet Movie Database
• The Art of the Steal at Metacritic
• The Art of the Steal at Rotten Tomatoes
• "Barnes $25 Billion Art Trove, Boardroom Fight Drive Documentary". bloomberg.com. February 26, 2010. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=awPQIYh04ySs. Retrieved March 12,2010. 
• Why Lenny Feinberg funded 'Art of the Steal', San Francisco Chronicle
• Fate of Barnes' artworks in limbo; The collector's will demands they not be moved. But a judge seeks more research before he rules., Los Angeles Times, January 30, 2004