the leading man is my tpye

Too much of everything

A Disappointing Continuation

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and I recommend it to anyone interested in fine art, documentary film-making, public scandals, and untold histories. It was both educational and entertaining; it amazes me that I was unaware of this ongoing art theft (the largest ever) until recently, and my ignorance only highlights the ability of powered interests to keep their blatant machinations from greater public scrutiny.On the substantive arguments: The works in the Barnes collection are not public goods and do not belong to the public or the city of Philadelphia. Dr. Barnes accumulated them through his own prudent art decisions and a fortune he earned fairly. No public funds were ever used to acquire or maintain them and any claims now are merely an attempt to use the levers of public office to appropriate very valuable private property. Without the attempts to corrode the Barnes Foundation from outside and finally from the inside, the foundation could gamely, and rightfully, continue its intended purpose, as clearly stated in Dr. Barnes will. Everything else, as Mr. Glanton (who is deliciously sketchy in all his interviews) puts it, is bull____.I'm very surprised and disappointed there hasn't been more of a public response by artists and collectors whose own wills and collections could be similarly abrogated by well-heeled institutions if this sets a precedent.

This movie is full of bullshit. But it's thought provoking, not about the art, but about something else.Is honoring one's will so important? If he wants to burn all these paintings, shall we honor it? Albert Burnes used "education" as excuse to keep these painting private. What's so bad to show it to public? Why show it to small group of people better than show to public? Albert Burnes's will is a WEIRED will. But showing those paintings to more people, justice and fairness have been done. Let analysis from beginning. ALbert Burnes got his money by some kind of luck. He enjoyed his money in his life time by collecting valuable arts to his own home and keep public out. It's already a selfish life. He want to keep the privilege forever by keep those painting to his house forever. What a selfish wish! Education? Go to hell. Showing to public is bigger education.Moving famous painting from a small place to a bigger museum is not a crime. Those people keep on saying this is a biggest crime in art world. Are they out of their mind? The paintings were not damaged, not owned by another selfish people, but to show to the public, owned by government. The angry and hard words from those interviewees in the movie are clueless.I have not idea about this subject before. Totally neutral. And I get the opposite impression against movie maker's intention after wathcing this biased movie. That's how bizzar their logic is! Another point. The crazy art world. Why these paintings so expensive? It's an illusion those "educated" people produce to make money, to show their higher status. It's just a painting. A copy of it has same color and shape, which you can get some enjoyment. The thrill comes from the "ownership of the original". A boost to ego. If those paintings can really enhance one's spirit, why most of the people in this movie are so low? They have closest contact with these best arts.

The scenario in brief: Albert C. Barnes is an idiosyncratic, but very wealthy man who has a good eye for art in the early 20th century and manages to snap up a large collection of post-impressionist paintings that becomes very important. Instead of opening this up to public view, he hides it away in a suburb on Pennsylvania, accessible only to a select elite. If we are to believe this documentary, his act of cultural kidnapping was founded on personal animosity towards the eminences running the public works in Pennsylvania in his day. Hardly an excellent reason to deprive the nation of the opportunity to view great works of art.But Barnes is not content with depriving his contemporaneous generation of these works and decides to drag his collection with him to the grave. He draws up an elaborate will that sets up a foundation that will keep the paintings sequestered away, mouldering under the gaze of small groups of specially-selected 'students'.The film covers the efforts made to wrest control of this vitally important collection away from a group of preppy blue-bloods who wanted to remain true to Barnes' exclusive vision. We are shown a series of sniffy elitist aristos whining as the barriers that Barnes set up are slowly broken down. We are told, in shocked tones, that one common gent decided to leave the exhibition after remarking that Reubens' paintings contained a lot of fat ladies (gasp! - the implication is clearly that mere commoners should not be allowed to view and pass judgement on these cultural fetishes).Finally, the Foundation teeters on bankruptcy and elected officials step in to ensure that the collection is maintained for the public good. In a final act of cultural vandalism they move it away from the tiny and vastly inappropriate secluded mansion Barnes provided and house it in a modern gallery where anyone can visit and enjoy these treasures. At this point the chosen talking heads erupt in a fury - the idea of common people leaving the imprint of their common eyeballs on work that should be restricted to the privileged elite is clearly beyond bearing.Make no mistake, the intent of this film is to argue the case for the Barnes elitists, and it spends a lot of time spewing rants about how evil it was to open up the collection. I knew very little of the Barnes Foundation before seeing it, but based solely on the information the film provided it is blatantly obvious that the terms of Barnes' legacy had to be overthrown.This art did not belong to Barnes, he only got to hold it for a while. This art belongs to the world, and the world finally has the chance to enjoy it.

This is one of the greatest cultural tragedies of the 21st century, with byproducts that will have a profound impact for decades. This is exactly what is wrong with the world. Barnes stood for so much more than the almighty dollar, and he was one of the richest. It is a shame that politicians are set to ruin an amazing piece of cultural history. Shame on you judge ott, u were bought. And shame on the mayor of Philly and all his paid off cronies. Thanx to the director for standing up for the little guy and making this amazing film to bring light to this injustice, maybe it could make a difference. Nothing is set in stone until it is. What can I do is the question?