Moment of Truth: Art of the Steal Charts the Biggest Heist You Never Knew About

Barnes himself (pictured above) seems to have anticipated a culture where people simply don't know -- or really even want to know -- how to look at and value art. As someone coming from a different background, what did making this film teach you about that?

Since I hadn't been to the foundation before making the film, we decided to make an appointment before determined if we wanted to make the movie. And walking into the Barnes totally challenges you to reconsider how you look at art -- how you feel about it. Up to that point, going to art museums and galleries, art is displayed in a very traditional way. You see the painting on the wall, and maybe there's a placard next to it that says who the artist was, when he painted it -- information that comes with the painting. That all becomes part of the experience. Even though you might not know the significance of why this art is great, it's great art. You get that all the time: "Oh, that's a Picasso, so it's a very important painting." But why? Because it's a Picasso? "Well, yeah." There's all this baggage that comes into how you look at art as opposed to having a subjective feeling about it.

Going to the Barnes for the first time kind of fucked me up because the only tools are you, your eyes and your feeling of it. There are no placards. Sometimes the artist signs the painting, sometimes he doesn't. Sometimes the name will be on the frame of the painting, sometimes it's not. You don't know -- so you can see the painting for what it is. The whole idea is that you can see the painting for what it is, and not what museums tell you look at. The Barnes isn't like that. The way he arranged the paintings is a work of art in itself. And there are reasons why he put African sculpture next to a Modigliani or Picasso. There are all these relationships in art, but they're relationships that make you draw the conclusions. The whole idea that they're going to move it -- or that they're going to keep the wall hangings how Barnes did them -- is, to me, just a guilt-ridden way of carrying this thing out. You're already destroying it, you know? You're not preserving it. Why act like moving it five miles away in a new building is still going to have the integrity of what Barnes originally intended?

There is indeed some infuriating stuff in this movie. In your estimation as an outsider who spent some time inside, does the entire art world work this way?

I can't speak for the whole art world. I can only speak to what happened in this story and in Philadelphia. The other thing that was eye-opening for me was the idea that charity is big business. You don't think of it that way, but it is, and they operate as such. They're non-profit corporations. They have a lot of money, they have a lot of power, and they do with that power whatever is in their best interests. To me, the whole idea of charity is that I want to help you. I'm giving you something, and I don't expect anything in return. But that's not how these charitable organizations operate. They'll say, "We'll come in and help you, but we want something in return." That's against the whole idea of what charity is! The attorney general says outright: They weren't going to give this money without getting some kind of control. Well, why not? Isn't that the whole purpose?

What kinds of reactions or discussions have you seen to these effects during Art of the Steal's festival run?

The response has been overwhelmingly positive -- to a certain extent. Taking it around to festivals has been amazing, because a lot of people don't know the story. It's a great way to discover this: Cold, without any baggage. But a lot of people do know the story, and then they're surprised about how much they didn't know. We get a ton of questions. It's really the most you can hope for when you make a film like this, where the idea is to get people talking and elicit some emotion -- even if it's a negative emotion. We get, "I don't agree; I think it should move." And that's fine. The worst thing you can make is one where people say, "Huh, OK. What's next?"

There might be one more thing you can hope for, which is that the documentary actually influences change. But is there anything left to change?

I guess part of me says that we weren't activists going into this. We didn't have a motive. We were just trying to tell a compelling story and an important story that explores larger themes than the literal story that's actually happening. Until they put first brick down, anything can happen. I'd lying if I said that if something changed because of this film getting out there wouldn't be an amazing thing. but I think it's dangerous to have those kind of lofty goals for a film like this. You're kind of setting yourself up. Part of the reason I think the film is so successful is that it's not preaching at you. It's not trying to get you involved to do something. But if its compels you to do something? Then that's great.

PREVIOUSLY IN "MOMENT OF TRUTH":

· Reliving the Road to October Country

· "The Journey Behind Barefoot to Timbuktu

":http://www.movieline.com/2010/02/introducing-moment-of-truth-movielines-spotlight-on-up-and-coming-documentaries.php

Pages: 1 2