User Reviews

I was amazed to see that there was no rating on IMDb yet for this excellent documentary series. Each episode tells the tale of a major art heist around the world. Docudrama where needed, actual individuals and footage from the time included where available. Told in a captivating pace, I binge watched the entire series in two days time. It popped up as an available option on my Amazon Acorn subscription. It also listed as available to purchase in DVD form. Some of the theft stories are well known from the news or from bits of other shows, but this series goes into greater depth about each incident. Terrifying to think that some of these treasures may never again be seen. A very high quality, well made documentary series. Absolutely worth a watch if you love documentaries, art or just a good crime thriller.

This "art-crime" documentary is actually quite an interesting presentation that closely covers almost a century of world-class art theft from the years 1911-2006.

From the grand theft of paintings by such renowned artists as Gustav Klimt, Edvard Munch, Pierre-Auguste Renoir, and, of course, Leonardo Da Vinci - This often-intriguing documentary of 14 episodes examines every angle of these bold and daring art-crimes through archival footage, reenactments, and interviews with police investigators and museum curators.

IMO - The absolute best episode in the entire program was the one that dealt with the amazing theft of Da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" back in 1911.

Great series of true life heists. Good pacing and interesting stories. I liked the location photography.

There are many episododes to this title but they are not listed here. I have seen one about an art gallery in Stockholm, another about "The Scream" being stolen and currently watching "The Russian Conspiracy" about the Hermitage Museum.

I think that the image of Klimt on the cover was a warning enough what kind of production this is: So many things dropped into one basket and called a heist, and yet any events around museum heist or forgery do not compare to conquest and confiscation. Hold that thought.

Worse is the camera work: The makers of the series want to generate "tension" by hysterically shaking the camera, cutting short snippets of 0.2 seconds into a visual goulash of kinds. I saw my wife covering her face and telling "I am becoming dizzy, I cannot watch it." In addition to that comes the rather simplistic dialog. An example please: In episode one (heist on the Museum in Stockholm) the narrator "surprises" us with this stunning statement: The police had to discover how the heist was performed, and "where the pictures are." Of course camera shakes all the time, short snippets of parts of police cars, streets, museum floor and whatnot appear as a background. Ah... I would not have guessed, we have to find out where the pictures are. How stunning. No. Not really.

And now lets mention the mix of "heist", "forgery" and confiscation. And there of course in the best Hollywood manner the Nazis come to rescue. This is not right. The dramatic events of WWII were not "a heist," this was an orchestrated action sanctioned by law, which was inhumane and criminal. This is a totally different aspect, with enduring consequences. The actions of the Nazis were by its nature limited to maybe 10 years, whereas the robbery of art and valuables in the time of conquest and in the colonial times endured for centuries. The number of peaces stolen and shipped to museums in Europe is in millions. Governments of Egypt, Greece, Italy, Turkey and many others protest for decades and demand a return of pieces from most respectable museums on the planet. Even the Getty Foundation in the US was apparently in possession of numerous stolen pieces, and were defending the return claims in courts with all means. In some cases they had to return stolen art. So you see, this where the Nazi stolen art belongs to, its a different kind of a problem. Should Venice return artwork to Constantinople/Istanbul? Should Russia return several tens of thousands of artwork stolen by the "trophy brigades" of the red army and rotting in Moscow catacombs be returned, as the Germans demand for decades?

And to make the things even worse, this production makes a very one sided report of the story about Cornelius Gurlitt, a son of an art dealer living in Nazi times. Yet another abuse of the term "heist." Apparently Gurlitt's collection was scrutinized by Americans after the war and deemed legal. Why this blank assumption that all artwork was Jewish? Should the number of pieces in possession not be proportional to the ethnic proportions? I am sure it is. Thus by its nature maybe every 100th piece in his collection was if you so want of Jewish ownership.

If it comes to "heist" in Gurlitt's case I would rather apply the term to the German prosecutor: They had no right to take the pictures from his home, without a warrant, when investigating tax issues. This was a blatant violation of law, and caused a level of indignation in Germany. Thus Mr. Gurlitt's will bequeathing every piece to a Museum in Bern, Switzerland. As it comes to the pictures itself: These were in most cases pictures which he tried to trade, but nobody was interested in for decades. No every picture ever made has an artistic value, that is in the "eye of the beholder."

This is a very hypocritical production, with a very selective set of topics, atop of the cinematic weaknesses. Shame on you.

This is a low budget doc series. No actual footage, cheap recreations and agonizingly boring first hand interviews.