Customer Reviews for

Who the $#%& is Jackson Pollock?

Average Rating 4
( 2 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing 1 review with 3 star rating   See All Ratings
Page 1 of 1
  • Posted October 1, 2010

    more from this reviewer

    The Art World Vs. Forensic Science: Who Wins?

    This is a fascinating, albeit frustrating film to watch. At face value, it is a story that objectively questions the authenticity of an alleged Jackson Pollock piece of art. Peel back the layers, and you find a story of The Haves vs. The Have-Nots; the Aristocracy vs. The Working Class, if you will.

    The art critics/experts in this film rub me the wrong way: so sure of their certainty are they, that they ignore forensic evidence that contradicts their own beliefs. One such expert, Thomas Hoving, is so steadfast in his commitment to his opinion, that at one point he essentially claims that forensic evidence of Pollock's fingerprints on the piece of art is inconsequential. HIS opinion matters, not science's. You see, the mucky-muck art experts are so incensed that a former truck driver possesses a Pollock, that they go to any lengths to blackball her despite evidence that points in her favor. How the art world can tolerate itself is beyond me: as much as I love art, this movie opened my eyes to the corruption and aritocratic filth that runs the world of art-dealing. It's sickening.

    Tha being said, the lady who possesses the painting, Teri Horton, also opens herself to criticism. Once evidence had essentially proven that her painting was authentic, she seemingly refused to take less than $50 million dollars for the painting (a high offer of $9 million dollars was declined). Here is a lady who has lived on the fringes of poverty her whole life, and despite being at odds with the upper-class art world, has essentially BECOME one of "them" through greed. A puzzling transition that leads me to believe that both sides of the battle have been blinded by economic interest, not artistic. I'm not sure Pollock would approve of such behavior.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing 1 review with 3 star rating   See All Ratings
Page 1 of 1