Is The Burnt Orange Heresy Worth Watching?
Answer: Maybe not, The Burnt Orange Heresy is likely a skip if you enjoy Mystery movies.
It features a runtime of 99 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to mature audiences.

Verdict:The Burnt Orange Heresy is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 5.7/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Mystery, Thriller, Crime genre.
Answer: Maybe not, The Burnt Orange Heresy is likely a skip if you enjoy Mystery movies.
It features a runtime of 99 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to mature audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 2020, The Burnt Orange Heresy emerges as a significant entry in the Mystery, Thriller, Crime domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of Hired to steal a rare painting from one of the most enigmatic painters of all time, an ambitious art dealer becomes consumed by his own greed and insecurity as the operation spins out of control. Unlike standard genre fare, The Burnt Orange Heresy attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Mystery is often anchored by its ensemble, and The Burnt Orange Heresy features a noteworthy lineup led by Claes Bang . Supported by the likes of Elizabeth Debicki and Mick Jagger , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of The Burnt Orange Heresy (2020) is mixed. With an audience rating of 5.7/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: The Burnt Orange Heresy is a Mystery, Thriller, Crime film that presents a compelling narrative that engages viewers from start to finish. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
The film presents its narrative with careful attention to pacing and character development. Hired to steal a rare painting from one of the most enigmatic painters of all time, an ambitious art dealer becomes consumed by his own greed and insecurity as the operation spins out of control. The story unfolds naturally, allowing viewers to become invested in the outcome while maintaining engagement throughout.
Ending Breakdown: The Burnt Orange Heresy attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to mystery resolution.
The final reveal recontextualizes earlier scenes, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of The Burnt Orange Heresy reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
The Burnt Orange Heresy incorporates elements from real criminal cases. As a mystery, thriller, crime film, it navigates the space between factual accuracy and narrative engagement.
The film takes creative liberties to enhance dramatic impact. Core events maintain connection to source material while adapting for theatrical presentation.
Creative interpretation shapes the final narrative, focusing on emotional truth over strict chronology.
Accuracy Assessment: The Burnt Orange Heresy adapts its source material for dramatic purposes. The film prioritizes thematic resonance over documentary precision.
Consider Watching If:







Amazon Prime Video
Amazon Prime Video with AdsAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 5.7/10, and global collection metrics, The Burnt Orange Heresy stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 2020 cinematic year.
The Burnt Orange Heresy has received mixed reviews with a 5.7/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
The Burnt Orange Heresy is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Mystery, Thriller, Crime movies, but read reviews first.
The Burnt Orange Heresy is currently available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video. You can also check for it on platforms like Amazon Prime Video, Amazon Prime Video with Ads depending on your region.
The Burnt Orange Heresy feels like it wants to do for painting what The Ninth Gate did for books. The problem is that there were books in Polanski’s film, and not just mere props, but objets d'art in their own right. In contrast, there’s precious little painting in this movie; in fact, there’s literally less than meets the eye. James Figueras (Claes Bang) is nominally an art critic, but sounds more like a shill. He has written a book called The Power of the Critic, and gives lectures about, well, the power of the critic. In one such lecture he resorts to "an oratorical gesture": a cock-and-bull story about a tortured Norwegian artists who, haunted by the portraits of Nazi officers he was forced to paint in a concentration camp, swore never to touch a brush again and took up finger painting. The anecdote is so far-fetched that we know it to be a crock five seconds before James admits as much, but the point is that "because of what I, as a critic and an expert, have shared with you ... I have shaped your experience of this painting ... I single-handedly made you believe that this [a non-descript painting that James himself "slapped down without any real care or inspiration"] was a masterpiece." Now, all James did was appeal to his audience’s emotions. His spiel, made up or not, provided no objective insight, no "expert" opinion. Wouldn’t his case for the power of the critic have been more convincing if he had produced in-depth arguments on technique, style, composition, etc., instead of feeding his listeners a sob story whose power lies in the telling and not in the teller, thus rendering James’s status as art critic moot? Perhaps he should have titled his book The Power of Rhetoric. Having said all that, it’s safe to say that James is actually meant to be a hack (no problem there; my beef is with how transparent of a hack he is). That talking up one’s own sense of power is a sign of weakness is a irony that’s lost on the character, but not necessarily on the filmmakers, who make James an embezzling pillhead; in that sense, his bragging about a power he doesn’t really have makes sense when we see it as typical junky behavior — not much different than when he says "I can end it [his pill-taking habit] ... I'm just waiting for the right moment." Unfortunately, this is about the only thing the filmmakers get right. The movie’s downfall begins with the introduction of wealthy art collector Joseph Cassidy (Mick Jagger fidgeting like he’d rather be anywhere else), who sits on the board of "The Debney Trust;" in that capacity, he is "to offer the great man accommodations" — the great man being reclusive painter Jerome Debney (Donald Sutherland). Debney lives in "dilapidated little house ... at the edge of [Cassidy’s] property," but cares little or nothing for his host, routinely rejecting Cassidy’s daily invitation to join him for lunch. Cassidy recruits James to "procure" him a Debney painting in exchange for an exclusive interview with "the great man"; the way Cassidy pitches this to James is half bribe, half blackmail, and full nonsense. Clearly, Cassidy has never heard of the whole 'if the mountain won't come to Muhammad, then Muhammad must go to the mountain' thing; what exactly it is that impedes him from going himself to the dilapidated little house and dealing directly with Debney shall remain an unfathomable mystery, equal to the riddle of why doesn’t the rich man doesn’t even attempt to bribe, not James but Debney, with something other than lunch. It shouldn’t be too hard to ply the geezer with money or some other substantial offering (Debney does confess to a weakness for a "local widow"); this is the same man, after all, who has a "charitable trust" named after him. Moreover, it will become apparent that what Cassidy wants is an art thief, rather than an art critic (insofar as James can be said to be one). In Cassidy’s defense, though, Debney turns out to be crazier than a s--thouse rat, and as James is bound to discover, there is a powerful reason that Cassidy can’t get his hands on Debney’s work — and by 'powerful,' I mean 'really, really stupid;' I won’t reveal it, but suffice it to say that it’s even dumber than the Norwegian finger painter stuff.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.