In 1922, a man by the name of Albert Barnes opened up a small art museum in a Pennsylvania suburb putting on display his personal collection, which contained 800 paintings, in total thought to be worth around six billion dollars. The new documentary The Art of the Steal tells the story of “the worst art theft since World War II,” as art purists fight to keep the legendary works out of the grasps of museums that may be more focused on tourism than presentation. A Philadelphia native, Don Argott has directed a fascinating film about art's true value, especially when tourism forces itself into the equation. I sat down with him at Chicago's theWit hotel to discuss his film, what Philadelphia has had to say about the project, and much more. The Art of the Steal opens in Chicago on March 12, 2010. Is there a way to keep popular art in the masses without it being exploited?

Exploitation can sound like a dirty word. The whole idea of people being able to have an experience is important. I think the idea of being able to go to the Barnes as it exists right now, I don’t think that’s exploitation necessarily, but if you’re gonna have the Barnes experience you should have it where it is now, and not what they’re going to turn it into.

You said you were from Philadelphia. How involved were you with the Barnes before this documentary?

I had lived there for 15 years, and I didn’t know anything about the Barnes Foundation. Lennie Feinberg, who is our executive producer, approached us abut doing this film. He was a student there twenty years ago, really fell in love with the place. He also lives in the suburbs where the Barnes is located. He’s just been following the story. It’s one of those that I think every city has their own little Barnes story, where something is going on in their own backyard. It feels like it has been going on forever. This is the story that has been going on in the Philadelphia backyard for a long time. I think that people see it as a very small town story. I was fortunate that I didn’t have any knowledge prior to entering the story, so I didn’t look at it as a small-town story or a big-town story or whatever. I was looking at it for what it was – I think it’s a huge story. I couldn’t believe someone when they actually told me. There’s very few hidden documentaries like that, that have as much significance that haven’t at least been told twice before. … There is a film that was made in the 90’s called “Susan Barnes,” it’s educational. Really awful.

Would you say that you go to bigger art museums begrudgingly?

No, not at all. People seem to have this idea that I am anti-art museum or something. I’m not that at all, I think there is a place for all of that stuff. The Philadelphia Museum of Art is a great museum. But the Barnes is a valid experience too. It’s different than going to the art museum, and that’s what is great about it. To me, this idea of accessibility and moving it for tourism – you’re missing the point about the experience. It’s not just making another art museum, it’s the fact that this is another place that we should be preserving, not destroying.

How long were you able to shoot inside the Barnes?

Not at all. It’s all stock footage.

So you’ve been there yourself before?

Many times, just not with a camera.

Are you going to shoot any sort of epilogue?

That’s interesting. Maybe. They are definitely hard at work on this new Barnes building, they’re ripping out the land where we shoot the last shoot in the movie. The banner that says “The Barnes on the Parkway,” the building behind that has been demolished. They’re definitely moving forward with it. We’ll see if there is enough for a DVD extra or something.

Has there been any backlash, or has anyone that wasn’t interviewed had anything nasty to say?

Not really. Philadelphia really interesting in that if you told a really personal Chicago story, people would get really passionate about it. I think that a lot of people feel like they know the story, and when they see the film, if it’s not in line with what they think they know, they’re going to be upset by it. It’s just being like, “Wow, I didn’t know that.” People seem to have an adverse reaction like, “That’s not right.” No it is, you just didn’t think of it that way. You had your information backwards or whatever. So, not backlash, so much as I think that the only thing that came out that was a little annoying was Carrie Rickey’s review in the Inquirer, she’s the major film reviewer there. [The other critic], Steven Rea, has written glowing articles about the film, about how it was a huge success in Toronto. I think he likes the movie. But Carrie Rickey gave it a pretty bad review. But if you dig a little bit deeper, but I don’t want to come across as sour grapes because of a bad review, but she is married to Paul Levy who runs the Center City District, is directly involved with tourism in Philadelphia, and has been quoted on record saying how great the Barnes is going to be. To me that’s a bit of a conflict of interest. If you read her review, it sounds more like the Barnes Foundation Talking Points than an actual film review. But that’s always what has been frustrating about Philadelphia. It’s always been very … bogged down in small-town politics, thinking they were some inferior city to New York or Washington, maybe because of where it is. Every city has got that [inferiority] complex or whatever. That stuff plays into it for me. It’s just a big city, but you wouldn’t know that by the way people act sometimes.

On living in Philadelphia.

I love living there, I really do. I have this great set-up there, but it doesn’t mean that I can’t be critical about the places that I live. And this is a story that is critical about a lot of people in Philadelphia and there’s no way around it.

Do you have a reputation or a bad rap with any of the people there?

I don’t they’re really concerned about me at the end of the day. I’m not like a Michael Moore … he’s all about publicity stunts. I’m sure they know my name now than they did before.

Did people know your opinion while you were filming?

We set out to make a really balanced film. We wanted everybody to talk, we didn’t want to talk to just one side. Some people wouldn’t talk to us, so I can’t make them talk. It becomes a more of a weighted piece clearly, but I think it would have been a much different film had we gotten access to some of those other people. But it’s like, at the end of the day, these people feel like they don’t have to talk, and they are moving forward. In essence, they won. The court already permitted that they could move. Talking about it to them is silly. They didn’t want to give us the time of day, and I don’t think they thought we were anything. They didn’t feel like this film was going to be seen by anybody.

There’s a saying that “Every artist is a thief.” What documentaries or directors do you feel that Art of the Steal borrows from?

There’s definitely some Errol Morris that is going to come to mind. If you’re gonna “steal” from other influences, steal from the best. I think Errol Morris just because we were able to get some Philip Glass in there. Any other docs … filmmakers … no one really comes to mind. We weren’t trying to invoke anything in style or anything like that.

You said yourself that “they won.” Do you think this is just a capturing of a story, or can it be something else?

Well, things can certainly change. That’s up to the people. If audiences see it, and they feel like they are sufficiently outraged, to me, that’s what the film is about. The film invokes something in you, that the discussion rages on long after the film is over. And that’s probably the best compliment, if it gets people talking – fired up. What more could you ask for as an artist to make something that leaves an impression on someone. I think it when its done right [the medium] can really be powerful, get people riled up.

How did you get the footage of Barnes?

A former teacher. The footage was under his bed, actually. He gave it to us and said, “Do what you will with it.” We transferred it, we didn’t even know what was on it. And I’ll never forget, we were doing some interview, and Demian our editor was at the post house transferring the film, and he called me up and said “We have Barnes.” It’s not like he’s a real documented guy, except for a couple of photos. From that point on, the film took a whole different life, because we were able to bring Barnes back to life.

Is there any footage that is not in the final cut?

No, not really. We shot a ton of interviews, b-roll. It’s a pretty tense story – a lot of years to cover. There’s not anything that we’re regrettably not using. It was what you see on the screen is the best representation of the film that we wanted it to be. Because it was so difficult [to make], we know what was really required to get it where it is now, so I’m really happy with it. There will always be things that bug me about it, but I’m not George Lucas, I’m not gonna CGI Richard Glanton out of it.

How willing was he to be a part of the documentary?

He’s great. He took a little coaxing, but he’s got a bit of an ego, and he had been vilified (for good reason), but he doesn’t look great, but he doesn’t look like the worst. He’s a part of the story. He clearly re-imagined the place, the beginning of the end. But he was still committed to making it work. And that’s the great part about the story, is that it keeps giving. Just when you think he is the bad guy, there’s all of these other people.

How many times when you were making it that you had a “What the f**k?!” moment?

We called it the “Oh s**t moment” where every time in the story when it goes this way or this way, it goes THIS way. And that’s what’s so great about the story, it’s a testament to how compelling the story is. We just had to make sure we did it right.

QUICK QUESTIONS with Don Argott

Favorite Fruit? Strawberries.

What did you have for breakfast this morning? An egg sandwich from Chick-Fil-A.

Last movie you've recently seen? A documentary by Joe Berlinger called Crude. I still haven't seen Shutter Island or even Avatar.

Age of first kiss? I don't remember. Probably 14 or 15.

Last album you bought? Wow, these are some f**kin' hard questions. An album called "First Daze Here Too" by Pentagram. If you could be anyone for 24 hours, who would you be? Martin Scorsese (now).

What's your favorite Scorsese documentary? I didn’t love the Dylan one, (No Direction Home), because I don’t think he was intimately involved in it. He wasn’t asking the questions, that was weird. The Last Waltz, if you want to call that a documentary, that was really good. [I would have liked] Shine A Light more if it were like the first half of it, which was more of the behind the scenes. But as far as concert films go, you can’t go wrong with that.