Disgruntled Star Editor Takes Constructive Revenge
Kensington Market's Business, Soon to be Improved
Live Green Toronto's Bright Idea
Vandalist: Ripple Effect
Toronto Will Host 2015 Pan American Games
Photo by Reza Vaziri from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.
The Toronto International Film Festival has been over long enough for us to get our bearings back, so we've finally had some time to ruminate on what has almost certainly been the most controversial festival in recent memory. The festival kicked off in an inglorious style with Bruce Kirkland's damning piece in the Sun, where he loudly proclaimed that "the Toronto International Film Festival is no longer the people's film festival" after a poor experience being passed over for tickets for the gala screening of Passchendaele in favour of donors.
Co-director of the festival and CEO of the Film Festival Group Piers Handling responded directly to the comments made by Kirkland shortly after, arguing in the paper that it was still "a people's festival," and for the reality that "donors do have to be treated differently because they are crucial, just like the corporate partners"—but the general feeling failed to improve thanks to other issues. Writers including Rex Reed of the New York Observer stated that the festival had tested "patience, I.Q.’s, trash resistance, and bladder control": "Film festivals," he continued, "have good years and bad years. For Toronto, this is a bad one."
Even Eye's Jason Anderson (who admits he is the "new owner of a one-bedroom 'Angelina Jolie' suite in the Lightbox’s condo tower") wondered whether "the fest has finally swollen to truly unmanageable and unfeasible proportions." His coworker Marc Weisblott of the Scrolling Eye blog was far blunter: "Worst film festival ever."
With largely negative press, one would think that brand-new co-director for the festival Cameron Bailey might be feeling the heat. Not so. We talked to Bailey as the festival ended and found him upbeat (if a little tired; we all were by that point).
"I think it went really well," he told us. In comparison to the middling to negative opinions of the overall quality of the programming this year from many journalists (opinions we mostly share), Bailey spoke instead the audience reactions he'd seen.
"I've been hearing great word from the audiences," he beamed. "I've run into many people who were moved by some of the performances, for example the screening of Skin [one of the films programmed by Bailey himself] where we brought the real person behind the true story to the screening for a Q&A with the director. The personal responses to the films have been really strong."
Not that Bailey has ignored the response to the festival from the media. On the charge that the festival is bloated, he argues, "We have fifteen fewer films than last year. We've put a lid on the number of films we'll show, because we're getting more and more films submitted every year—this year we had over 4200 films submitted—and there will be more submitted next year! We made a conscious decision after last year's festival to pull back on the number of films we're showing."
"If you're seeing 4200 films—and those are just the films that are submitted, our programmers go all over the world to discover more—and in total from that you're selecting only 312 films (including shorts) to show, it's a pretty rigorous selection process. There are a lot of films that don't make it."
"We are a smaller festival than we were last year, and I do think we're keeping the quality high," he continued, claiming that reviews have been "by and large positive," before returning to the topic of the audience response—particularly how pleased he has been with the audience response to the films he's personally championed. "I program about thirty films, and I'd say there have just been some great moments. I was at two of the screenings of Teza, the Ethiopian film from Haile Gerima; just to see people talk to him about the film afterwards, or even embrace him—that's one of the examples when something I've programmed has connected with an audience in a way perhaps you or I wouldn't have expected."
Of course, the difficulty (and expense) of getting to see films in the first place is something that's been highlighted too, and on that Bailey pointed us towards Handling's original statements on the festival, but added, "One of the things I want to emphasis is that for the first time we have a number of activities—programming, screenings, concerts, events—that are free. And we've never done that before. And so I think to a casual moviegoer—a regular member of the audience in Toronto, who probably isn't going to take their vacation to spend the week watching 50 movies, but is instead maybe just curious about the festival, there are so many ways that they can take part in the festival that are absolutely free. My sense is that we're doing more to bring a wider audience of the festival than ever."
Photo by C Lapid from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.
He admitted that the festival "does need to do more to plug in to the city in as strong a way as possible," and expressed his delight at being able to help move that forward with events including the free screening of People's Choice Award–winning film Slumdog Millionaire at the Elgin.
In addition, he stated unequivocally that the festival had "held ticket prices steady from last year."
"There is pressure to raise it every year just from inflation and as costs increase, but we held prices and that was a conscious choice."
On other issues people may have had—confusing line-ups at the new AMC location, for example—Bailey was pragmatic. "There are always kinks to work out. One of the things we still have to work out is getting people from the ground floor up the escalators efficiently, but audiences seemed to love the fact that it was right on Yonge/Dundas Square, and that we had a lot of stuff happening in the square this year. It seemed like a place people would want to hang out all day."
"Once this is over we sit down and we do a full post-mortem of the festival with all of the departments of the group, and it won't be until we've done that we know what we're going to change or do differently next year," he continued. "But we're all paying attention to what's working well, what could work better."
"The fact that this year we didn't raise any prices, and we held free events I think (I would hope!) would reflect that we have an interest in offering our audience the best value for money. We know money is tight for everybody these days, and we want to make sure the audience can take part in the festival in whatever way they can—in the best way we can."
Photo of Cameron Bailey by Michael Buckner/WireImage for the Toronto International Film Festival Group.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I actually enjoyed all ten films I saw. The only one I was disappointed with was Edison & Leo, and even then, I've seen far, far worse at the fest in the past. I rank it as one of my best overall TIFFs in terms of movies I saw... but maybe I just picked well.
But the lineup situation NEEDS to be fixed. The nearly invisible AMC lines (go up 4 flights of escalators to be told the line is outside around the corner), the double-movie lines at the Elgin/Winter Garden (down Yonge, down Shuter, down Victoria all the way to the back of the Elgin again?), even a line at Isabel Bader that kept getting moved back because the sprinklers turned on and were soaking a section of people. A large part of the problem is that they're not letting people in until 15 minutes before the show, which then delays the screening as people find seats. In years past, it was usually around 30 minutes pre-show.
The donor preference was also incredibly annoying. I don't donate to a hospital, or charity, or anyone else because I expect something in return... that's why its called a donation. They didn't need to do this in the past, why now? Oh, because Lightbox is still short on funding and they want to drum up more donations.
Well of course he's going to say "it went well," being the co-director and all.
I've been attending TIFF for several years but my interest has waned in the last couple...mainly because of prices and the hassle of the advance draw, which is still the best way to get tickets for the higher-profile films if you don't have connections. I avoid the $40 galas as they're ridiculously priced, I don't care about 99% of actors, the Q&As are one of my favourite things about the fest (galas don't have them) and I prefer to catch the small gems that may get released a year from now or never at all. I liked most of my film choices so I wasn't really disappointed because I had no real expectations...they just sounded intriguing to me and that's all I went on. I don't care about Oscar potential or star wattage or any of that BS.
My biggest beefs with TIFF:
-line-ups, line-ups, line-ups. I appreciate wanting to be at Yonge/Dundas, but a 3-hour line-up in the blazing sun, in the busiest intersection of the city, right around the corner from a university in its first week of class...not a smart idea. Have the movies there, but don't have the draw line-ups there.
-the website crashes every year when single tickets go on sale. When I called later in the week to ask a question about my online order, I was on hold for 45 minutes.
-along those lines, unhelpful staff and lack of service. I went to a box office to buy a voucher pack and was told they were sold out, despite having just seen them available on the website before I went (was hoping to avoid service fees). When I got home that night I ordered them online with no problem...the employee who "helped" me in person didn't even check for me. Also when I went to pick up my advance tickets and do some exchanges, the AMC box office had several empty computer terminals (on one of its busiest days!), plus a cashier reserved for donors. As there were no donors in line but several thousand of us regular people waiting, some of us asked if he could help us and he told us that his supervisor said no. A few minutes later, they relented.
-the whole "donors are special" thing, like the aforementioned special line-up. I didn't pay attention so I didn't even know this was going on until the ticket process was underway. I'd like to support TIFF but I have been unemployed on and off this year so I don't have a lot of cash to spare. It's one of the reasons I bought less tickets than I used to. I would donate if I were able to, without expecting anything back and pissing off other people who are not in the same financial situation. TIFF is quite expensive as it is.
I've been a volunteer with TIFF for five years and have been on the Box Office staff for two years. Here's my personal perspective.
I've seen some great films at the Festival that I could never see otherwise and have enjoyed the director or cast's insights many times. I'm very happy to see the free stuff added this year; I wish I could have got down to the free People's Choice screening, I really wanted to catch Slumdog Millionaire. I think TIFF is Toronto's deepest and most accessible cultural event by a long shot.
From an audience perspective, "this is the worst year ever" is an observation I have heard every single year. I've also heard "this year was fantastic" every year. It all depends on your expectations and the instant in time that you are there. I stood for 14 days at the bottom of the escalators in the Toronto Life Square building and there were only three or four days with crazy lines. A little rational thinking goes a long way in planning your Festival! The lines were outside because of the conditions the property managers set, not because we wanted them there.
Why the Advance Ticket Selection can't be handled by the web site is not known to me. Simplifying this would be a big improvement in a lot of people's Festival experience... Ditto the web site crashing on Single Ticket day. In spite of the perception that TIFF screenings are expensive it runs pretty damn lean, I'm sure money invested in the appropriate areas would solve these issues, but where is the money? Ramping up staff and equipment for a one day crunch is a big cost.
Last few quick notes: Donor's tickets aren't in the same allocation as public tickets so processing them separately doesn't impact your chances of getting into a particular screening, but without the Donors you can also be sure that your ticket would be a lot more expensive. What look like empty terminals may be broken or available for staff that are usually doing something else. The least likely reason that they are idle is that we couldn't be bothered hiring someone to work at them.
Every year is a one-off event from a box office perspective. There's lots of past experience to draw from, but we never know how the dynamic factors will play out... I hope I can keep helping the Festival operate for years to come!
The website was total crap. I could not register to use MyTIFF and of course, could not buy single tickets online. Come on... it should be possible to make this work.
"A little rational thinking goes a long way in planning your Festival!"
I dropped by on both days during the advance draw pick-ups and the lines were incredibly long at different times in the day. I don't know what kind of "rational thinking" can help anyone avoid them, unless you're willing to wait until after the rush, which would be several days later, to pick up your tickets. At that point many of the movies are going to rush already.
"Last few quick notes: Donor's tickets aren't in the same allocation as public tickets so processing them separately doesn't impact your chances of getting into a particular screening..."
According to the TIFF website:
"processing of your TIFF Ticket Order through the Advance Order Procedure (ahead of the general participants)..." So yeah, if you don't donate, your order is pushed behind theirs. That's a perk of donating. Even if they're from a different allocation, that's still a block of tickets the non-donors don't have access to.
"What look like empty terminals may be broken or available for staff that are usually doing something else."
I counted 5 or 6 empty terminals on the 2nd day of advance-draw pick-ups. That's a lot of terminals to be broken so early in the process. Why are they even there if they are unmanned during one of their busiest days? Surely they can find a few more people to hire at minimum wage for those days when they have thousands of people in line. They also only had 4 people pulling envelopes and they were moving at a snail's pace.
"The least likely reason that they are idle is that we couldn't be bothered hiring someone to work at them."
The box office seemed understaffed but there seemed to be several extra volunteers standing around. How about training them for those two days? Even paying them a bit.
The problem with taking most criticism of the film festival seriously is that so much of it is, well, completely stupid. Rex Reed complains about Yonge-Dundas square being "blocked up" by public screenings of movies, while Marc Weisblott a) relays Rex Reeds complaints as though they were something other than idiocy and b) apparently blames TIFF for some bloggers computer problems. And when you listen closely to complaints about a lack of good films at TIFF this year, it quickly becomes apparent that these are being made by people who consider seeing "Synedoche, New York" to be adventurous. Yes, many of the high-profile films fell flat. But that will happen from time to time. There were still a large number of wonderful films this year if you were willing to look at any of the programs besides the Galas.