Ebert may not be God, but he’s one of the better-known film critics. he’s someone who’s gonna be familiar w/the politics of film festivals & the selection process, so I find it interesting he concludes: “The Festival should never have agreed to be used like this.”

Ebert isn’t God and I’m not going to chase him down. I quoted him because what he wrote made very good sense. He seems to have been misinformed by someone about a supposed conspiracy that Cameron Bailey and TIFF have denied publicly.

He can find the information here, in the comment above, but it won’t be me who extends the invitation.

?

you can post under any moniker you like there.

From NowToronto:

“It’s important to note,’’ he says “that the [Tel Aviv Spotlight] was independantly [sic] conceived and curated. Entirely. We were looking for a place on the planet where there was new work happening. I was interested in bringing the culture of the city to Toronto to spark debate. There was no influence from any outside sources.’’

Does that include cash inducements, I ask? “The only financial element is the Israel Film Fund which funds filmakers travelling to festivals. And that’s all there is.’’

And from the Cameron Bailey Open Letter on the TIFF website:

As the programmer of City To City, I was attracted to Tel Aviv as our inaugural city because the films being made there explore and critique the city from many different perspectives. Furthermore, the City to City series was conceived and curated entirely independently. There was no pressure from any outside source. Contrary to rumours or mistaken media reports, this focus is a product only of TIFF’s programming decisions. We value that independence and would never compromise it.

The goal of City to City is to take a closer look at global cities through a cinematic lens, especially cities where film contributes to or chronicles social change in compelling ways. We believe that the 10 films in our inaugural programme do just that. We encourage everyone to see the films, engage in debate and draw their own conclusions.

There is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever, and complete and entire denials by Cameron Bailey, that there was any form of collusion here between Israel and the Festival. There is far more evidence (see one, two and three) that Palestine House is behind this campaign against the Festival and that at least one former adviser to the PLO is involved with this campaign against the Festival.

blogs.suntimes...

It was neither a “goodwill gesture” nor part of a “deliberate plan to ‘re-brand’ Israel.

I suspect that some of the “protest” organizers “educated” Mr. Ebert, and I’ll bet he hadn’t seen the clear denials by the Festival organizers.

I’m writing this the day after first posting this entry. I now regret it. The point I make about artists is perfectly valid but I realize I wasn’t prepared with enough facts about the events leading up to the Festival’s decision to showcase Tel Aviv in the City-to-City section. I thought of it as an innocent goodwill gesture, but now realize it was part of a deliberate plan to “re-brand” Israel in Toronto, as a pilot for a larger such program. The Festival should never have agreed to be used like this. It was naive for the plan’s supporters to believe it would have the effect they hoped for. The original entry remains below. The first 50 or so comments were posted before these regrets.

Fonda’s explanation of why she signed it in the first place includes the claim that “I signed the letter without reading it carefully enough.” Someone online asked what sort of letter Jane Fonda thought she was signing. This person wondered if Jane Fonda reads her contracts with so little care.

Jane Fonda is in her 70s. Her acting career is basically over. If you visit her website you see that it’s mostly having dinner parties with Rod Stewart, and so on.

So she wants to smooth over ruffled feathers without retracting the substance of what she signed. Retracting it would be asking the organizers of the petition to remove her name.