The Cineforum bids goodbye yet again

WHAT THE FUCK......AGAIN??

What in the motherfracking hell is going on in Toronto, and what reincarnated royal bug did Hartt step on to deserve this blow to his karma? And why can't people in general (the city, bureaucrats, and legal butt-kissers) leave Hartt the frack alone?

The man's TRYING to bring some art (cinema) into our measly little lives, all for a fraction of what's charged at Bell TIFF Lightbox, Toronto Underground Theater, Hot Docs Bloor Cinema, Scotiabank Theater and a ton of other places. For once in the existence of everything leave the man the frack alone and LET HIM DO HIS THING IN PEACE, FOR FRACK'S SAKES!!!!!

On a related note, TIFF Bell Lightbox is a scam. Amazing theatres, super-crappy projection. I have never seen a movie there yet that wasn't totally dull and lifeless looking.

The Cineforum comes and goes but the Beer Store across the street is forever!

Actually, I have to agree with the Lightbox assessment. I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey and A Clockwork Orange there, with both films billed as new, never-before-seen prints (brand new 70mm print, in the case of 2001), and in both cases, the quality was abysmal to the point where I actually called the theatre to complain. I was told to send an email, which I did, but never heard back from them. Having seen those films so many times I've lost count, I can honestly say the TIFF Bell Lightbox presentation was the worst ever. I have no idea how this is possible, since the theatre itself is one of the best.

The projection and sound equipment is about the best money can buy but the screens are too small, mainly the two large cinemas #1 & #2. Don't blame "dull and lifeless" looking prints on the projection system, blame the cheap studios who contract the printing of the films out to labs that strike them off so cheaply. A good 35MM film can look great, or crappy - depending on the quality of the printing process for the release print(s). I can't speak to Clockwork Orange because I didn't see it there but I did see 2001 (and West Side Story) in 70MM and although I agree the 2001 print had a considerable amount of dirt on it at changeovers they never - ever claimed "never before seen print", they billed it as a newly restored print. Clearly it had made the rounds before it got to the Lightbox and I agree, it was a little disappointing but it wasn't terrible (IMO). The real problem is that small screen they showed 2001 on. Another problem they have sometimes (I guess it depends on the projectionist) is they do BAD changeovers. I've seen two films where they don't set the film up correctly in the projector at the correct starting point so when changeovers happened 5-7 seconds of film is missed at the beginning of each reel. I've also written them about Lightbox and several emails about major problems at the Ryerson venue during TIFF last September and not only did they not respond, they did nothing to fix the problem at Ryerson. Very disappointing.

Why do these no-lifes, street scum, IRL spammers, think they matter, and, more importantly, why does the editors of blogto think this is worthy news?

Since when did camh let out all the crazies? I mean, seriously, these two fools and their public bickering is so much more pathetic than watching two turds dry in the sun. Both Dr. Jamie and Reg Hart are truly lords of the dregs who's, beyond their pathetic cultural insignificance, only contribution to our greater city is the mats of paper spam that they ritually latered on public spaces.

These gutter-posters, who commercialize our public spaces for their own profit, should not be lauded as anything but profiteers and their lame dramas should be left unrecognised.