VIFF 2006: The Cinema of Despair Returns

VIFF 2006

film-collage-sept29.jpg

The first day of the 25th annual Vancouver International Film Festival is history, Vancouverites by the thousands were sequestered inside darkened theatres, and the family that constitute the regulars who have attended VIFF for a quarter century have once again come together in celebration.
First film: Arriving just minutes before the 6 p.m. screening of Passabe at the Granville 7, Pacific Cinémathèque’s Sue Cormier directed me towards G7 theatre manager Teresa Weir, who without benefit of VR plea resolved an access dilemma by grabbing a “ticket” to Cinema 5, allowing me ready entrance to the theatre in time to catch the beginning of the film.
And lest one is left with the impression that VanRamblings amounts to a hill of beans in this crazy world, we don’t; Teresa had no idea who we were. Yet she intervened. The VIFF is all about human contact, and an ideal (if sometimes despairing) world. Humanity, the milk of human kindness, empathy and going that one step further. That’s the VIFF. We’re gratetful.

Continue reading VIFF 2006: The Cinema of Despair Returns →

VIFF 2006: Celebrating a Quarter of a Century

VIFF 2006

VANCOUVER INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL 2006

The Vancouver International Film Festival may be a quarter of a century young, but believe it or not there are still a few people around who’ve never taken in a screening of a VIFF film. Hard to believe, but true.
To move Vancouverites, and those farther afield, to partake in the illustrious delights of a couple of hours in a darkened theatre being offered a window on the world, VanRamblings will kick off this year’s coverage of the VIFF by offering a few tips to those as yet uninitiated in the joys and delights of Vancouver’s most welcoming Festival event. So, here goes ..
How do you know you’re a Vancouver International Film Festival newbie?
You know you’re a VIFF newbie when you look at the list of 550 screenings of the more than 300 films from 50 countries offered at our city’s illustrious international Film Festival and immediately break into a cold sweat.
You know you’re supposed to be excited about the award-winning German thriller that excited the critics in Toronto, not to mention Canadian actress Sarah Polley’s directorial début that wowed those same audiences. You’re pretty sure you’re supposed to be intrigued by the nihilistic stop-motion animation Czech film described as “darkly comic in a way that encourages laughter, horror and thought.”
But, frankly, you just don’t know what to make of a movie titled The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema and, now that you think about it, you have no idea what a “cinephilic feast” is and whether you’ll even like it.
And with 300 films at four venues on 10 screens over 16 days, you’re starting to feel the weight and scope of the whole thing press down upon you. Where to begin? What to see? All of a sudden, you think it might be a good idea to steer clear of this whole VIFF thing altogether because it’s just SIMPLY TOO MUCH.
But first, take a deep breath. We understand how it is. Asking a freshman to jump into the Vancouver International Film Festival is like asking a novice swimmer to jump into the ocean. The vastness of the open sea looks scary.
But here … let us offer you some water wings.

Continue reading VIFF 2006: Celebrating a Quarter of a Century →

Board of Variance Fired. Story Over. Not By A Long Shot.

BC Politics, Vancouver

BOARD OF VARIANCE FIRING INVESTIGATED BY BC OMBUDSMAN

Now, you’d think what with Vancouver City Council (not to mention, the Vancouver Courier’s Allen Garr) on vacation for the remainder of the summer, and Supreme Court Justice Robert J. Bauman having trampled on the hurt feelings of the recently deposed members of the City of Vancouver Board of Variance, that this ‘story that won’t die’ would be over.
But you’d be wrong. You can take the hint from the latter sentiment expressed in the previous paragraph: the Board of Variance sacking is a story that won’t die. And, why not?
Well, just when you thought to yourself, good riddance to that Ray Tomlin fella, and fair thee well to Quincey Kirschner, Terry Martin, Tony Tang and Jan Pierce, it would be too soon if I ever heard any one of their names ever again … it seems that your cherished opinion in the matter has been overturned by citizens honourable and true, an as yet unidentified band of truth and justice seekers who, when the Board was fired four weeks ago today, filed a complaint with the Office of the BC Ombudsman.
So what, you say? Well, this is what: the office of the City Clerk, City of Vancouver, informed Secretary to the Board of Variance, Louis Ng, on Thursday afternoon that the aforementioned Ombudsman’s office has launched a “full and thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding the dismissal of the City of Vancouver Board of Variance.” Mr. Ng was instructed to co-operate fully with the investigation.
Justice Robert Bauman ruled that Board of Variance counsel, Derek Creighton, had not proved evidence of “bad faith” by Vancouver City Council in its dismissal of the Board. But now, with a truly independent arm of government conducting an investigation into the firing, perhaps evidence of “bad faith” might finally be proven. We’ll wait and see.
Seems that the Office of the Ombudsman will issue a full report on the matter sometime later this year, or as late as next spring.
Board of Variance fired. Story over. Not by a long shot. This is the story that won’t die.

This Just In: Board of Variance Crushed by Supreme Court

BC Politics, Vancouver, VanRamblings

BOARD OF VARIANCE CRUSHED IN COURT

This morning, in Courtroom 20, in the British Columbia Supreme Court building at 800 Smithe Street, in the city of Vancouver, during the course of a 45-minute video tele-conference address, Mr. Justice Robert J. Bauman ruled decisively against the recently deposed members of Vancouver’s beleaguered Board of Variance. Okay, let’s be honest: with one devastating body blow after another, he slammed them to the ground, and crushed their cheery little faces into the dirt multiple times. But who’s counting?
Justice Bauman ruled that the decision by Vancouver City Council to rescind the appointments of all five members of the Board of Variance constituted “an institutional change,” ruling that Vancouver City Council — as the legislative authority — had the “unfettered right” to fire the Board of Variance, and were not compelled either to give reasons for their decision, nor were they to be concerned about any possible damage to the personal and professional reputations of the deposed Board of Variance members.
Tuesday afternoon at 5 p.m., Council appointed a ‘new‘ Board of Variance, made up of Alex “Sleepy” Lam, Francesca “I used to be an NDPer, but I seen the light, and now I’m a Liberal” Zumpano, Marguerite “I don’t know why some people think I’m scary” Ford, and (“what must they have been thinking, jumping into this mess?“), former 1993 – 1999 Board of Variance member Parveen Adrakar, and newcomer, Jagdev Dhillon.
The best part of this whole fiasco? VanRamblings is now free to write any (responsible) thing it wishes on this blog about Council, without fear of retribution by Mayor Sam Sullivan and cohorts. That’s the good news.
The bad news: the terrible loss that the 350 families — and all of the other members of the community who approach the Board of Variance, each year, for an appeal of the Director of Planning involving a development decision in their neighbourhood — who will almost certainly suffer an untoward experience at the hands of a Board of Variance whose determinations must surely be seen to be tainted by the recent action of Council to fire the previous Board, in a decision taken with no just and reasonable cause.
In respect of Mr. Justice Robert Bauman, and in fairness to the fulsomeness of his ruling, given the impeccable and compelling presentation of counsel for the City, Mr. George Macintosh QC, to Mr. Justice Bauman’s court, there was very little room left for Justice Bauman to rule other than he did (although, one supposes, the door would always be open to a broader interpretation of the matters placed before a Supreme Court Justice).
Mr. Justice Robert Bauman ruled as he felt he must. VanRamblings believes in the rule of law, and all those who believe in civil society must stand by the rightness of a decision of the Court, whatever the negative personal consequences one might experience as a result. That an appeal of Justice Bauman’s ruling is under consideration speaks only to points in law counsel for the Board feels may not have been fully explored.
Still and all, VanRamblings would ask: Was it absolutely necessary for Justice Robert Bauman to award costs to the City, risking bankruptcy for the good-hearted, principled volunteer members of the Board of Variance who have worked so hard and well, and so ethically, this past year?