Canadian Barry Avrich, pictured, directed The Road Between Us: The Ultimate Rescue, which tells the story of retired IDF major-general Noam Tibon.Chris Young/The Canadian Press
The headline was Onion-worthy, truly unbelievable (and not to be believed, it turns out): “TIFF withdraws Oct. 7 doc because filmmakers ‘didn’t receive permission from Hamas to use videos.’ ”
Oy, went my immediate response, vey. (At least that’s the reaction I can print here.)
The more consequential response – from some TIFF supporters, people in the Jewish community, the film world and gobsmacked folks of sound mind everywhere – began with that’s absolutely nuts and quickly devolved into a now-familiar scenario that puts not just freedom of expression at risk but also the ecosystem that funds the arts.
The Road Between Us: The Ultimate Rescue, by Canadian director Barry Avrich, tells the story of an Israeli man who, on Oct. 7, 2023, raced to the kibbutz where his son, daughter-in-law and very young granddaughters were hiding in a safe room as Hamas terrorists stalked the place, killing their neighbours. Noam Tibon – a retired IDF major-general (which is surely part of the opposition to this documentary) – saved not just his own family, but others along the way.
Mr. Tibon called the decision by TIFF “absurd and delusional” and accused the festival of choosing to “silence and erase October 7.”
Opinion: Even in war, attacking medical facilities must remain off limits
Opinion: As a Jewish Canadian, I want my community to speak out about the horrors in Gaza
The reason the festival offered – the lack of permissions from the terrorist entity Hamas – was, as I saw one person put it, narishkeit (“nonsense,” but it sounds better in Yiddish).
Because as The Globe and Mail reported, Mr. Avrich had received an e-mail from TIFF CEO Cameron Bailey, citing concerns about protests and dissent within the TIFF ranks.
That in-house dissent was the real reason for the disinvitation, according to the director of another film about the Hamas attacks and the global antisemitism that followed. “The truth is that TIFF staffers refused to work if this film about a grandfather rescuing his family on October 7th was shown,” posted October 8th director Wendy Sachs.
The head of TIFF – whose mission statement is to “present transformative film experiences that enlighten, enrich understanding, and foster empathy” and promises to defend curatorial independence and artistic freedom – put out a statement late Wednesday after the story exploded, promising to work with Mr. Avrich to screen the film. And by late Thursday, the film had been reinstated. Still, TIFF is the festival that claimed to be about artistic freedom but caved to dissenters, at least initially. Did it learn nothing from last year’s Russians at War debacle?
The result of this mess will not be the kind of transformation TIFF’s mission statement promises. It’s one that could wind up causing more than just reputational damage.
Opinion: The wombs in Gaza will bear the scars of war
Opinion: Genocide is a process, not an event
When the TIFF news broke, petitions were launched, letters written, outrage expressed. There were calls to cancel tickets, donations and volunteer shifts, and to boycott not just the festival but its sponsors. Lists were posted, along with screenshots of TIFF’s “Partnerships” page. What say you to this, Rogers? Do you approve of this kind of censorship, RBC? What about you, Visa? Oh, and you down in the corporate partners level, Cineplex and L’Oréal? And what about the governments of Canada, Ontario and Toronto?
Toronto City Councillors James Pasternak and Brad Bradford called on TIFF to screen the film in a statement, as did Liberal MP Anthony Housefather. “If the festival does not reverse course all sponsors should reconsider their participation,” he posted.
The last thing the likes of Rolex and Don Julio want for the fortune (and tequila or what have you) they hand over to TIFF is to be dragged into this.
Scotiabank learned the hard way that sponsoring what was once considered a shiny Canadian literary prize was no longer a way to boost its image, but rather to tarnish it. People – who have a legitimate protest against an ugly war – began focusing not just on the government of the country fighting the war, but on a prize celebrating Canadian fiction and the bank (with a subsidiary that invested in an Israeli arms manufacturer) sponsoring it. After 20 years of sponsorship, Scotiabank is out. And now, the Giller Prize is in serious financial trouble.
All of this has created not just chasms in the arts community and a chill on artistic expression, but a disincentive for organizations considering ponying up to support the arts. You want your brand associated with something positive and meaningful: a literary prize, a film festival, maybe a theatre festival that claims to push the boundaries. (Vancouver’s PuSh International Performing Arts Festival also caved to dissenters, cancelling the Canadian play The Runner last year.) But shell out money to get embroiled in this? In this economy?
The arts are in trouble and need corporate support. The world is in trouble and needs art to guide and inform, and artists who help us understand the issues and inspire us to be brave and fight for what’s right.
Which is something TIFF should be doing.
