Comments on Not So Confidentially

Having the venues so spread apart kinda sucked. Bring it back to BPH, I say.

Given how jam packed the venues were, how long the lines were, I'm led to believe that they're just not managing their money well, at all. Failing to pull a profit from SIFF is ridiculous.

I don't know... felt to me like lines were less than previous years. I also know pass holders who didn't buy this year, and regulars who felt the catalog was lackluster.

Not smaller enough for a passerby to notice. I still had to wade past movie theaters packed with inconsiderate liberals who don't know how to form a single line.

That's still a lot of people and there's no reason SIFF can't turn a serious profit given that kind of turnout. The money's leaking somewhere, and I'm not saying anyone's surrepticiously taking anything, just that it could be managed better.

Everyone complaining that full theaters should mean that SIFF is rolling in cash missed every speech reminding audiences that ticket sales cover less than half of the costs of putting on a film festival.

As to Gomez's complaint about liberals not knowing how to form a single line: there is no "single line" at SIFF, there are usually supposed to be three (ticketholders, passholders, and rush).

Best of luck to Gary -- I wonder if he'll be back part time? Otherwise who's going to live up the challenge of topping his the sponsor roll call at next year's opening gala?

Man, that sucks. Any organization would be lucky to have Mr. Tucker. No one could possibly read that ridiculously long list of sponsors with as much panache. Here's hoping they put that redundant tradition to bed.