Hey, Torontonians, Carleton cinemas is closing at the end of this week

[Muldfeld]

Very, very sad. I called cineplex.com and they said that the cinema had steadily been losing money and the company made the decision to close it.

The good news is that all the employees (who are among the very best and kindest of any cinemas out there) are getting jobs at other cinemas, including the Varsity, and the manager will be transferred to Scotiabank Theater, which has terrible customer service, so that's a relief to be getting a decent person.

Still, the very very bad news is that there is uncertainty if the less commercial films -- the documentaries, foreign films, and independent films -- that Carleton would show will be able to be fitted into the schedule for the other cinemas. It was a nice walking distance from where I live.

Now, I'll have to take the fraking subway to see a movie? That sucks.

I'll miss you, Carleton.

Here is that last set of films running until Sunday, December 5, 2009:
http://www.cineplex.com/Theatres/TheatreDetails/182736C4/Cineplex_Odeon_Carlton.aspx

This is what happens when too many well-off people choose to download illegally some indie film that barely makes any money. I hate my age group for that.

 

[Vincent Vega]

This is tragic and shocking news to all of us at the same time, though I'm not so sure if your alleged cause for that event is really that applicable for that film genre/documentaries.

 

[Muldfeld]

This is tragic and shocking news to all of us at the same time, though I'm not so sure if your alleged cause for that event is really that applicable for that film genre/documentaries.

I don't understand what you're saying. This is the "Free Your Mind" section to talk about real world events, right? Where else would it fit? Also, there's no cause; I'm just letting fellow Toronto cinema goers know.

 

[Jive Turkey]

I dont think VV was implying that it didnt belong here. I believe he was saying that illegal downloaded wasnt really applicable to the genre of films they show and thus, may not have contributed much to the closing


that being said, I think it would fit better in the Lemonade Stand or Zoo Station, but I couldnt care less where it was

 

[Vincent Vega]

Your last sentence to me sounds pretty much like a 'cause' for the development.

 

[Diemen]

This is what happens when too many well-off people choose to download illegally some indie film that barely makes any money.

Well that's just a little bit of a stretch, don't you think?

 

[redhotswami]

This is what happens when too many well-off people choose to download illegally some indie film that barely makes any money. I hate my age group for that.

That has nothing to do with it, I'm sure.

 

[Muldfeld]

Your last sentence to me sounds pretty much like a 'cause' for the development.

I dont think VV was implying that it didnt belong here. I believe he was saying that illegal downloaded wasnt really applicable to the genre of films they show and thus, may not have contributed much to the closing

that being said, I think it would fit better in the Lemonade Stand or Zoo Station, but I couldnt care less where it was

Thanks. I get it now.

Well that's just a little bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Why is it a stretch? There's a direct correlation between the increasing ability of people to download large files and the decline in being able to find even award-winning documentaries like "No End in Sight" or "Taxi to the Dark Side" or films like "Che", which was barely shown in cinemas here.

Whenever I hear about people seeing indie or foreign films or docs and they're in my age group, they've downloaded it illegally. I had a friend who would never want to go to the cinema alone, so he'd download illegally. That money wasn't going to the cinema or the film-maker.

At the very least it was part of the cause. That's quite indisputable.

 

[Muldfeld]

Anyway, I'm gonna check out a film now -- maybe "Anti-Christ" or the horse documentary.

 

[melon]

I'm certainly sympathetic, as a movie-going Torontonian who likes obscure films (my last cinema experience, for instance, was a one-night rescreening of Orson Welles' "F for Fake"). Nonetheless, my reason for not seeing more films in theatres has nothing to do with downloading them off the internet, which I don't do, but the fact that these kinds of films are tremendously underpromoted, and I generally only expect to see most of them once they have been released on DVD. Plus, I'm forced to admit that I feel overworked these days, and I fear I'd fall asleep in the theatre half the time.

"Antichrist" is on my to-see list!

 

[melon]

Whenever I hear about people seeing indie or foreign films or docs and they're in my age group, they've downloaded it illegally.

Anecdotally, I'm not terribly surprised. I know several people here who would fit that description. I have to wonder if it's due to a lack of legal, high-quality online video options here, coupled with a non-responsive media industry that views the internet mostly with contempt. And so tech savvy Canadians have learned not to expect this situation to change anytime soon, if ever.

I've been here a year now, and I still have Hulu withdrawals...heh.

 

[corianderstem]

I don't think I know anyone personally who downloads movies illegally. When I've read about people online doing it, it's always big blockbuster movies they're talking about.

Which probably doesn't amount to a hill of beans in the larger context, but I felt like sharing that, and so I did.

 

[coolian2]

i wouldn't steal a car, but i'd download one if i could.

 

[Muldfeld]

I'm certainly sympathetic, as a movie-going Torontonian who likes obscure films (my last cinema experience, for instance, was a one-night rescreening of Orson Welles' "F for Fake"). Nonetheless, my reason for not seeing more films in theatres has nothing to do with downloading them off the internet, which I don't do, but the fact that these kinds of films are tremendously underpromoted, and I generally only expect to see most of them once they have been released on DVD. Plus, I'm forced to admit that I feel overworked these days, and I fear I'd fall asleep in the theatre half the time.

"Antichrist" is on my to-see list!

I just check Cineplex.com - Trailers - Movies - Theatres - Showtimes - Home weekly for showtimes, and know what to look for due to "At the Movies" (which used to be hosted by Ebert and Roeper and now is by Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott). I find that once stuff leaves the cinema, too much time has passed and I forget that I ever wanted to see it and very few video stores have everything.

I just saw the doc "The Horse Boy" about parents who try to aid their son's autism by taking him to see shamen in Mongolia; quite interesting and honest.

"Anti-Christ" will be showing past Thursday and into Sunday, but the 9-something showing on Sunday is cancelled.

From Friday to Sunday, they're going to be showing "Monty Python's Holy Grail", which was one of the first films the cinema ever showed when it opened in 1981.

 

[Muldfeld]

Anecdotally, I'm not terribly surprised. I know several people here who would fit that description. I have to wonder if it's due to a lack of legal, high-quality online video options here, coupled with a non-responsive media industry that views the internet mostly with contempt. And so tech savvy Canadians have learned not to expect this situation to change anytime soon, if ever.

I've been here a year now, and I still have Hulu withdrawals...heh.

The folks I know never gave a damn about a legal option. You don't get more high quality than just going to the cinema. It's laziness. They don't want to rent, either.

Obviously, there's a grading scale of moral depravity on this; if you live in a town that doesn't have such films or are poor, it's much more understandable. Also, there's the matter of frequency. I'm no saint on this issue, but I do try my best.

The major thing people don't factor in because they're thinking about how people often buy albums they like that they've downloaded illegally (I, for one, was pushed into checking out and then buying Arcade Fire, The Strokes, Sufjan Stevens, etc by these same friends.) is that people rarely want to watch a film a 2nd time the way they might want to listen to an album a second time. Think of all the films you've liked; how many times have you seen them? So, even if an illegally downloaded film proves to be great, people have very little incentive to go and watch it at the cinema or rent it, let alone buy it. That's a huge blow to small films.

 

[Muldfeld]

I don't think I know anyone personally who downloads movies illegally. When I've read about people online doing it, it's always big blockbuster movies they're talking about.

Which probably doesn't amount to a hill of beans in the larger context, but I felt like sharing that, and so I did.

Yeah, that's fine. I do that all the time, eh!?

I don't find that the issue with downloading blockbuster films is as much of a problem because these films have a large margin of profit. However, indie films and foreign films and documentaries make very little money -- unless they are that rare Michael Moore type doc; the best ones often get little attention and they really need the money.

I've seen some amazing films at this cinema, including my favorite documentary of all time, "The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill", which got no attention compared to the far crappier and forced "March of the Penguins" released that same year.

 

[Muldfeld]

By the way, I asked the employees and they said they were only told 2 weeks ago, which is, like, the bare minimum amount of time by which you have to inform people before you fire them. And that's pretty disgusting of Cineplex.

More worryingly, the employees said that they had guaranteed jobs, but they were worried that their hours would be cut, so that's hardly a proper fix.

People should email cineplex.com and call to the highest authorities to make their voices heard.

I'm so fraking sick of corporate Canada. Cineplex has a monopoly and films are often delayed like mad from the US and now this!

 

[BVS]

Yeah, that's fine. I do that all the time, eh!?

I don't find that the issue with downloading blockbuster films is as much of a problem

Not much of a moral consistentcy, eh?

By the way, I asked the employees and they said they were only told 2 weeks ago, which is, like, the bare minimum amount of time by which you have to inform people before you fire them. And that's pretty disgusting of Cineplex.

You don't HAVE to give any warning before firing someone

More worryingly, the employees said that they had guaranteed jobs, but they were worried that their hours would be cut, so that's hardly a proper fix.

People should email cineplex.com and call to the highest authorities to make their voices heard.

I'm so fraking sick of corporate Canada. Cineplex has a monopoly and films are often delayed like mad from the US and now this!

I'd take a guaranteed job with less hours than nothing at all, gives you time to look for a new job while still having some income come in. I think most people would agree.

What would calling or emailing do? The theater wasn't making money, period. It's basic economics.

 

[Vincent Vega]

You don't HAVE to give any warning before firing someone

I think Canadian labour law actually does have a clause of a minimum period of notification.

 

[BVS]

I think Canadian labour law actually does have a clause of a minimum period of notification.

For firing or laying off?

 

[VintagePunk]

For firing or laying off?

Termination without cause. If adequate notice is not given, there must be financial compensation in lieu of notice.

 

[BVS]

Termination without cause. If adequate notice is not given, there must be financial compensation in lieu of notice.

Well this makes sense... To me this is the difference between being fired and layed off.

 

[Vincent Vega]

When you close a branch you will find it hard to set your labour free a day before or so and justify that as a firing. If Canadian labour law is not too different from German labour law, then the employees will have grounds to sue. In German law, you could only fire an employee without prior notice if he did something against the interests of the company, i.e. stealing, spying etc.
Exception, of course, if it is contract or temporary employees or low-wage workers. Who needs to take care of those?

 

[VintagePunk]

Here's an explanation of Canadian (more specifically, Ontario) labour laws, and the subtle difference between termination without cause, and lay offs.

Lay-off or Dismissal, under Ontario Law --It All Amounts to the Same Thing. by Bram Lecker Lecker & Associates

 

[Diemen]

Why is it a stretch?

Well, the first thing that comes to mind is because you're prone to hyperbole when you're worked up about something.

But it's largely due to the fact that the legal viewing options available for indie film fans have increased and improved drastically over the last few years. I would think that the fast service and nearly encyclopedic selection of a site like Netflix makes a far larger dent in theater attendance than people who illegally download films. Not that illegal downloading doesn't make some impact, but it's hardly the big culprit.

 

[Vincent Vega]

The thing is that especially in the case of indie films and documentaries illegal downloading often has only little effect. The reason is, those who are really into this kind of movies are generally more loyal cinema-goers and they rarely if ever download such movies. For the people who do download them, if the option of illegal downloading weren't available for them they simply wouldn't watch it at all. So technically there is no revenue lost from most, as otherwise they wouldn't have gone to the cinema anyway. Hence, the foregone revenue is rather low.

 

[anitram]

Here's an explanation of Canadian (more specifically, Ontario) labour laws, and the subtle difference between termination without cause, and lay offs.

I'm just nitpicking but this is actually the ambit of employment law, not labour law (we are one of the few places where the distinction exists).

 

[melon]

Well, the first thing that comes to mind is because you're prone to hyperbole when you're worked up about something.

But it's largely due to the fact that the legal viewing options available for indie film fans have increased and improved drastically over the last few years. I would think that the fast service and nearly encyclopedic selection of a site like Netflix makes a far larger dent in theater attendance than people who illegally download films. Not that illegal downloading doesn't make some impact, but it's hardly the big culprit.

You have to remember that these "legal viewing options" are often U.S.-only. Try and access these sites from outside the U.S. and you'll get a nice "fuck you" message, courtesy of antiquarian regional distribution attitudes. Netflix, as well--U.S. only. That's not to say that there aren't some Canadian counterparts; the "Netflix" of the north is "Zip.ca." But if you're looking for a site that matches the quality and breadth as, say, Hulu, you're fresh out of luck. The sheer lack of real competition, coupled with a mutual contempt between audiences and media conglomerates, makes tackling illegal distribution up here a far more difficult proposition.

 

[VintagePunk]

I'm just nitpicking but this is actually the ambit of employment law, not labour law (we are one of the few places where the distinction exists).

Noted. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Muldfeld]

I think Canadian labour law actually does have a clause of a minimum period of notification.

And I'm not saying you disagree, but I have a HUGE problem with a rich corporation taking advantage of people and only sticking to the minimal law. I HATE that -- especially in this economy, when people are having such a tough time. The employees at the Carleton aren't high school kids who want video game money; they're guys in their 20s and 30s who really need those jobs. And what I've found shocking is how people will just allow societal conventions as an excuse to screw people over. That's how the conservatives are winning in Canada; lots of upper (and upper middle) class people just don't care and make excuses for themselves.

Well, the first thing that comes to mind is because you're prone to hyperbole when you're worked up about something.

But it's largely due to the fact that the legal viewing options available for indie film fans have increased and improved drastically over the last few years. I would think that the fast service and nearly encyclopedic selection of a site like Netflix makes a far larger dent in theater attendance than people who illegally download films. Not that illegal downloading doesn't make some impact, but it's hardly the big culprit.

I really don't think legal online purchases can compete with illegal theft. Do you honestly believe U2's recent album sales would be so low without illegal downloads. I just don't buy it. Same with many bands like The Beautiful South, who had to call it quits, and The Cure; they're not making up profits through legal online venues.

You have to remember that these "legal viewing options" are often U.S.-only. Try and access these sites from outside the U.S. and you'll get a nice "fuck you" message, courtesy of antiquarian regional distribution attitudes. Netflix, as well--U.S. only. That's not to say that there aren't some Canadian counterparts; the "Netflix" of the north is "Zip.ca." But if you're looking for a site that matches the quality and breadth as, say, Hulu, you're fresh out of luck. The sheer lack of real competition, coupled with a mutual contempt between audiences and media conglomerates, makes tackling illegal distribution up here a far more difficult proposition.

Yeah, I can't stand links to Hulu or how about when you go to a US official sites for TV stations offering extra footage and you can't watch. That's one of the best things about youtube.com.


I saw "Anti-Christ" last night and it wasn't as horrific as I thought, but I definitely had to turn away and gasped aloud a few times; I'm really glad I didn't look at one of the scenes at all as the women in the back row seemed particularly disturbed.

I'm not sure what it was trying to say, either, but it was interesting. I'd rather watch this than another Ocean's Eleven movie or anything by Abrams, but it is draining.

THE TENTATIVE GOOD NEWS is that I talked to a customer service rep and that guy assured me that the Carleton cinemas employees would be getting equal hours and pay and wouldn't have their hours cut; he seemed shocked that anyone would think such a thing would happen. I'm happy, then. He better not have lied, though.