The controversy over the Toronto International Film Festival decision to remove a Canadian made October 7th documentary film from its lineup focused primarily on the absurd demand for copyright clearances of clips taken by Hamas terrorists on the day of the attack. While TIFF reversed its decision given the enormous backlash over what many rightly perceived to be censorship, another aspect of TIFF’s demands remain in place. According to media reports, the initial title of the documentary was Out of Nowhere: The Ultimate Rescue. TIFF demanded that the name be changed in order to be included in the program, leading to the new title, The Road Between Us: The Ultimate Rescue. TIFF staff apparently objected to the phrase “Out of Nowhere”, which suggests that staff believes both that (1) the October 7th attack was not out of nowhere, and (2) that it was appropriate to limit artistic freedom of expression by substituting its political views over those of the creator.
TIFF’s decision to limit artistic expression sets a dangerous precedent that should be strongly condemned by creator groups and anyone who believes in freedom of expression. It should be obvious that “out of nowhere” was a perfectly appropriate title given the unexpected Hamas terror attack, but it should not matter what I think or what TIFF thinks. This is a suppression of artistic freedom of expression by a film festival that receives significant public funding from multiple layers of government and from numerous corporate supporters. Canada’s Status of the Artist Act is not designed for this situation, but the spirit of the law is clear: protection of the rights of artists to freedom of expression free from pressure tactics.
As far as I can tell, this type of name change is unprecedented. There have been voluntary name changes due to political developments (the film “Z” changed its name after the Russia adopted the “Z” symbol in the Russia-Ukraine war) and the Venice International Film Festival sparked controversy when it changed the name of the origin of films from Taiwan to Chinese Taipei (though not the title of the films). But I am unable to find a public example of conditioning participation on a name change of the film to due political views. Indeed, the approach runs counter to TIFF’s professed mission that includes “defending artistic excellence and artistic freedom.”
This violation of artistic freedom should not be ignored in the hope of moving beyond TIFF’s egregious now-reversed decision to remove the film from its lineup. The mandated name change remains and with it TIFF’s violation of its principles and those of Canadian law. Governments and funders should demand a full accounting on what occurred and TIFF should reverse the name change decision so that film maker Barry Avrich can call the film whatever he wants without shameful interference from TIFF staff and executives.
