.

The thing I find interesting about your comment George (and thank you for the comment BTW - we love any sort of discussion here at TFS), is that in an article wherein I'm talking about a very real issue that affects an already marginalized segment of the population your reaction was essentially 'how dare you speak ill of a multi-billion dollar entity that's run by corporations who are more concerned about their bottom line than the creative content of their output' (actual fact, not just my opinion). You'll notice I never actually said that ALL Hollywood-produced films are creatively bankrupt - clearly that's not the case - but just that Hollywood proper is not known for making their green-lighting decisions based on anything more than how marketable a product is. Again, not my opinion but something we've heard time and time again from the filmmakers we talk to here at TFS and personally from my own 15 years working within the film industry. The entire operation is basically set to exclude any voices that don't jibe with the most desirable target demographic and ensure that mainstream cinema will never tell stories that are applicable to everyone.

Hi Barrett, Thanks for your comment but I'm not really sure what logic there is to explain. The film is an endless gush-a-thon which is about in line with every other film that Barry Avrich has made...or as I said, "it's as whitewashed and kiss ass as every other film that Avrich has produced" - the fact that Steinberg seems like a nice enough guy just means that maybe it wasn't such hard work to not address or gloss over any skeletons that may actually exist. But then it seems that you have some insider knowledge about the production. How great would it have been if the film were actually about making a puff piece about an egomaniacal comedy legend? I'd much rather see that film and it would have made for a much more compelling documentary. Thanks again for reading!

Thanks so much for your insightful comment. You make some great points and I think you'd really dig seeing the film at Hot Docs and having the chance to interact with the filmmakers in a Q&A session! BTW - the film positions Bedford vs. Canada as being about a capitalist free market so your issue is with the filmmakers, not me.

As someone who probably sees this movie through the rose-coloured lenses of childhood devotion, I think it's really interesting to read Trista's take on it. I've never thought of it as being bleak or as the family having tension that goes beyond regular family bickering. I can definitely see what you're saying though - it's especially evident when you compare it to the child-centric society we seem to live in now. That definitely wasn't the case back then. I bet someone could write a really interesting paper on this film's dark undertones - kind of the way Vincente Minelli's Meet Me in St. Louis is actually sort of macabre if you look past all of candy colours and silly songs.