Latest Entries »

Standing Up For Free Speech

Last week each day  I went out with flyers for my programs I found them destroyed the next day. Friday I found the ones destroyed I had put up on Thursday. Saturday I found the ones destroyed I had put up on Friday. Sunday I found the ones destroyed I had put up on Saturday. In their place I found posters placed by a man who has been bringing harm to others and to myself for nearly twenty years ( I also found posters put up that attack me personally.

If you think our elected officials care about you, I have news. They do not. Never have. Never will. Oh, now and then one stands up for us. When s/he does they quickly get shot done.

THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA defended street postering as freedom of speech for the poor. The poor can’t afford to pay for protection.

I am going out again this week with more posters. Again they will be destroyed. If you put up posters for a yard sale, a special event, a concert or any thing else that you might want to do they will be destroyed as well.

This man also puts up posters for his used bicycles. They say: POLICE AUCTION BIKES. People think the bikes are being sold by the police. Actually, only the frames come from the police. The parts come from everywhere including the ashes of the big fire that destroyed Duke’s Cycles on Queen West. Dr. Jamie  6 Dr. Jamie  8 Dr. Jamie  7 Dr. Jamie  5 Dr. Jamie  4 Dr. Jamie  3 Dr. Jamie  2 Dr. Jamie  1You can read these posts on the web from people who made the mistake of buying them.

People say I am crazy because I stand up against this man. I know they are crazy not to. In the meantime each of us has a City Councillor, a Mayor, an MPP, an MP, and a Prime Minister who says they stand up for us. Write them. Yell them if it is time they showed it. This is not about my posters. It is about our right to Freedom Of Speech. If we do not defend it we will lose it.


In his flyer Dr. Jamie says that he will destroy all posters not put up by himself. Want your posters to stay up? Pay him for  "protection." Who is he protecting us from? From himself.

In his flyer Dr. Jamie says that he will destroy all posters not put up by himself. Want your posters to stay up? Pay him for
“protection.” Who is he protecting us from? From himself.


This racist poster went up during Caribana. It was mixed with Reg Hartt`s flyers to make it look like Reg had posted them. Thousands were posted. The intent was to get an angry Black man to commit murder.

This racist poster went up during Caribana. It was mixed with Reg Hartt`s flyers to make it look like Reg had posted them. Thousands were posted. The intent was to get an angry Black man to commit murder.

This poster was an attempt to get a drug dealer to send a hit man here. One did come. He left when he saw this is bullshit. Drug dealers are not stupid.

This poster was an attempt to get a drug dealer to send a hit man here. One did come. He left when he saw this is bullshit. Drug dealers are not stupid.


This is James Gillis aka Dr. Jamie. He is a real piece of...

This is James Gillis aka Dr. Jamie. He is a real piece of…

Break-Legs1 Wait-a-minute Anonymous-005


Aboriginal Rights: Science Versus Faith

Mark 16:9-18J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)


9-11 When Jesus rose early on that first day of the week, he appeared first of all to Mary of Magdala, from whom he had driven out seven evil spirits. And she went and reported this to his sorrowing and weeping followers. They heard her say that he was alive and that she had seen him, but they did not believe it.

12-14 Later, he appeared in a different form to two of them who were out walking, as they were on their way to the country. These two came back and told the others, but they did not believe them either. Still later he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were sitting at table and reproached them for their lack of faith, and reluctance to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

15-18 Then he said to them, “You must go out to the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature. He who believes it and is baptised will be saved, but he who disbelieves it will be condemned. These signs will follow those who do believe: they will drive out evil spirits in my name; they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up snakes, and if they drink anything poisonous it will do them no harm; they will lay their hands upon the sick and they will recover.”

Jesus did not say, as so many modern “faith healers” say, “I have healed you.” He said, “Your faith has made you whole.”

There is a difference and it is a big one.

This week in Ontario, Canada a judge upheld the right of a native woman to refuse chemotherapy for her eleven year old daughter. Instead, to the outrage of just about everyone in the media, the mother has turned to native medicine.

I once read an interview with medical missionary to Africa Dr. Albert Schweitzer was told by the journalist, “It is good that you are offering an alternative to the primitive medicines of these jungle witch doctors.”

Schweitzer replied, “There is no difference between myself and them. We are both doing everything in our power to convince our patient that they have the gift within themselves to heal themselves of the worst the world can throw at them. If we can do that they will live. If we can not, they will die.”

I am very close to this story. The family in question are my friends. The girl’s brother (who is transgendered) lives with me. S/he came for a program.  S/he was the only person here that night. We talked. It transpired that he had been in an abusive relationship and was homeless. That homelessness ended that night.

I don’t go to church. The ones I did go to let me know clearly I am not welcome.

My church is found under the sun and the stars. It is big enough that there is room in it for everyone.

John 10:16J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)

16-18 “And I have other sheep who do not belong to this fold. I must lead these also, and they will hear my voice. So there will be one flock and one shepherd. This is the reason why the Father loves me—that I lay down my life, and I lay it down to take it up again! No one is taking it from me, but I lay it down of my own free will. I have the power to lay it down and I have the power to take it up again. This is an order that I have received from my Father.”

Too long those who say that only by joining THEIR church will we be saved have turned a blind eye and deaf ear to those sheep which do not belong to this fold.

A story about science versus faith:

I had a beautiful dog which I had raised from birth. I treated him as my friend, my equal. People said to me, “You raise good dogs.” “I treat him just like a person,” I would reply. Then when they got all sweet and syrupy I said, “But I treat people like dogs.” 100% of the time the person snarled at me. Doing that they showed me how they would treat a dog.

I came home one day to find my fellow unable to swallow his food. I took him to the vet. The vet had him for two weeks. He ran tests. He told me that the muscles in my dog’s esophagus had gone lax which is why he could not swallow. The vet advised me to put my fellow down but added that if I wanted a second opinion I could take him to the vet hospital in Guelph, Ontario. I did. Two more weeks passed. When I returned my dog had lost an awful lot of weight. He was skin and bones. “No dog in this country has survived with what he has,” said the specialist.

I asked, “What about outside the country?”

He replied, “Two in The United States did.”

I said, “Then one in Canada will.”

One in Canada did.

Science has its merits. There is however no medicine greater than the power of faith.

Let those who scoff scoff.

My Faith is greater than this world’s science.

I worship the Creator not by going into a building one day a week for one hour but by every day helping those others pass by.

In David Mamet’s book on film making, BAMBI VS. GODZILLA, I found these words: “Preach Christ constantly. Use words if you must.”

I am with Mamet.

I am also with the family of this child.

–Reg Hartt, 16/11/2014.

Matthew 25:31-46J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)

The final judgment

31-33 “But when the Son of Man comes in his splendour with all his angels with him, then he will take his seat on his glorious throne. All the nations will be assembled before him and he will separate men from each other like a shepherd separating sheep from goats. He will place the sheep on his right hand and the goats on his left.

34-36 “Then the king will say to those on his right ‘Come, you who have won my Father’s blessing! Take your inheritance—the kingdom reserved for you since the foundation of the world! For I was hungry and you gave me food. I was thirsty and you gave me a drink. I was lonely and you made me welcome. I was naked and you clothed me. I was ill and you came and looked after me. I was in prison and you came to see me there.”

37-39 “Then the true men will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and give you food? When did we see you thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you lonely and make you welcome, or see you naked and clothe you, or see you ill or in prison and go to see you?’

40 “And the king will reply, ‘I assure you that whatever you did for the humblest of my brothers you did for me.’

41-43 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Out of my presence, cursed as you are, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels! For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink. I was lonely and you never made me welcome. When I was naked you did nothing to clothe me; when I was sick and in prison you never cared about me.’

44 “Then they too will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry, or thirsty, or lonely, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and fail to look after you?’

45 “Then the king will answer them with these words, ‘I assure you that whatever you failed to do to the humblest of my brothers you failed to do to me.’

46 “And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the true men to eternal life.”

P.S. If the priest or minister you follow can’t help the sick you have the wrong priest or minister. Get the Hell out of his house.

These signs will follow those who do believe: they will drive out evil spirits in my name; they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up snakes, and if they drink anything poisonous it will do them no harm; they will lay their hands upon the sick and they will recover.”

The staff at both Yonge Street locations of Sunrise Records was among the very best in this city ever. Record stores come and go. The employees make or break the store. All the people at Sunrise made the store exceptional. Too bad the new owners are blind. Too bad the old owners screwed the new owners on the rent. We all lose BIG.201159-sunrise-records

Stan Michna, of SUNRISE RECORDS, is one of Toronto's exceptional resources.

Stan Michna, of SUNRISE RECORDS, is one of Toronto’s exceptional resources.


Benjamin McGirr Remembered

Ben_McGirr1 Benjamin-McGirr-2 TS2013922_20121030 OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERABenjamin McGirr possessed one of the finest minds I have ever had the pleasure to live with. His time was short. His impact on myself has been far reaching.–Reg Hartt

Without a vision a man is not a man

In Native American life young men were sent out alone on vision quests. They were not to return unless a vision had been granted to them. Should they manufacture a vision so they could return the people knew at once that it was a lie. For the rest of their life they were treated with deserved contempt.

In John Nails’ book on JOHN FOOLS CROW I found the vision of Crazy Horse reported.

It these days that vision is increasingly apt. Crazy Horse said that in the future there would be terrible fires all over the world. “Men will be brutal to women everywhere. In the end God is coming to judge the world.”

Today “educated” men in the main deny both God and the visionary process. Daily violence towards women increases, There are terrible fires all over the world.

The vision of Crazy Horse is a true one.

The last book by Jane Jacobs is titled DARK AGE AHEAD.

Mrs. Jacobs left this life in 2006. Today, eight years after her passing, much of what she warned would happen has.

Neither Mrs. Jacobs nor Crazy Horse was a Christian.

Jesus taught that in the end times it will be as it was in the days before the flood.

There is nothing to be alarmed about in this. This things must be.

What will follow them is something great beyond the power of most to grasp.

There is a great day dawning.

The present pain is like the pain of a mother about to give birth. It will be forgotten when the child is born.

William M. Drew is among the foremost silent film authorities. He does his homework. Others provide opinions. He gives facts. It is a pleasure to share this:
Dear Reg,
 Although I am engrossed in other projects, I feel I must bring to your attention the latest attack on D. W. Griffith courtesy of the Museum of Modern Art. If you go to the Silent Film Group, you will find a link to the following online piece at: This is in turn linked to the Museum of Modern Art’s own program announcing the rediscovered film with the customary attack on Griffith at:
Here follows my own response to this which I would like to post on the Internet. As it is an initial draft, there may be some additional points or changes in wording I may want to make. Still, it is essentially what I would like to put before the public to counter the new outburst of malicious exaggerations and distortions that continue to eat away at what little is left of Griffith’s reputation.
I very much regret that the poster calling himself Trav Es Dee as well as apparently the Museum of Modern Art has chosen to cloud what is otherwise the exciting discovery of the unreleased 1913 Bert Williams feature with the all-too-common demonization of D. W. Griffith and “The Birth of a Nation” in lieu of reasoned historical inquiry. It is a repetition of the same thing that happened when Oscar Micheaux’s pioneering feature, “Within Our Gates” (1920), was discovered about 25 years ago and was widely touted as the black “answer” to “The Birth of a Nation,” although so far I have not found any African-American source of that era advertising it as such.
First of all, before considering the Bert Williams film itself, I will respond, as futile as I know this will likely be, to Trav Es Dee’s repeating for the millionth time that “The Birth of a Nation” is the primary reason for the revival of the Ku Klux Klan in the 20th century. While I had always felt such a claim was exaggerated, believing as I do that such phenomena owe far more to broader historical, political, economic and social currents than the release of a single film, no matter how popular it was, I had no concrete evidence to the contrary until fairly recently. But the availability we now have of digitalized newspapers from the past has opened a window into much that was long unknown. Thanks to the information contained in these old news accounts, I can now report that there were revivals of the Ku Klux Klan in scattered rural communities in various parts of the United States from 1908 right up to the fall of 1914 before the release of “The Birth of a Nation” in 1915. The reason many standard sources have fixed on 1915 as the date for the resurgence of the KKK, apart from the compulsive need to vilify Griffith, is that, as an outgrowth of the lynching of Leo Frank that year, there was formed in the large city of Atlanta a new Klan whereas the KKK revivals of the preceding few years had been confined to small town and rural districts.
However, despite its appearance in Atlanta, the KKK remained a marginal group for the next two years. It was the US involvement in World War I in 1917-18 that brought back the Klan on a wide scale. Checking the newspapers of 1918, one finds constant accounts of Klan activities throughout the country with the intent of opposing pro-German elements and going after “slackers” and opponents of the war. Screenings of “The Birth of a Nation” appear to have had nothing to do with this resurgence, judging from the contemporary sources. Following the Armistice, the Klan did fade for a short while but the combination of Prohibition, the Red Scare, and increasing attacks on non-WASP ethnic, racial and religious groups as “alien” and “foreign” provided a powerful recruiting drive for the new Klan when they began again to manifest themselves in 1920 as a mass movement. Many people, including a number of still-respected public figures, as well as the war itself helped to create this climate. Unfortunately, most commentators today seem to be more emotionally invested in condemning an individual artist than for undertaking a line of inquiry that might end up questioning the wisdom of US participation in a war that had as one of its clear side effects the revival of the Klan.
Now turning to the subject of the unreleased Bert Williams feature, I understand that the Museum of Modern Art discovered and safeguarded this film as long ago as the late 1970s. Why, therefore, have they waited this long to bring it to the public’s attention? Had they made the information available then, conceivably there might have been people still living who could provide recollections of the film, perhaps shedding some light on how it came to be made and why it was never completed or released. That there appears to be no record in the newspapers or motion picture trade journals of 1913 concerning its filming is most astonishing as such sources were normally quite thorough in documenting every film project of the period then being undertaken in the United States. In lieu of the facts, however, commentators like Ron Magliozzi resort to conspiracy theories, arguing that the Williams feature was never released mainly due, it would seem, to the evil influence of Hook-Nose Dave. According to their speculations, unprecedented production delays in a film that was shot in 1913 meant that it was still not ready over a year later when the release of “The Birth of a Nation” in 1915 turned the US, or at least the American film industry, into such a racist monolith that there was no room for a feature offering a positive depiction of blacks that had been in production earlier. Somehow, though, no one involved in the Bert Williams feature, and no one in the black press of the time, either, ever went on the record ascribing the suppression of this particular film to such motives. Furthermore, this same conspiracy theory fails to account for the fact that Biograph, the company which allegedly may have buried the film as a concession to the all-powerful Griffith, once again hired the very same Bert Williams to both star in and direct two comedy shorts in 1916 when “The Birth of a Nation” was at the height of its box office popularity.
The manner in which the Bert Williams feature is now being exploited by the Museum of Modern Art and commentators like Trav Es Dee is even more absurd in its exaggerations than the earlier presentation of “Within Our Gates.” Writers have argued without dissent that Micheaux’s film was intended as an “answer” to “The Birth of a Nation” even though it nowhere addressed the historic issues of war and occupation that were Griffith’s main concern in a film he insisted was not intended to reflect on any race or people of the 20th century. Also, since “Within Our Gates” was shown almost exclusively to black audiences, it could hardly have been an effective “answer” or counter to the majority white audiences who allegedly had been indoctrinated by Griffith’s film and would have thus needed to see an alternative depiction of blacks. Finally, contemporary black reviews and advertisements did not promote or describe it as an “answer” to “The Birth of a Nation.” What “Within Our Gates” was intended to do was to awaken black audiences, especially those of the urban middle class, to the plight of impoverished African-Americans struggling against prejudice and oppression in contemporary America, particularly in the rural South. Presenting an alternative vision of past history was not the main thrust of its message.
Now with the Bert Williams feature, Griffith is being vilified again, this time in a bizarre effort to make sense of the fact that a film shot in 1913 and which would normally have been released at the latest in the following year, 1914, a film for which there is even no published record of its being in production, has been buried in obscurity for over a century. That the subject matter, narrative and contemporary setting of the film has absolutely nothing to do with Griffith’s focus in “The Birth of a Nation” matters not at all to these commentators. Instead of informed historical analysis, they have used negatively one man and one film to define the entire African-American experience.
The manner in which Griffith’s reputation has been destroyed in his own country in the last quarter of a century is chillingly reminiscent of the totalitarian methods once employed in the former Soviet Union and China during the Cultural Revolution. Those engaged in these constant attacks have utterly forsaken the methods of reasoned historical inquiry. Instead, they constantly denounce Griffith as not only the symbol but to a considerable extent a major cause of everything awry in American race relations. In the process, Griffith’s overall contributions as the creative genius who, more than any other single person, developed cinema into a mature art has long since been forgotten. It is as though Shakespeare had been redefined mainly as an anti-Semite with”The Merchant of Venice” blamed as a principal cause of the Holocaust. Under such circumstances, there can be no reception for more detailed analyses of the director’s life and career, such as I undertook with my book, “Mr. Griffith’s House with Closed Shutters,” including as it does startling and hitherto unknown facts about his formative years that are essential to an understanding of this complex figure. Unfortunately, complexity is something in which the current crop of politically correct polemicists have absolutely no interest. They would rather foster a totalitarian mindset as a means of explaining things they cannot readily understand, including evidently the 1913 Bert Williams feature that has just been unveiled by the Museum of Modern Art and which failed to even disclose they had it for over 30 years after restoring it.
William M. Drew
Dear Reg,
Many thanks for your reply. But while I guess I did not spell it out, would you be interested in running on your site my comments on Griffith, MOMA and the Bert Williams film? Or might it be a better idea to put it on my own site at:  I haven’t done much there lately. Of course, I’ve never really used it as a continual blogspot. But it might be good to put it there, after all. In any case, I’d like to share with you in advance my research and discoveries in connection with this.
There are so many additional errors and shortcomings connected with the Museum of Modern Art’s exploitation of the uncompleted 1913 Bert Williams film, including the very wording of their program note (to which I gave you a link) in which they state “New York producers Klaw & Erlanger mounted the untitled project at virtually the same time that D. W. Griffith began his racist epic, ‘The Birth of a Nation.”” Considering that Griffith did not begin filming “The Birth” until the summer of 1914, that statement is simply not true. In the world of early cinema in which time flew faster than light, far from being at “virtually the same time,” the gap between the fall of 1913 and the summer of 1914 would have seemed like eons. While this might appear to be nitpicking on my part, I think it is a very important distinction to be made in light of the theories surrounding the 1913 film’s alleged suppression that are being spun by the curators at MOMA. Note also that in the program note they list as one of the film’s directors T. Hunter Hayes. They have so little regard for accuracy that they cannot even get the man’s name right which is T. Hayes Hunter:
  Ever since the announcement of its resurrection, Ron Magliozzi has been advancing his pet theory that the Bert Williams film was not released due to the nefarious impact of “The Birth of a Nation,” including in this New York Times article from September: The same anti-Griffith note is sounded in this article on the Williams film published in the “Guardian” at:
Even though Magliozzi admits he has no specific facts to back up his allegation, he keeps making it anyway. To attempt to deal with this question, I undertook my own research today to find what might be indicated in contemporary sources. As I said, there is absolutely no reference to the Bert Williams project in 1913 in any of the moving picture trade journals of the period. However, I do have documentation concerning Klaw & Erlanger, the post-Griffith Biograph company, and T. Hayes Hunter at that time.
First of all, although Biograph is (or at least used to be) most famous as the company where D. W. Griffith made his most revolutionary techniques in cinema art during the years he was employed there, however beneficial it proved to him in a number of areas it always hampered him when it came to his wish to make longer, more ambitious films. For quite some time they insisted that he could not make films of more than one length. When he defied them in 1910 and early 1911 and made films that were two reels in length,”His Trust” and “Enoch Arden,” they would only agree to their release as two separate films, a first part and then a sequel. It seems to be another of my singular discoveries that some years ago I located a major featured “Los Angeles Times” article on the production by Griffith of a three-reel Western epic–the first account ever published of Griffith as a director which I reprinted on my site at: However, as I discerned from my research, “Crossing the American Prairies in the Early ‘Fifties” was too grand for Biograph which apparently demanded that the three-reel film be cut to one, which it was and was then duly released as “The Last Drop of Water.”
Although the vast majority of Griffith’s hundreds of films for Biograph were one reel in length, in 1912 and his final year with the company, 1913, they finally allowed him to make several films that were two reels in length. However, considering that by this time first European and then American producers had begun making full-length features that were an hour or more in length, this was scarcely a major concession on the part of Biograph. The final breaking point came when Griffith made “Judith of Bethulia,” his last film for Biograph, four reels in length with a running time of over one hour when shown at the proper projection speed. (Note that there are those, like Trav Es Dee, who are now proclaiming that the Bert Williams film was a full-length film made before Griffith ever made a feature. Of course, they conveniently overlook the fact that “Judith of Bethulia” certainly was a full-length feature and that it was made before the Bert Williams film.)
Griffith had made “Judith” in defiance of the Biograph bosses who put it on the shelf for months and made it clear that if he were to remain with the company he would have to confine himself to one and two reel films. In the meantime, they had signed an agreement with the theatrical firm of Klaw & Erlanger to produce film versions of popular plays. These productions were to average three reels in length although some were as long as four. Following his return from California and making “Judith,” Griffith was kept busy trying to locate better opportunities elsewhere and then securing his ties with the merged Reliance-Majestic company for which he would resume producing and directing by the end of 1913. In the interim, many of his players, including Lillian and Dorothy Gish, Blanche Sweet, Henry B. Walthall, and Bobby Harron appeared in a number of the Klaw & Erlanger films that were shot in the fall months.
Unlike many other films of the period, there was a considerable gulf between the time the Klaw & Erlanger/Biograph films were shot and the date of their release. Apparently, one of the main reasons for the delay was that, unlike with their other product, Biograph used a special perforation pattern on the Klaw & Erlanger featurettes incompatible with the standard projectors then in use, thus forcing exhibitors to lease special equipment from Biograph in order to show the films. Most of the Klaw & Erlanger films that had been actually filmed in the latter part of 1913 or, at the latest, early the next year thus did not reach the public until 1914 in a period that began in February and concluded in December of that year.
I have found an article from the June 21, 1913 issue of “The Motion Picture News” which announced the new arrangement between K&E and Biograph and listed a number of the plays they planned to film. As I have found from a number of sources from the period, T. Hayes Hunter was the main supervising director of the company at that time. However, in January 1914, he left the organization in order to produce and direct elsewhere. He said in statements at the time that everything was fine with him and Biograph and that he was not leaving because of some sort of rift. Whether he was telling the truth or was being diplomatic and concealing some very real disagreements I have no idea. I suppose, though, that he, too, may have had ambitions for longer films which Biograph was not prepared to fulfill.
In any case, the 1913 Bert Williams film may simply have been a casualty of Biograph’s unwillingness to release longer films. The Museum of Modern Art says the footage is of a seven-reel feature and the Biograph company, in fact, never released a film longer than four reels. Once the association with Klaw & Erlanger ended in 1914, Biograph reverted to putting out short films exclusively. Indeed, of all the original pioneer American movie companies who became part of the trust–the others were Edison, Vitagraph, Lubin, Selig, Essanay, and Kalem–Biograph was the only one that did not make the transition to films longer than four reels, nor did they make those variants of the longer film, the serials and series pictures like “The Perils of Pauline” and “The Hazards of Helen.”
Additionally, both the main director on the Bert Williams feature, T. Hayes Hunter, and another prominent director who worked on the film, Edwin Middleton, had left Biograph in early 1914. Apparently, they had also left behind the footage of the Williams film which, unlike the other K&E productions, they had never completed or assembled into a form that could be distributed. Hence, the Biograph management in 1914 would have found the Bert Williams material they had on their hands to be something that they could not readily market, whatever its content. And seven reels would have been too much for the conservative Biograph management to handle. Blaming it on the racist climate supposedly generated by “The Birth of a Nation” well over a year after the unreleased film’s directors had gone on to greener pastures is one more effort at exploiting the now-prevalent image of Griffith as a social villain to explain away the failure of the Williams film to reach the screen. Additionally, if this was all part of a racist plot by Griffith-influenced managers at the company he had left behind him, why were these same studio executives only too happy to rehire Bert Williams to star in two short films for the company in 1916?
Unfortunately, there is no way one can ever hope to reason with the Ron Magliozzis of the world or the writer who penned that atrocious piece for the “Guardian.” Like Dr. Goebbels or any other ideologue you can name, they are not interested in objective truth, historical accuracy or reasoned inquiry. Believing as they do that they are right, that, in effect, they have God on their side and are giving rise to a better world, they manufacture their own facts, create their own vision of the past and by dint of the authority and power they possess in their own little kingdoms are able to force their version of historic events on the public at large. Trying to challenge them is utterly futile. I recognize that Griffith is definitely a lost cause, that I will simply have to write off the book on which I expended so much time, effort and emotion and continue on with other, hopefully less stressful projects. The United States today (and Stephen Harper’s Canada, too, I might add) is essentially a totalitarian society as is inevitable when its supreme goal is endless war. That Griffith, a man who hated war and spent much of his career depicting its cruelty and devastation on the screen, should become a casualty of a heavily militarized mindset is to be expected. The only hope I have left, faint though it may be, is that some day in the future, perhaps 100 years from now, Griffith will once again be honored and recognized as a great artist. I shall not live to see that day, not in this incarnation, but I do hold out hope that I will be reborn and that in this better, wiser time, whatever other grave intellectual errors exist, I will find that Griffith will be almost universally revered and appreciated to an even greater extent than he once was in my own lifetime back in the 1970s.
Warmest regards,
  William M. Drew


Buyer Beware:

3D Glasses   2Ordered forty pair of these. They were supposed to be shipped two weeks ago. I was given a tracking number. No sign of the shipment. Finally, after a frustrating week I contacted the supplier. Was told I had to pay an additional customs fee. First time I got hit with THAT from the source. Fine, I paid it. Was told shipment on the way. Check the tracking number. Guess what? No movement. Now I am told send the receipt for the payment. The person I have been dealing with has been as helpful as she can be. The people who are mucking this up are very poor business people.


Let other buyers beware. Fed up I asked for a full refund. I prefer to have the glasses. I prefer to have them delivered without having more monies extorted. Not a happy camper.

I now find my emails are being rejected by this company. DHL has no record of the materials ever being placed for shipment. I am out close to $1,000.00. Let it be the last $1,000.00 that gets ripped of from someone by this company.

Canadian Anti-Fraud Center


Western Union # 1043779

dear sir
you need bring the the receipt of your transfer to the bank. and you need to tell the bank the name of receive is wrong. you can ask them to correct it. you can show the receipt to them. there is only one name : AiHua Liu.pls check our account again. don’t lose a letter, also no more a letter.
western union
• First Name : AiHua
• Last Name : Liu
• City : Shenzhen
• State :Guangdong Province
2. Report them to Alibaba and Paypal.
Alibaba : Login -> myAlibaba -> Submit Complaint and Report

5. Report your case to the Chinese embassy in5. Report your case to the Chinese embassy in your country.

6. Report your case to the China police Shenzhen department
or find the right department here :
7. Report your case to :

Shenzhen Bureau of Trade & Industry
Address: 3/F, Block C, Civic Center
Tel.: (86 755) 8210 7117, 82107434
Fax: (86 755) 8200 1360

Shenzhen Industrial and Commercial Administrative Management Bureau
Address: Gongshang Wujia Building, 7010#, Shennan Avenue, Shenzhen
Tel.: Industry and Commerce ( 86 755 ) 12315 Price: ( 86 755 ) 12358

Administrator of Local Taxation of Shenzhen Municipality
Address: 28#, South Futian Road, Futian District
Tel.: ( 86 755 ) 123662

Shenzhen Customs
Address: Shenzhen Customs Building, 1087#, Heping Road, Luohu District
Tel.:( 86 755 ) 8439 8110

Shenzhen Foreign Affairs (Overseas Chinese Affairs) Office
Address: 2/F, Block C, Civic Center
Tel.: (86 755)8210 5977, 8200 2509

Shenzhen Port Office
Address: 10#, South Futian Road, Futian District
Tel.:(86 755)8339 4325, 8339 4409

Shenzhen Entry-Exit Inspection & Quarantine Bureau
Address: China Inspection & Quarantine Mansion, 1011# Fuqiang Road, Futian District
Tel.: (86 755)8388 6000
Fax: (86 755)8339 5995
Shenzhen General Chamber of Commerce
Address: 8#, Hongbao Road, Shenzhen
Tel.: (86 755)8211 3000 ,2559 1851
Fax: (86 755)2559 2408

European Office Shenzhen
Address:Ostendstr.100 D-90482 Nüremberg Germany
Tel.: 0049-911-95339143(O) 5065025(H)

North American Representative Office of Shenzhen
Address: Los Angeles World Trade Center 350 South Figueroa Street, uite 288 Los Angeles, CA90071
Tel.: 213-628-9888

Japanese Representative Office of Shenzhen
Address: Room 1908, 1-30-5 Hamamatsucho, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0013
Tel.:(030)5733-2244 (030)3906-9301

8. Create your own blog
here in reporting your scam history.
Remember that China is a very legal country with strict rules and punishes Chinese thieves.
Posted 20th April 2013 by T.P3D Glasses   3 3D Glasses DHL 3D Glasses Rejected


The see image on FIREFOX hit image and then hit view image. It opens the picture up.

The see image on FIREFOX hit image and then hit view image. It opens the picture up.

THE BUBBLE (1966) Arch Oboler.

In a recent review of a documentary film produced in 3-D the writer said, “The 3-D of this film is not the 3-D of plastic glasses films. It sweeps by the viewer.”

What the writer does not know is that the 3-D in both films is the same. The thing is that conventional aesthetic taste restricts action in foreground space (Z-Space) on the theory such action takes you and I out of the movie. StereoCine

From Ray Zone’s STEREOSCOPIC CINEMA AND THE ORIGINS OF 3-D FILM I learned this battle between the purveyors of good taste in 3-D film making and the bad taste of those who relish off screen effects goes back to the origins of 3-D Film. The first movies were rejected until the film makers brought in movies that highlighted foreground action.

Both Pablo Picasso and Salvador Dali said, “It is good taste not bad taste which is the enemy.” I’m with them.

The first movie I saw that used 3-D was THE MASK (1961) which had segments in anaglyph (red and blue) 3-D.

Arch Oboler’s THE BUBBLE (1966) was the first polarized 3D movie I saw. While the story left a lot to be desired I loved the 3-D.

A shortened version of THE BUBBLE has been available for years in both anaglyph and field sequential 3-D. The quality of the image was not itself exciting.

Thanks to THE 3-D FILM ARCHIVE the image of this film is now as exciting as is the use of 3-D.

In fact, for 3-D Film Makers, THE BUBBLE is a Bible.

THE BUBBLE. This image shows the film as it now is. If you have one of the old copies of this film from other source you can appreciate the work done by THE 3D FILM ARCHIVE in cleaning up dust, dirt, splice lines, etc., on this picture. They have done a great job. The film lives.

THE BUBBLE. This image shows the film as it now is. If you have one of the old copies of this film from other source you can appreciate the work done by THE 3D FILM ARCHIVE in cleaning up dust, dirt, splice lines, etc., on this picture. They have done a great job. The film lives.

(  which allowed for the first time a single film strip 3-D presentation. He and Bernier had high hopes for the medium. Those hopes were not to be realized.

Bernier rode hard on Oboler. This film stands as a document in how to use 3-D from the man (Bernier) who most understood the medium. That makes THE BUBBLE of vital interest to everyone concerned with the entertainment value of stereo cinema.

THE GREEN LANTERN, for example, failed to light up the box office as expected. The problem with the film is that it never lived up to its visual potential. Had the battles in the picture used foreground space the way Martin Scorsese did in HUGO the film would have been dazzling.

THE BUBBLE is low budget which shows more often than it does not. It was made at a time when the view, incorrectly, was that audiences did not like 3-D Movies. The critics may hate them. The public has always loved them. The great thing is that Oboler and Bernier, despite their lack of money, were able to pull off the technical feat that this film represents. This is 3-D at its best.THE BUBBLE    6

THE BUBBLE. Things really come out at us. Arch Oboler used the technology developed by Robert Bernier to do this without causing eyestrain.

THE BUBBLE. Things really come out at us. Arch Oboler used the technology developed by Robert Bernier to do this without causing eyestrain.


THE BUBBLE is in digital side by side 3D. I made these anaglyph screenshots solely to let you see how pronounced the emergence effect is in this film. This is considered EXTREME bad taste by 3D Film makers. They have thought that way since the dawn of 3D. Salvador Dali and Pablo Picasso said, "It is good taste not bad taste which is the enemy. " I am with them.

THE BUBBLE is in digital side by side 3D. I made these anaglyph screenshots solely to let you see how pronounced the emergence effect is in this film. This is considered EXTREME bad taste by 3D Film makers. They have thought that way since the dawn of 3D. Salvador Dali and Pablo Picasso said, “It is good taste not bad taste which is the enemy. ” I am with them.

THE BUBBLE is the fifth of six releases that have benefited from the work of   THE 3-D FILM ARCHIVE. Their resources were employed in the release of THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON (1953)–Thanks to them we are getting the film in the right format, MAN IN THE DARK (1953), INFERNO (1953) Region 2 only, DRAGONFLY SQUADRON (1954).

3-D FILM ARCHIVE also own archival 35mm materials on several hours of shorts, tests, trailers and cartoons dating back to the dawn of stereoscopic cinematography. They include Kelly’s Plasticon Pictures: THRU’ THE TREES, WASHINGTON D.C., the earliest extant 3-D demonstration film from 1922 with incredible footage of Washington and New York City; Lumiere’s “L’Arrivée d’un Train” first shown at the Academie des Sciences in Paris in March 1935; NEW DIMENSIONS (aka MOTOR RHYTHM) the first domestic full color 3-D film originally shown at the New York World’s Fair in May 1940; THRILLS FOR YOU, a fascinating promotional film for the Pennsylvania Railroad, first shown in May 1940 at the Golden Gate International Exposition in San Francisco; BOO MOON, an excellent example of color stereoscopic animation from December 1953; DOOM TOWN, a controversial anti-atomic testing film which was mysteriously pulled from theatrical release after a few play-dates in July 1953; THE MAZE coming attraction trailer with fantastic 3-D production design by the legendary William Cameron Menzies, and many more.  These rare and historic shorts will be released by Flicker Alley on 3-D Blu-ray in 2015.

Producers of classic 3-D Films who would like to get their work on Blu-ray are encouraged to get in touch with THE 3-D FILM ARCHIVE. They do great work at one thirtieth of the cost the majors pay.

THE BUBBLE hits the shelves November 11. Reserve your copy. This is 3-D that is 3-D!The_Bubble_British_Poster The Bubble (Sherpix, R-1972). One Sheets 2

For a deeper look into Arch Oboler and Robert Bernier:

Ray (3-D) Zone interviews Arch Oboler;
Why would there be great public interest at this time in 3-D?

Well, you know, in life unless one is born with defects, the average person with two eyes sees in three dimensions from early infancy. Even then one scans and looks at side objects. Three-dimension is really the natural form. Once a person has been exposed to three dimensions no matter how badly done, unless their eyeballs are torn out of their sockets by very bad three-dimensional techniques, they want it again and again.

How far does your own interest in 3-D go back?

Well, it goes back very far. My father bought me one of the early Bell & Howell cameras in Chicago. At the time, as soon as I learned that motion pictures had started out in three dimensions, great experimenters, including the sainted Edison, had tried to introduce the financiers of the time, who were putting up the money for the nickelodeons in three dimensions. From that time on I was very much interested in 3-D.

It wasn’t until I met a man named Robert Bernier, a colonel in the United States Army, that I really felt that I met 3-D in the fullest. Colonel Bernier was on the Eisenhower staff during World War II. Bernier was assigned to work on three- dimensional maps for reconnaissance, and he had a very good notion on how to get three-dimension without the defects of the two-camera system.

I’ll parenthesize to say that, as you well know, in their eagerness to get 3-D on board, many of the entrepreneurs in town had reverted to the two-camera system. I originated printing it on one film in Hollywood with a picture called The Bubble (1966). Although we shot it on one film, the exciting part to the theater was that it was projected on one film. One strip of film, unlike Bwana Devil (1952), my first 3-D picture, where we had to do it with interlocked projectors for the left and right eye.

So that’s when I really got interested with Bernier. I had made a 3-D picture, as I said, but that was to my mind pseudo-three-dimension, because it was, again, the entrepreneurs. A very fine camera technician by the name of Friend Baker had the idea for the two-camera system. It was not original with him, but he had done a very fine job of putting it together on an aluminum block. He tried to interest a man by the name of Gunzberg, who was a small-time Hollywood writer who had a brother who was an ophthalmologist. But he thought so little of 3-D, he wouldn’t put a nickel into the system.

Finally, Gunzberg came to me, and I broke up the kiddie’s piggy bank, and I got the money together and put it into a practical use. But that to me was not the answer, I repeat. The Gunzbergs tried to make everything very mystic with their “Natural Vision” name and covering the cameras with canvas so no one could look inside to this mysterious thing that they had wrought.

As time went by, the inventor, Friend Baker, was shoved into the background. The people who originally talked to him suddenly became the inventors. Nevertheless, I knew at once, with a slight knowledge of optics, that it had to be done better. What I did was I took fifty thousand dollars of the loot that I had gotten out of Bwana Devil. At that time, fifty thousand would be like spending half a million now. And I went all over the world. I investigated the 3-D inventors. I got to know them all. And they were all con men. Except ten. Out of a hundred, I’ll say ninety were absolute confidence men. As with all fields of science, as you know, the confidence men enter into the beginnings of an endeavor.

Out of the ten that I felt were legitimate, Bernier really had the only system worth considering. I can read blueprints, and I saw at once that he had a good system. It took about fifteen years from the time he first talked to me to build his system. He started as usual. All inventors will say, “It will cost a dollar and a half or so to get this lens made.” It ended up costing me personally, and I don’t make no bones about it, six hundred thousand dollars. Which is an awful lot of money for a writer, as you well know. You have to write an awful lot of words to earn that much money. After taxes.
The system that Bernier came up with, Space Vision, to my mind is still the best system. It still makes the most sense. All the others have proven themselves to be secondary. I don’t know any of them that have put out a picture practically, sensibly, controllably, so that the director, rather than guessing at what’s going to happen, can set dials and know what’s going to happen, as you can with Space Vision.

My own feeling, however, about three-dimension is that its future, as we know it now, is limited. Because in the distance there is the look of the laser. Holography has got to come. It’s got to happen. I know that there are seemingly insurmountable problems before it can happen. But, again, in the history of inventions there are always three steps—the original concept, the implementation from the concept, and the practical use.

From the time that Zworykin came up with the cathode tube, and this is with some other nods to people who worked on the cathode tube, from that date to the time the television tube became a practical thing was at least forty years. It was at least forty years from the time that RCA first poured millions into the development of TV.

As we all know, there are institutions that are pouring money into holography here and abroad. So the breakthrough is bound to happen. After making Bwana Devil, I used to go around and talk about three dimensions. I would say, “Until there is a new basic principle, we’ve got to use something that gives the left eye one image and the right eye one optically and mixes them in your visual brain center. There has to be a new principle, and, ladies and gentlemen, that is not on the horizon.”

Well, it was on the horizon all the time. And we know it’s here. If we weren’t going out into space. And if we weren’t concerned about fission and fusion, it would be here already.

Holography will wipe out optical three-dimension as we know it today, completely. I’m sure that you have seen holographic results. Even stills. It’s very exciting, fantastic.
For my own prophesy (and I can only say, immodestly, that my ancestry traces back to a prophet who stood on a temple wall and made certain pronouncements) I’ll simply say, “Let me stand on this mythical wall and make a pronouncement. We will have in our living rooms a pinpoint of light coming through the ceiling that will send our messages into the room, our dramas, our musicals, our lectures. We will have a little control by our side and we will adjust them. And we can adjust them to Lilliputian images or to fantastically huge images of goddesses. We’ll have a twenty-foot goddess in our room. And we’ll walk all around her and see her in every dimension.” That will be the future of three-dimension as we know it, out of holography…

As you well know, these things are a matter of timing. Life itself is a matter of timing. You’re there at the right time with the right thing, as I was with Bwana Devil. I just happened to be there when the theaters needed different product.

I’ve got a much better picture, in terms of photography and three-dimension, sitting right here. It’s never been shown. It’s infinitely better than Bwana Devil. It’s perfect for three dimensions. So much so that the people at the brain trust for Hughes, before he died, said, “It is the ultimate in optical three dimensions. It can’t get any better.” I got the report. Still have it. They thought it was the ultimate in three-dimension.

Was this also to be shot in Space Vision?

Yes. It would be shot correctly.

Three-D is only as good as the person directing the controls.

It’s so easy to become an expert. Bernier was the man. I would figure the shot. He would say “No.” Then we would argue about it. Sometimes I won. Mostly, I lost.

When Bernier died, with him died the censorship of what you should or should not do in 3-D. I learned about how to handle a frame, what cuts off and what doesn’t, from Bernier.

I spent a year with Space Vision before I made a picture. The first shot I wanted for The Bubble was a B-17 flying out into space. I quickly discovered that even in the miniature it didn’t work because there is the psychology of three-dimensional viewing. The mind will refuse to accept that which it thinks is impossible. To put it simply, the audience would accept a wing coming out, but they would not accept an airplane.

And I ran tests with questionnaires. And a certain number, we in the know, would accept it. Well, the best one of all was this: it was Valentine’s Day, and I made a Valentine with a boy and girl kissing. I zoomed it out into space and they didn’t see it. Because they didn’t understand how their heads could be cut off.

The projectionist saw it all right. Bernier saw it. I saw it. But the rest of the people didn’t see it.

The future of 3-D, unfortunately, at the present time, is in the hands of people who don’t particularly care. That’s why I’m looking forward to the future of holography, which can be any size. There is no frame line with holography.

Good filmmaking starts with the written word. I’ve written a script called The Borgia Emerald that is the ultimate in three dimensions. It uses all the safeguards, all the expertise I’ve learned over the years. And it’s written for the Space Vision camera.

I sold out Space Vision to EMI, but I have the right to use the lens. The funny part of it is that if I wrote a horror story (and you’re talking to the guy who was known on radio for horror), I could outgore them! I could play you records that would cause you to stop eating for a week. If I did that for motion pictures, I could get any money I want. Unfortunately, I don’t want to do that with three-dimension. I’ve gone way beyond that.

So I wrote a story that is the ultimate in 3-D, and I can’t get the money to make it. Maybe I will. I don’t know. I thought I would have gotten the money just like that.

When Bwana Devil opened, I had to buy the silver screens. Or I had to seduce the theater owner into putting three hundred dollars into it. When I did Bwana Devil, I walked into the State Theater in New York, right on the main drag, and there were lines for blocks. I walked into the theater on opening day. When they started the film, there was no 3-D whatsoever. In the crowded theater, I walked straight down the aisle up to the screen, put my hand out, and the screen was wet!

They had just wet the screen with aluminum paint. And it was the wrong kind of aluminum paint. I went upstairs to see the manager and asked him, “What the hell are you doing?”

I finally got him to change the screen, but not for a couple of days. Meanwhile, the critics in New York didn’t see the film in three-dimension. Arid they were very kind. They imagined they saw 3-D. It’s an old story.

In terms of 3-D, until there is some artistic level of choice of stories in the studios, we may have the same reaction to the present 3-D excitement that we had back in the Bwana Devil days. The audience will become surfeited with gore, with bad stories. The only hope for 3-D is that someone will come along with taste and understanding and do a good story without regard for the extremes of 3-D, using it in terms of the story itself. It’s so easy to get so seduced by the wonders of going into space that you forget about the story.

And again—how shall I put it nicely—there are so few good movies in two dimensions that maybe I’m reaching for the impossible when I say let’s have one in three dimensions.
A good friend of mine, Frank Lloyd Wright, had all the trouble in his life architecturally that the world of 3-D has. But he always stuck to the precept that you had to start not with the concept of doing something madly, offbeat, but doing something that was right for the purpose for which you were doing it—a house, a museum. We talked about 3-U, because I was just starting with it shortly before he died, and I talked to him about the need for story, story, story.

It didn’t come off the first go-round. I doubt that it will come off on the second go-round. But I sure wish it will come off on the third! I hope the viewing audience will have patience enough. From what I’ve seen up to this point it’s kind of terrifying. –3D FILMMAKERS Conversations With The Makers Of 3-D Films, Ray Zone,
Steve Gibson
Stephen Gibson is a Los Angeles resident and die-hard 3-D movie fan who found a way to make 35mm 3-D feature films in the 1970s. Steve’s claim to 3-D fame is that he is the first filmmaker to make feature-length 35mm 3-D films in color anaglyph (also called polychromatic anaglyph). In the following interview, Steve discusses how he founded the Deep Vision Company to make and distribute color anaglyph 3-D films. He discusses 3-D filmniakiflg from both technical and business standp oints, and he also reveals just how passionate he is about stereoscopic cinema:  “I got started with Bwana Devil just like everybody else who was in that time frame. We said 3-D is the way to do it. My dad knew Arch Oboler. So there was a film connection there right away, even though he knew Arch Oboler from the radio days…When Arch Oboler produced The Bubble, I went up to the Ivar Theater and I saw it. 1 thought that this was where movies should go. Arch Oboler was a very charming guy, a nice man, and I thought he really was a visionary, and I saw the vision. I thought 3-D pictures were the next logical step. The closest you can come to it is Other than that there is nothing else like it. There is no other entertainment domain other than three-dimension pictures where you can become involved and captured.”—Steve Gibson, (3D FILMMAKERS Conversations With The Makers Of 3-D Films, Ray Zone).

The Bubble (Arch Oboler Productions; December 21, 1966). Filmed in Space- Vision Tri-Optiscope 4-D (single strip over-and-under 2.35:1). Producer, writer, photographic designer and director Arch Oboler. Director of photography Charles F. Wheeler. Director for Space-Vision technology Colonel Robert V. Bernier. Space- Vision licensing The Tru-D Company. Film editor and music supervisor lgo Kanter. Music Paul Sawtell and Bert Shefter. Producer’s assistant Jerry Kay. Associate producer, production manager and art director Marvin Chomsky. Sound Alfred Overton and Carl Daniels. Rerecording Don Minkler, Bill Mumford and Buddy Myers at Producers Sound Service, Inc. Sound effects Edit-Rite, Inc. Lighting Don Stott and Harry Hopkins. Head grip Arthur Brooker. Second grip Henry Briere. Camera crew Donald Peterman, Fred Pearce, Serge Haignere and Robert D. Sharp. Script supervisor Dorothy Hughes. Assistant director Richard Dixon. Makeup Harry Thomas. Special effects George Schlicher and Samuel Dockery. Color backgrounds George Guard, Joe Chavez and Mobile Colorfx of Hollywood. Titles and optical effects Consolidated Film Industries. Cameras Mitchell Camera Corporation. ¶A Midwestern Magic-Vuers production. An Arch Oboler film. Copyright 1966 by Midwestern Magic-Vuers, Inc. Filmed at CBS Studio Center and on location in Southern California. Dimensional Color (Eastman Color by Consolidated Film Industries). Westrex recording system. 112 minutes. Cast: Michael Cole (Mark), Deborah Walley (Catherine), Johnny Desmond (Tony), Virginia Gregg (ticket cashier), Olan Soul (watch repairman), Chester Jones (newspaper vendor), Victor Perrin (taxi driver), Kassie McMahon (doctor), Barbara Eiler (Talent). Reedited to 94 minutes and rereleased in 1972 by Sherpix, Inc., as a Louis K. Sher presentation with an MPAA PG rating. This version was retitled Fantastic Invasion of Planet Earth and rereleased in March 1977 by Monarch Releasing Corporation as an Allen Shackleton presentation advertised in Stereovision 3D. Currently available in polarized 3-D on videocassette from StereoVision International.

COMMENTARY: Arch Oboler made a number of weird little films, not the least of which was the groundbreaking Bwana Devil (q.v.). He was a supporter of 3-D until his death in 1987 and produced three features and one short in that format. I’m sure he would have gladly done another one had he been able to, and he was forever the optimist about the future of stereoscopic films. (He hated the fact so many producers chose to make X rated 3-D films instead of mainstream features.) From the very first he felt a perfected single film format would be the savior of 3-D, and he spent quite a bit of money trying to prove his ideas were correct. With Spacevision (then called Space-Vision Tri-Optiscope 4-D) Oboler believed he had the perfect stereoscopic system, and in many ways he was correct. Unfortunately, he was unable to get others to see the benefits of the process, (at least in the sixties and early seventies) and his two films utilizing it, The Bubble and Domo Arigato (q.v.) were anything but successful. The Bubble has been called just about everything but entertaining. While many have lavished praise on the use of Spacevision, they have berated the film mercilessly, and I believe too cruelly, for the most part. The movie wasn’t very entertaining, it did seem to drag- partly due to the bad score which got a bit bothersome at times and the cast wasn’t very interesting. Had it been a book signed by any number of cult authors it would be called a classic, but as a film it simply wasn’t well-liked. The story wasn’t very involving and there was much that seemed lacklustre about the whole show. Yet it was at least as good as fifty percent of The Twilight Zone episodes with which it is most closely compared, and better than most sci-fi films from the same period. (Many have said it was just an expanded Twilight Zone—type story which would have been better in 30-minute TV format. Yet the story could not be told in so short a time. Actually it’s more like an episode of The Outer Limits.) I’m not sure exactly why the film is so often belittled. It wasn’t all that talky, and it had a few interesting, though minor, action scenes. The 3-D effect was spectacular throughout, and several scenes drew gasps from audiences. While it wasn’t very engrossing storywise, it still was an okay movie, quite acceptable for its modest budget and offering a rather unusual storyline that, rather bewildering to me, wasn’t a sci-fi freak’s dream come true. (I am forever amazed by these SFers who complain about such films as Star Wars because they aren’t cerebral enough and then knock every sci-fi movie that does rely on an intelligent story premise. On the one hand they claim they want “a true science fiction story” and not “mindless action-adventure yarns,” but on the other hand they browbeat sci-fi films that take the very approach they swear is what they want.) I don’t like this film a lot, but I am not one of its detractors in any real way. To me it was just an average sc-fi tale made a great deal more viewable by fantastic 3-0 staging. It is in fact one of the absolute “must see” stereoscopic movies.—R.M. Hayes, 3-D MOVIES, A History and Filmography of Stereoscopic Cinema.

“Pssstttt….you plaster half-coherent missives on phone poles for a life! Everyone thinks you are a joke!”–John Semley to Reg Hartt.

Michael Coren is a journalist who is published by THE TORONTO SUN in both its print and media editions.

Michael wrote a book titled WHY THE CATHOLICS ARE RIGHT.

The problem is that Michael is an uniformed thinker. His “Christianity” jives with THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH right enough.

It does not, however, jive with THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Currently Michael is talking about the unjust persecution of Christians everywhere.

Michael is like many who think themselves Christians. They are fine until the going gets rough. Then they start to whine.

Robin Lane Fox is a non-Christian. He is also a man who does his homework (which is fucking rare).

His book THE SEARCH FOR ALEXANDER was one of the key works used by Oliver Stone for his film, ALEXANDER. Fox was an on set consultant throughout the film which is much better picture than many allow. It does not fit with current mass belief but, then, in his day neither did Alexander.

Fox’s THE UNAUTHORIZED VERSION: TRUTH AND FICTION IN THE BIBLE (1991) is enough to shake the faith of the strongest. If you are not brave enough to read it and then to think about what he has to say I feel sorry for you. [ISBN 978-0-14-102296 is ]

In his book PAGANS AND CHRISTIANS Fox writes, “Persecution has been an enduring fact of Christian history: ‘It is by no means impossible that in the thirty years between 1919 and 1948 more Christians died for their faith than in the first 300 years after the Crucifixion.'”

My point, and my only point, is that as one who chooses to believe that everything we have been told about Jesus IS true I accept persecution willingly.

On the same day the two great voices of Christianity were silenced. Peter was taken to a hill outside Rome. He said, “Crucify me upside down, please. I do not deserve to be crucified right side up.” Paul as a Roman Citizen could not be crucified. He was beheaded.

Both men knew from the moment they put their foot on the path where it led as do I.1fa5f400fe96ddbd76a8591d122f11bc alessandroalgardi_beheadingofstpaul beheaded-by-islam-resized crucifixion-of-st-peter-1605.jpg!Blog Image7 painting1 peter-paul-rubens-beheading-of-st-john-the-baptist-5756 st_peters4 the_beheading_of_st_paul_med

The word “suffer” has come to mean to experience pain, illness, injury.

It has a deeper, older meaning, “I will suffer this this that I may learn.”

Likewise the word “sacrifice” has come to mean giving up something we want for something we do not but are told we should want.

Actually, the word means to give up the lesser for the better. A true sacrifice carries none of the baggage we associate with the word.

More than a few people who call themselves Christians make a big deal about constant prayer.

Well, the word “pray” meant “think” once upon a time.

We think constantly without trying.

When it comes to prayer in THE GOSPELS Jesus tells us that when we pray we should not belabor our father’s ears with long winded phrases thinking that with much speaking we will be heard. In fact, he says, “Keep it short and simple.”

For myself the shortest and simplest prayer is silent trust for experience has shown me that the things I need are taken care of daily.

Arthur Rimbaud is nearer Christ than are all the Billy Grahams of the world combined. The Billy Grahams preach the Christ they imagine. Rimbaud published the truth he knew. The words “CHRIST” and “TRUTH” are one and the same. Those who preach truth preach Christ.

The wannabe poet waits for the right moment. A true poet knows that every moment is right. Plato nailed it long ago: “He who without the Muse’s madness in his soul comes knocking at the door of poesy and thinks that art will make him anything fit to be called a poet, finds that the poetry which he indites in his sober senses is beaten hollow by the poetry of madmen.”

“There goes Reg,” said a fellow in my grade thirteen class when I began to answer the question the English teacher had asked me.

“You be quiet. He is the only person in this room who is thinking,” the teacher said.

“People say you are eccentric,” student (wannabe) journalists nearly always tell me.

John Stuart Mill, in ON LIBERTY, writes, “Eccentricity has always abounded when and where strength of character has abounded; and the amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor and moral courage it contained. That so few now dare to be eccentric marks the chief danger of the time.”

He wrote that in the 19th century. The 21st Century is even worse than the one he lived in.

The best lack conviction. The worst are fanatics. (

The great secret is passionate detachment.

A young Moslem a few days ago asked, “Do you believe Jesus is coming back?”

“Yes,” I said.

“YES!!!” he said in return leaping from where he sat in joy.

We are here to embrace Calvary not to run from it.

In the gospels Jesus warns that at the end times there will be persecution such as the world has never known. He adds that thanks to it many will lose their faith.

A continent and almost two thousand years away Crazy Horse coming down from his vision in The Black Hills said that there was to come terrible fires all over the world. He added, “Men will be brutal to women everywhere. But in the end God is coming to judge the world.” Crazy Horse was not a Christian. He was himself which is something much harder to be. He was murdered.

Quit yer place of a curse

The hour of trial:





John-Kricfalusi Grim-Natwick-In-Toronto Jean-Cocteau-1 Jane-Jacobs Bugs (1) Jane Jacobs 5 Chuck-Jones-Christmas-Card-0014.TIF1_ Best-place-to-take-a-date Amazing-Impact kerouac_quote Rubaiyat-Of-Omar-Khayam2




“Being knowing or blase is really the sign of a very unsophisticated person. The most sophisticated thing one person can say to another is, ‘I know nothing about that. Please tell me.'”–Oscar Hammerstein III.


Thank you. You have given me the best day of my life,” said an old Chinese gentleman who had sat in the back row of the theater from my first screening at 2pm through to my last at 9pm.

The location was New York’s THALIA THEATER (Now SYMPHONY SPACE). Woody Allen’s film, ANNIE HALL, has a scene set there. I had been invited down to present my cartoon program. I agreed on condition that the last program be devoted to Shamus Culhane whom I had met in 1982 when he came to Toronto for a presentation I did honouring Grim Natwick.

I did six shows in a row that day in New York. It was Hell. The first was sparsely attended. Most of them stayed over for the second show. On the third show most of the people stayed over for the third. The same happened with each succeeding show.

The show was a program of short animated cartoons. It stayed the same. What they stayed over for was not the films. They were staying over for me. For what I had brought to the table.

By the end of the day the theater was so full that, as W. C. Fields put it, “They could not applaud sideways. They had to applaud vertically.”

John Semly appeared on the scene as a writer for THE TORONTOIST. He wrote a piece on my recurring battles with the city in which he said, “But considering Hartt’s steadfast conviction in his work (and his proclivity for acts, or at least emails, of considerable grandiloquence), and his willingness to turn the Cineforum into a Jacobsian staging ground for an urban turf war, we don’t think he’ll be going anywhere soon.”

He was right about my not going anywhere soon.

The “considerable grandiloquence” part speaks more about Semley than it does myself.

Pierre Berton, one of Canada’s foremost writers, gave his last public reading at my place. John Adams, of THE GLOBE AND MAIL, contacted Berton’s office. He asked, “Why is Pierre Berton giving a reading out of Reg Hartt’s row house on Bathurst.” Berton’s office replied, “Pierre loves Reg.”

Frankly, it does not come better than that.

The question speaks to the attitude of far too many people who think themselves journalists.

When that old Chinese gentleman at the Thalia said, “Thank you. You have given me the best day of my life,” I thought about the history of the Chinese in America. I thought of all the abuse he must have endured from people who thought themselves his superiors because the color of their skin was unlike his. I said to myself, “I guess you have done something here today.”

I get those expressions of thank you a lot.

I also regularly get dismissed as a nut case by the John Semleys in the media.

One woman who had asked if she could interview me said, “A projectionist for Cineplex Odeon told me you are crazy. He said you throw people out of your screenings for talking.”

“I do not think people go to an event or a show to listen to members of the audience talk throughout it,” I replied.

“Oh, I did not think of that,” she said.

At the end of that email I sent that John Semley is talking about I included what a very great number of people over the years have had to say about my work. The fact is a lot of extremely qualified people have said extremely good things about what I have done.

Said Jane Jacobs, “Old ideas are sometimes found in new buildings. New ideas are found in old buildings.”

The TIFF BELL LIGHTBOX is in a new building. Once in a while an old idea may be found there. The Cineforum is an old building. New ideas are found here.

After his piece appeared on THE TORONTOIST SITE John called to say VICE had asked him to do a piece on me.

“Are you kidding? I am not talking with you again, ever,” I replied.

He admitted that he had been flippant in the Torontoist piece but asked me to give him a second chance.

I thought of the scorpion which said to the frog, “If I sting you we both will die. What is the sense in that?”

“Why?” said the frog when the scorpion stung him half way across the pond.

The scorpion replied, “It is my nature.”

John Semley has a scorpion nature.

It is natural to him to be poisonous.

At the end of Mark’s Gospel it is written, “These signs will follow those who do believe: they will drive out evil spirits in my name; they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up snakes, and if they drink anything poisonous it will do them no harm; they will lay their hands upon the sick and they will recover.”

I first read those words over fifty years ago. The only way I knew then to know their truth was to trust them.

Having trusted them for fifty years I can say with authority they are 100% absolutely true.

“Preach Christ constantly. Use words if you must,” David Mamet writes in his book on film making BAMBI VS. GODZILLA.

The quote comes from St. Francis. It is highly protested by those who like to speak much.

I prefer to use a few words as possible. Actions speak louder.

Nonetheless, I say to John and to those like him, “Bring your cups filled to the brink with poison. Not only will I drink them dry I will smack my lips. Do your worst. You can not harm me.”2270620_orig easy-rider-thalia-1986copy index large yt-thalia-front





From ON LIBERTY by John Stuart Mill; “The initiation of all wise or noble things comes and must come from individuals; generally at first from some one individual. The honor and glory of the average man is that he is capable of following that initiative; that he can respond to wise and noble things: I am not countenancing the sort of ‘hero worship’ which applauds the strong man of genius for forcibly seizing on the government and making it do his bidding in spite of itself. All he can claim is freedom to point the way. The power of compelling others into it is not only inconsistent with the freedom and development of the rest, but corrupting to the strong man himself. It does seem, however, that when the opinions of masses of merely average men are everywhere become or becoming the dominant power, that the counterpoint and corrective to that tendency would be the more and more pronounced individuality of those who stand on the higher eminences of thought. It is in these circumstances most especially, that exceptional individuals, instead of being deterred, should be encouraged in acting differently from the mass. In other times there was no advantage in doing so, unless they acted not only differently but better. In this age, the mere example of non-conformity, the mere refusal to bend the knee to custom, is itself a service. Precisely because the tyranny of opinion is such as to make eccentricity a reproach, it is desirable, in order to break through that tyranny, that people should be eccentric.

“Eccentricity has always abounded when and where strength of character has abounded; and the amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor and moral courage it contained. That so few now dare to be eccentric marks the chief danger of the time.

“Film students should stay as far away from film schools and film teachers as possible. The only school for the cinema is the cinema.”-Bernardo Bertolucci.

“Admit, assume, because, believe, could, doubt, end, expect, faith, forget, forgive, guilt, how, it, mercy, pest, promise, should, sorry, storm, them, us, waste, we, weed-neither these words nor the conceptions for which they stand appear in this book; they are the whiteman’s import to the New World, the newcomer’s contribution to the vocabulary of the man he called Indian. Truly, the parent Indian families possessed neither these terms nor their equivalents.”-Ruth Beebe Hill, HANTA YO.

“He who without the Muse’s madness in his soul comes knocking at the door of poesy and thinks that art will make him anything fit to be called a poet, finds that the poetry which he indites in his sober senses is beaten hollow by the poetry of madmen.”-Plato.

“You have no need that any man should teach you.”-1 John 2:27.

Here is a new idea, a brand spanking new idea that appeared at The Cineforum this Saturday. They are called CHYPS. They are a percussionist group. They came to see KID DRACULA (NOSFERATU set to RADIOHEAD). After experiencing it they talked with me about how brilliant the fusion is. I asked them what they did. They replied, “We aqre musicians.” I asked, “Would you like to make music here?” Obviously they did and do like making music here. They also make films. You can catch their films Saturday at 7pm and their music at 9. You need red and blue glasses to view the video. Haven’t got them? Close your eyes and listen to the music. This is their first public performance. As  it was Hallowe’en season they are wearing  masks. This Saturday you will see their faces.