DOMINIC MOAWAD:
SERIAL COMPLAINER
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE COLLECTED
LETTERS OF COMPLAINT 2003
Predictably, they're complaints about film related
subjects. The first two letters involved the banning of Ken Park.
The first is a letter to Bob Carr, the second a letter to the
Federal Attorney General. Both of which fell on deaf ears. The third
letter is a classic two pager which coupled as a letter of demand
and a complaint relating to the Dendy's stuffing up of my viewing of
Spellbound. To the Dendy's credit, they met all my demands promptly,
including my "small administration fee."
FIRST LETTER: TO BOB CARR WITH LOVE
The Hon. Robert John Carr, MP.
Level 40 Governor Macquarie Tower
1 Farrer Place
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Bob Carr,
RE: OFLC RC for Ken Park: For your urgent consideration
"This is our most desperate hour. Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi. You're my
only hope."
- Princess Leia, Star Wars, 1977
I have written an e-mail/facsimile/snail mail to the New South Wales
Attorney General regarding this matter, but I also write to you in
these forms considering your great championing of the arts in your
role as Minister for the Arts and Premier of our State.
I am disappointed and disgusted at the recent decision of the Office
of Film and Literature Classification in refusing classification to
the film Ken Park. The film, by the simultaneously controversial and
applauded director Larry Clark (Kids, Bully) would be (going on his
past films) understandably challenging to audiences because of its
harsh, almost hyper real subject matter. It is, nevertheless an
important and fundamental discussion of sub cultures and the
aimlessness of some youth. Kids is still as relevant today as when
it was released in terms of the attitudes of young people,
particularly as HIV infections increase across the country. Bully
dealt with mainly disaffected wealthy middle class youths whose
ready access to money and privilege made them believe they could do
anything they liked, even murder. If we are to have serious
discussions about youth culture and how to challenge aimlessness and
disaffection, how can we do this if we turn our backs and ignore
these honestly disturbing portrayals?
I'm also uncomfortable that these judgments are made by panel
members who must be excessively concerned with the feelings of a few
loud mouthed conservatives (and interpret their noisy standards as
the 'community' standard) who want their definition of 'morality' to
impede on our freedom of thought, speech, analysis and discussion.
Furthermore, that these people use the most odious form of
justification - under the guise of 'protecting children' - is a
shameless manipulation of children to further their particularly
oppressive form of morality. Therefore, it's time for people like me
to stand up for my right as an adult to watch a film that a panel of
intelligent people have deemed worthy of inclusion in the Sydney
Film Festival. Even if the movie was the most appalling piece of
film put to print, we should still have a right in the Sydney
festival to view and discuss it, just as we do with most other art
forms.
I noticed in your "birthday message" to the Sydney film festival[1],
you wrote:
"On this golden anniversary, we honour the festival's achievements
in building a vibrant and sophisticated film community, bringing the
best and latest in world cinema to local audiences,... promoting
Sydney as a film and cultural capital..."
I believe you are absolutely serious about what you wrote because
your many years in office has demonstrated you do not come from the
Wizard of Oz school of leaders. Therefore, you must be seriously
unhappy and embarrassed at the mockery this ban does to what you say
the Sydney Film Festival stands for. How can we be a "film and
cultural capital" when according to www.imdb.com, TURKEY has
screened the film and we, in sophisticated, modern, self-assured,
progressive Sydney, cannot watch it[2]?
I therefore urge you to fully exercise your power as a State
Government and break the tie with the currently over-zealous OFLC
with respect to the classification of this film. After all, OFLC
decisions are binding with the agreement of your Government.
Feigning powerlessness seems too convenient an excuse considering
how easy it would be to give classification to this film in New
South Wales.
Considering that the Howard Government's more conservative approach
is sending us back to the pre-1970s[3], I would also like you to
consider in NSW state legislation a more long term approach of New
South Wales being able to overturn RC classification decisions on
appeal to a specially constituted panel of film experts.
Thank you for your time, and I hope you will be able to act
speedily.
Dominic Moawad
A film nut who thinks it looks ridiculous to be sending an e mail
about the censorship of a film in 2003.
[1] Silver Screen Golden Anniversary 50th Sydney Film Festival,
Official Programme
[2] Other 'immoral' places screening the film in festivals or
release: Venice, Toronto, Vienna, Hong Kong, Denmark, Netherlands,
Austria, the Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, Belgium and the USA.
[3] According to the SMH on June 7, 2003, "Doing their lolly", Don
Chipp's 1970 stint as Custom's Minister saw Government policy to
censorship change (no film has, until now, been banned from the
festival): "The government adopts a policy that the festival can
show films not screened for the censors, but the agreement is never
written into law."
SECOND LETTER: TO DARYL WILLIAMS WITH
MALICE
The Hon. Daryl Williams AM, QC.
House of Representative
Parliament House
CANBERRA 2600
Dear Daryl Williams,
RE: OFLC RC for Ken Park: For your urgent consideration
I am angry and disappointed at the heavy handed way in which Ken
Park has been handled by the Office of Film and Literature
Classification. It has been over 30 years since a film at the Sydney
Film Festival has been banned. The film itself has screened all over
the world, and according to www.imdb.com screened in Turkey, most of
Europe and the United States. Does this Government have a problem
with adults viewing controversial material? Did we ask for this
Government to be our nanny? What makes Australian adults more
susceptible to moral corruption than other adults of the democratic
(and slightly democratic) world. I'm 25 years old and don't want
some censor telling me that the Sydney Film Festival chooses films
that offend the morality and decency of reasonable adults. It
offends my morality that a 'classification board' takes the
extraordinary step to not only censor but BAN a film that is worthy
of inclusion in a major international festival.
It is nothing short of a disgrace. And I'm sick and tired of a few
loud mouthed arbiters of taste with their own agendas - who would be
happy living in a Taliban style world where anything mildly
controversial, against the status quo, or "just not normal" is
banned - setting the tone for our classification system. How they
have been able to ingratiate themselves into the decision making
process is beyond me. Have we not learned the mistakes of history?
The 'silent majority' are not the loudmouths. They are those who are
reasonable enough to understand that really good art must challenge
us. They understand that being adults, if they are not going to like
a movie about troubled teens, they will simply not turn up and watch
the film. What your censors are doing is ignoring the problem by
pretending that there aren't youths who are having the problems or
living the lives depicted in the films. Countless movies would be
banned if depictions of sexual intimacy between characters 16-18
years old (played by adults) were reason to ban a film. Some of
these films have even won academy awards.
So, as an Australian citizen, I'm doing this very small bit by
making you aware that there are people out there who detest what's
going on with classification in our country. Classification is fast
becoming a euphemism. And there are still a few of us who believe in
freedom of speech and freedom of expression who are uncomfortable
enough with this euphemistic office for banning films. I know you
might think it's hard to believe - but we're the same people who
believe in democracy.
I can only hope you can use your powers as Attorney General to
uphold what tenuous faith I have in our Government - the very people
we entrust to protect our democracy - and grant this film a fair
playing at the Sydney Film Festival.
Yours Sincerely,
Dominic Moawad
A film nut who thinks it looks ridiculous to be sending an e
mail/facsimile about the censorship of a film in 2003.
THIRD LETTER: TO THE DENDY FOR MAKING MY LIFE TOUGH
[Manager's name deleted]
Dendy Cinemas
Shop 9, 2 East Circular Quay
SYDNEY 2000
LETTER OF DEMAND AND COMPLAINT
Dear Mr. [name deleted for privacy],
RE: Recent Experience with Spellbound on Saturday 7 June 2003
I have been a loyal supporter of the Sydney Film Festival. This
year, I purchased a week two subscription pass as well as over
fifteen subscriber tickets.
On Friday June 6 2003, at around 8:30pm, I purchased three
additional tickets at the subscriber rate. One was for Spellbound at
4pm on the next day, the other two were for the horror film Cabin
Fever on Friday June 13. These were purchased with credit card.
After dinner, I realised that these tickets were lost, and I
immediately returned to the Dendy theatre to purchase the ticket (at
around 10:30-11:00pm) to Spellbound for Saturday and then come back
to purchase the tickets for Friday. The box office was closed but I
saw the girl on duty who had sold me the tickets.
Both the girl on duty (who distinctly remembered my purchase) and
the man that was there told me
1. I would not need to buy another ticket, and the box office was
closed anyway.
2. Instead, I would need to turn up to the cinema. Before the
session started they would see if the seat was not taken and then
let me in. I had already purchased a ticket but the additional
ticket was for a friend. The man told me that he or Susana, the
manager would be on duty.
I specifically said that it was not a matter of concern for me to
pay again, since I had lost the ticket, but the staff assured me
that I did NOT have to buy a ticket to the films that I purchased.
If I had an inkling there would be a problem with this procedure, I
would not have hesitated to make other arrangements to ensure I had
the second ticket for my friend.
Saturday 7 June
When I arrived at the Dendy and explained the situation to Susana (I
couldn't see the man I spoke to on Friday), I felt she did not
believe me as I could not remember the name of the man and lady I
spoke to the day before. She did not even bother to check with her
employees, and insisted that because the session was sold out, she
could not sell me the seat and that there was no way I could get in
as someone might have taken my lost or stolen ticket.
It was now approaching the starting time, and I insisted that she
could not go back on the word of her employees, who are agents of
her. After all, what she was telling me was misleading and deceptive
conduct. She then agreed to look in the theatre at a certain time
and if it was available I could purchase the ticket. As it was now
on 4pm, I had no chance to argue with the condition of paying for it
(since your employees said that I would not need to) and said OK.
She then went back to speaking on the phone and dealing with other
customers and then I saw the man who told me that I would not need
the tickets. He apologised for not speaking to Susana but went and
spoke to her after I asked him to so that she would know I was not
lying to her. It was well after 4pm by now, and Susana finally
acted.
Just as I was about to hand her the $9.50 for the ticket, Suzanna
decided I was paying full price since I already had a $9.50
subscriber ticket. This was the final straw for me. On top of the
fact that I was
a) Late for the movie.
b) Had been deceived by her about being unable to sell another
ticket when 260 (or whatever the full house was) had already been
sold.
c) Had been misled into believing my entry into the sessions I
bought would be guaranteed after speaking to the employees, when it
was the manager's policy not to allow this to happen.
d) Embarrassed in front of my friend for being treated like a liar,
she was now charging me $14.00 for the ticket.
This is in contravention of the Sydney Festival booklet. It does not
say that only ONE single ticket can be purchased at the subscriber
rate. Indeed, on Friday when I bought my three tickets, two of them
at $9.50 were for the same horror film. Furthermore, this year, as
in others, I have bought multiple tickets TO THE SAME SESSION from
the SFF at $9.50. As the booklet itself says:
"On presenting your subscription pass, you can buy single tickets to
other attractions in the general program for only $9.50 (32% off)"
Indeed, if they wanted to limit the $9.50 tickets to one per
subscriber, they would have written it into the booklet, as they did
with the closing night film, where only ONE $16.50 ticket is
permitted per subscriber. There is also no exemption for the manager
of Dendy Opera Quays to make up rules at her whim. I can only
conclude that instead of apologising to me for thinking I was a liar
and making me late for the session, she demanded the $14.50 as a
PUNISHMENT for my insistence that I should be let into the session.
I advised her that I was not happy, and would be taking the matter
further. If I am wrong, and she was merely applying Dendy policy,
then I will be referring this matter to the ACCC, as there must be
many other subscribers who were refused discount tickets on the same
basis as Susana told me. These customers are entitled to reparations
under Trade Practices Law.
I also make the following compensatory demands:
1. The full refund for the three tickets I purchased @$9.50, plus
the $5.00 Suzanna charged me extra for Spellbound.
2. An administration charge for me having to take time out of my
life to write this letter to you and reconfirm the points of law.
I would like this refund and small administration charge to come in
the form of a cheque for $50.00 as a donation to the Sydney Film
Festival.
I re-iterate. On Friday night, when I came back to the cinema I said
I was unconcerned about paying for the tickets. It was your
employees who told me of the arrangement of waiting for the cinema
to fill and then putting me in those seats. I didn't come up with
this idea. Therefore, I did not receive the goods as promised and
have a full right to make this claim for compensation.
I would also like to know what steps you will take to ensure that
none of your managers will ever treat a customer in the same way I
was treated. I have thankfully not had any problems at your
beautiful cinema in Opera Quays. But this experience will make me
search elsewhere for my independent cinema after the Sydney Film
Festival finishes. I also hope you take my letter and demand
seriously, because I don't think any decent person should have to
suffer the ordeal I did on Saturday.
If you would like to speak to me or contact me, I can be reached by
letter, on the phone (97499741) or by e mail at...
Yours Sincerely,
Dominic Moawad ballb