Los Angeles Film Festival...shamed! The Richard Raddon ghost haunts event. Should gays boycott fest?

Tattler readers may recall from a controversial post that I suffered a nasty run-in with last year with former Director of the Los Angeles Film Festival - Richard Raddon - when I approached the devout Mormon about covering the annual Westwood-based event.

In fact, I am still baffled by Raddon's bizarre conduct, to this day.

Post:

http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2008/06/los-angeles-independent-film.html

Shortly after I published the tell-all on the Internet, I spied a sudden surge on searches for Richard Raddon on google, which piqued my curiosity.

For some inexplicable reason, Raddon was suddenly a "hot potato" in the blogosphere; so, I dived in head-long and conducted my own dragnet on the high-profile film fest organizer to get to the bottom of the "dish".

Within minutes, I stumbled upon a whole heap-load of nasty sh** on the odd-ball local celebrity in the film biz.

A headlining scandal took the cake.

Allegedly, as "gays" in the Los Angeles lower mainland were engaging in a bitter fight tooth & nail over the issues pertaining to Proposition 8 (initiative to ban gay marriage in California) individuals - Raddon, for one - were stabbing 'em in the back by silently donating significant funds to support the cause.

Raddon's contribution to the witch-hunt?

A thousand bucks!

Shortly afterward, a war of words between "gay activists" and "Mormons" hit the fan, and a controversy erupted in the community that led to angry marches in the street and near riots.

Gays got organized in military-style precision!

Before you could say tit-for-tat, a boycott was launched against all businesses and individuals that contributed funds to the Prop 8 initiative, to demonstrate the clout of the pink dollar.

A trendy Mexican diner on Beverly Boulevard in West Hollywood - frequented by gays in the neighborhood for decades - was the first to feel the pinch and cave in.

The Los Angeles Film Festival was also a prime target ripe for levelling.

Unless Raddon was "let go", gays and their vocal supporters, threatened to boycott the Fest - shut-it down - if possible.

Bowing to pressure, Richard Raddon resigned, and justice appeared to rule the day.

However, the controversy was still bubbling on a back burner behind closed doors.

On the heels of the resignation, actor Don Cheadle - a member of the Festival Board - proceeded to urge Raddon not to kow-tow to the demands of the angry mob (along with a handful of other Directors at the Los Angeles Film Festival who held similar views).

This triggered a heated dialogue on various issues which was awash in the press for weeks on end.

When push came to shove, Raddon honored the resignation, and gays breathed a collective sigh of relief.

Now, as the new Festival (2009) prepares to launch in Westwood in the next ten days or so, there remains one burning question to be answered.

Since Richard Raddon supporters are still firmly ensconced at the LA Film Festival - and no doubt still hold their prior views on gays, the Mormons, the right to contribute funds to political causes (no matter how morally reprehensible), and a ban on gay marriage in California - should the gay community launch a boycott this year to ferret the rest out?

Enquiring minds want to know!

Not!

http://www.julianayrs.com

Richard Raddon...quote of the day!

For the past two weeks - since news broke that Richard Raddon contributed $1500.00 in favor of the Proposition 8 initiative - there has been a flurry of activity at my blog site at Wordpress where I posted an article on despicable behaviour I encountered at the hands of Raddon a few months ago.

Post link:

http://julian1st.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/los-angeles-film-festivalrichard-raddon-improper-behaviour-la-times-conflict-of-interest-blogger-disdain-pass-on-it/

When Mr. Raddon resigned his post - in spite of the fact a handful of Board Members at the Los Angeles Film Festival encouraged him to remain on as Director (Don Cheadle, included) - the subject heated up with accusations flying back and forth between the Mormons, the gays, and the Blacks!

Did I forget anyone?

At my blogsite at wordpress, a number of pro-active anti-Proposition 8 folks have been posting comments non-stop.

I've been publishing them as part of the "healing" process.

Today, I laughed when one fellow attempted to post a comment (anonymously, of course!) in which he made the sweeping comment that everyone who posted on the issue - or visited the site to peruse the article - was a bigot!

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Andre Gide once said:

"The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity."

Bloggers...thank you for your support! And, have a Happy Thanksgiving...

Since I hooked up with wordpress, I have been able to keep better track of my blog stats - and subsequently - determine what kind of activity is going on in respect to my daily posts.

Frankly, it has been quite heartening to discover these past few weeks that numerous bloggers have either "quoted" my comments on their sites or installed direct links to posts they have been keen on.

Not unlike me, many bloggers painstakingly struggle over their message - with a keen eye to the turn-of-a-phrase - before posting.

Then, after the little gem is published, most wonder to themselves.

Is anyone ever going to stumble on this post - and just maybe - read the material I slaved over?

Fortunately, when I step out the door, I get an immediate reaction to my musings!

When I waltz into a restaurant, or stroll down the street - even step into a crowded Hollywood nightclub - all eyes turn toward me.

"That's him," they whisper, "The famous blogger."

Nonetheless, the support I have received over the past few months, has been quite heartening.

Daily, I receive private e-mail messages about some novel or thought-provoking idea or two, bloggers pine to pass on.

Many are inclined to post a comment on the blog sites, too.

Since I started up my first blog over a year ago on the Fox Network TV Website ("On the Lot") my first-hand experience in the blogosphere has been about ninety-five percent positive!

Occasionally, I do get some wacko spouting off at the mouth, but rarely.

Also, through a glass darkly, I have had the chance to get a glimpse into the psyche of a handful of twisted individuals around the country.

For instance, one day I penned a post after a red carpet premiere in Hollywood, in which I noted that Jeff Goldblum was very kind on the eve of the screening.

Shortly after that, I stumbled across a screwball comment, that some Goldblum fan made on their blog.

The individual, who acted like they owned Mr. Goldblum, referenced my article in which I underscored the actor's good manners.

Rather than just link the story, or say thanks, he proceeded to make a negative remark.

"I LOL! We already knew that. It's too late."

Too late?

Since when is it too late to compliment a person on their exemplary conduct?

Notwithstanding, people do change over time.

Personalities (especially in the spotlight) are often in flux.

A few years ago, an actor may have been a mean scoundrel who spit in the face of the press; but today, they may be meek as a lamb.

Also, new fans are always coming into the fold every day.

For their sake, isn't it a good idea to mention how approachable the object of their admiration is?

Oftentimes, I run into twisted people with no common sense whatsoever, either.

For instance, recently I wrote up a post on an e-mail I received which was a satire on Obama's speech patterns.

However, when I originally penned the post, no credit had been attributed to the original writer in the e-mail I secured the hilarious material from.

One day I was cruising the net when I located the article with a credit to the original author.

Instead of just "lifting" the name of the individual, I actually spent a few moments to thank the blogger for including the author's name, so I could give the comedian professional credit in my own post.

Wasn't that the appropriate professional action to take under the circumstances?

The blogger in question proceeded to read the post - and due to an obvious lack of intelligence or abililty to read and comprehend English - summarily twisted and distorted my intentions in such a convoluted way that it boggled the mind!

The lady (who posts anonymously and uses a photo of Raquel Welch to represent herself online) proceeded to post a negative comment about me!

In contrast, any intelligent sensible person would have recognized my obvious thoughtfulness and professionalism.

Talk about wacko!

More recently, a couple of individuals attempted to post negative comments on my blog in response to my expose on Richard Raddon in recent days.

Since the posts were written anonymously - and were traced back to the LA Film Festival site - it was obvious to me that a person in support of Raddon was involved in some all-out skulduggery on his behalf!

Needless to say, I zapped their comments into oblivion.

What am I thankful for this turkey day?

To be blessed with the precious good fortune of having readers at my blog sites who are like-minded, sound in intelligence, and of good heart.

Happy Thanksgiving, eh?

Richard Raddon...resigns elitist post at the Los Angeles Film Festival. He hurt people so good riddance!

News has just filtered out that Richard Raddon has resigned his post as Director of the annual Los Angeles Film Festival.

Management at the Festival site issued a release in which they confirmed that Mr. Raddon - who was at the center of a controversy since it was revealed that he contributed $1,500 to the Proposition 8 campaign to ban gay marriage in California - resigned his post on November 25th (2008).

"I'm personally saddened by the outcome," said a Film Independent Board member - Bill Condon - writer-director of the hit "Dreamgirls."

"Someone has lost his job and possibly his livelihood because of privately held religious beliefs. I think the organization was ready to tough this out, but Rich ultimately decided it wasn't worth the cost. I'm not sure he was right."

On the contrary, it was right that Mr. Raddon resigned.

Notwithstanding his donation to the "Proposition 8" cause - Raddon also mistreated myself and others in recent months - in spite of the fact there was no conduct on our part that deserved such outrageous insults.

For example, I penned a post a few weeks ago in which I reported on improper conduct Mr. Raddon engaged in, in respect to access to festival events.

Mr. Raddon not only levelled strange abusive conduct at me in the month of June earlier this year, but also denied my entitlement (and right) to cover the Los Angeles Film Festival as a member of the press for no good reason.

In fact, in a perverse whim - last minute - odd-ball Raddon chose to deny me access to the Festival circuit in Westwood - and ultimately - discriminated against me in the process.

Post: 06/10/08

http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2008/06/los-angeles-independent-film.html

In view of the foregoing, I - for one - have no sympathy for Raddon's plight today.

In fact, Mr. Condon's arguments in support of Mr. Raddon, fall on deaf ears.

Deservedly so!

I say good riddance to a bad seed!

The creative community - and the film and gay community - will be better off without him in our midst.

Los Angeles Film Festival...Richard Raddon improper behaviour. LA Times conflict of Interest! Blogger disdain. Pass on it...

I tell you, they are a screwy bunch over there at the Los Angeles Film Festival.

In recent months - whenever there has been a Festival of Films - I simply get in touch with the Festival Director and a press pass is issued so that I may cover the events, pen reviews, and interview guests whether they be a director, a star, whatever.

That was the case with the 24th Annual Asian Pacific Film Festival, the Newport Beach Film Festival, the Backlot Film Festival, and the Mockfest Film Festival.

In recent days - I was not only baffled by the questionable conduct of the Festival Director - Richard Raddon - but taken aback at his incessant game-playing, lies and deceit, and obvious efforts to either bribe me, make a pass at me, or wrangle my services for the Los Angeles Film Festival.

A case in point.

I submitted my request for a press pass in anticipation of the event looming on the horizon. But, a response was long in arriving.

I was about to send a query to determine if the request had been lost - when a lowly Public Relations person - Petra Kauraisa - sent me a curt notice informing me that her office could not provide an accreditation for the Film Festival.

Without explanation, mind you. Talk about unprofessional conduct.

What an odd turn of events!

Especially in view of the fact I gave coverage to handful of their events last year.

In fact I gave glowing reviews to worthy entries at the Festival.

Talk about ungrateful bast**ds!

In a good-faith effort to resolve the issue - and assuming the young lady was not familiar with my credentials - I responded by enlightening her that I was a critic in the professional arena, a known-writer, and then proceeded to provide links of Festival coverage to her superior, Julie Siegel (Public Relations).

Normally, I don't like to toot my own horn, but what was a boy to do?

The experience was somewhat intriguing because my press credentials for the CineVegas Film Festival (a major Film Festival event in the United States) were just approved without problem.

Why does a rinky-dink little Film circuit program like the Los Angeles Film Festival have such a difficult time issuing press passes?

At first, I thought - well now - the Los Angeles Times wants all the coverage of the events to themselves. After all they are a sponsor of the Festival.

The idea that the Los Angeles Times was behind the rejection is not all that far-fetched, either.

It should be noted that in recent days I reported on the LA Book Festival.

I did not attend, though.

I simply gave notice of the much-anticipated event (to be attended by Literary giants such as Gay Talese) so that interested blog readers could attend if they were unaware the popular fair was scheduled that weekend.

On the heels of that fair, a journalist at the Los Angeles Times newspaper made some disparaging remarks about bloggers. For instance, the writer reported there were a lot of scruffy bloggers at the UCLA celebration.

Obviously, at the Los Angeles Times there is some disdain towards bloggers.

After all, the remark, was uncalled for.

Another writer - at the same paper - also lamented one day in another piece that bloggers hadn't gone through the journalist route and inferred that they hadn't paid their dues and - bottom line - suggested that they weren't bona fide professional writers.

When you consider these events, it would appear there may be a connection between the obvious disdain towards bloggers at the Los Angeles Times, and the denial of a press pass to a blogger who openly competes with their newspaper on a daily basis, wouldn't you think?

After all, in the event you were unaware of it, the Los Angeles Times backs the annual Los Angeles Film Festival.

In retrospect (and all things considered) it would appear that the newspaper may be inclined to hog all the coverage of the events for itself - or in a more sinister vein - is trying to control the image of a Festival that is their "baby" which they have gone to great pains - along with an impressive outlay of cash - to build, promote, and boast about in the community each year.

Understandably - in my view - it is a conflict of interest for the LA Times to act as a major sponsor for the Los Angeles Film Festival for obvious reasons.

It would appear they only want select journalists - and maybe non-bloggers - to attend their press events to garner the high-profile coverage they are seeking to tout their artistic efforts.

In view of the foregoing facts, the argument is compelling, isn't it?

Notwithstanding these curious events - it should be noted that after I received word there would not be a press pass - I proceeded to ask the Public Relations office to provide the name and e-mail address of the Festival Director so that I could lodge a formal complaint.

At this juncture, things got curiouser and curiouser, as they say.

Mr. Raddon - the Festival Director (who had been out-of-the-loop until this time) - sent me an odd e-mail out-of-the-blue replete with staggering implications and - under the circumstances - some highly unusual requests.

He started by informing me that he had "watched" the trail of e-mails back and forth between myself and the publicity department and that he realized that I may be able to "help" the Festival because they were trying to resolve some web issues.

Verbatim, his e-mail says:

"We are working on many web agendas and you sound like the kind of individual who would have a wealth of information about this arena."

Then, he requested I meet with him as soon as possible.

"I am open this week. Accreditation at the LA Film Festival wont be a problem, but I want to meet."

Why, pray tell?

In fact - the urgency of his demands, and the nature of them - were a little unsettling.

One minute, Raddon's office denies me a press pass; then, in the next breath they urgently court me on the grounds that I "have a wealth of information about this arena" that may be of use to them?

If my wealth of information requires an urgent meeting, then why wouldn't he issue the pass?

Because there appeared to be no logic to his actions, I had to seriously consider if there were strings attached.

He said he could come to my neighbourhood. That we could have drinks.

Verbatim, his e-mail says:

"I would still like to meet you in person and I can come to your neighborhood for a quick lunch or drinks. Please let me know if you have the time and inclination."

Gosh, what was going on here?

He wants to come to my neighborhood and have drinks?

When I noted somewhat hesitantly that I was busy with preparations for the upcoming Vegas Film Festival coverage, he responded by noting,

"I have to leave Thursday afternoon for a family emergency. are u free tomorrow at all? ill come to you."

I've never had a Festival Director ever made such an overt, improper request, in my entire life.

For this reason, I was leery.

Since he said - "if I had the time and inclination" - I decided to pass.

And - since he said the pass would be no problem - I just expected it to be ready at the Festival gate when the festivities commenced in Westwood.

This evening, in anticipation of my plans for Vegas, I zipped off an e-mail to Mr. Raddon to ensure that the press pass would be ready at the Festival grounds.

Imagine my shock when he proceeded to not only pester me about meeting once again, but inferred that unless I did, there would be no press pass.

Does that sound like coercion to you?

I responded by noting that I basically found his behaviour odd and that I would forgo on any future efforts to obtain a press pass.

I notified him of my intention to file a post online to report on his bizarre odd-ball antics, and to inform my readers as to why I would not be reporting on the Los Angeles Film Festival this year.

In response, he threatened to sue me.

"I now consider this matter closed and will be turning it over to our lawyers. The law has very strict punitive guidelines for slander. We will be watching."

Well, I laughed out loud.

The man is obviously off his rocker.

First of all, slander pertains to the "uttered" word.

You can not sue a person for slander for remarks that are in written form.

Secondly, his comments about the lawyers, also appears to have been an attempt to threaten and intimidate me.

You can't be sued for printing the truth, Sir!

In sum - when you consider the chain of events (and Mr. Raddon's conduct) - it is quite obvious the man was up to "no good".

If my credentials did not pass muster, why did he want to meet with me to obtain my assistance on matters he noted amounted to - in his own words - a wealth of experience?

Why did he say the accreditation was not a problem, but later, deny it?

Obviously, Mr. Raddon wanted to meet with me in person to discuss matters he preferred not to be in writing - and in my estimation - was anxious to seize on such a meeting to perhaps make inappropriate advances to me on various questionable levels.

Why did Mr. Raddon have to meet me away from his office?

And, in my neighborhood?

And, for drinks?

Sir, I don't take bribes.

And, if you thought that once in my neighborhood (after we had a few drinks) that I would invite you to my "home" nearby, you were mistaken.

I do not help festivals sort out their problems.

I try to remain neutral in my business and professional relationships, without influence.

And, in the final analysis, I report my point of view fairly and squarely.

Mr. Raddon - at this point - it is obvious you need therapy!

Also - in view of your lack of ethics and professionalism (and inability to pen the simplest of e-mails) - I seriously have to ponder how you landed the Festival Director position in the first place.

All things considered, in my opinion, you are a disgrace to the Los Angeles Film Festival scene.

In fact, if you ask me, you are a menace to the community at large.

I'd rather get a root canal then mingle with clowns like you.

As to the Festival, by the way, it looks like pretty lackluster stuff.

Old re-runs of films, in some instances. And, unimaginative, cliche attempts to ponder the medium of film.

Losers!