Pulp and Dagger Blog

So…the Genie Awards were handed out the other night — celebrating “the best in Canadian film”. While a few weeks back there was an announcement that the TV equivalent (the Gemini Awards) were contemplating — or perhaps had made — changes to their categories.

And it just got me thinking about what is meant, and intended, by such awards — and, yeah, I’m re-visiting a topic I wrote about concerning last year’s Genies. But the fact that I can write about it again…kind of demonstrates my point. Or, at least, that it does seem to be turning into a chronic situation.

But when one is celebrating the “best” in “Canadian” film (or TV) — how do we define that concept. Not “best”…but “Canadian“!

Among this year’s nominees were A Dangerous Method, David Cronenberg’s fact inspired drama about Carl Jung (you’re only as “jung” as you feel) and Sigmund Freud (don’t be a-freud…I know what I’m do-ink). A Dangerous Method is apparently an international co-production, and continues Cronenberg’s long march away from his early roots as the bad boy horrormeister of Canuck Cinema. Now, technically, A Dangerous Method is partly Canadian, at least I’m assuming so, in so far as some of the money was put up by Canadian producers. But as a film, as a creative enterprise, how “Canadian” was it? Sure, the director is Canadian…but it was written by an Englishman, the main roles going to Brits and Americans, and was shot in Europe (using, therefore I assume, a largely European crew) about European historical figures. To be fair, perhaps Canadians filled out some of the behind-the-scene roles, of costume designers, or sound editors. But as far as the great unwashed public will perceive sitting down with their popcorn in the darkened theatre…just how “Canadian” is A Dangerous Method? As Canadian as, say…Avatar (actually, Avatar was arguably more Canadian, because at least it was also written by a Canadian!) In other words: not very Canadian.

Yet A Dangerous Method snagged one of only five slots for nominees for Best Canadian Picture.

Viewed by itself, it’s not much of an issue. Except when you realize it was part of a whole Co-production Mafia (to use the cheeky phrase that is applied to cliques these days — as opposed to literally suggesting awards host George  Stroumboulopoulos was waking up next to a horse’s head). Other nominees this year in various categories included The Whistleblower and The Bang Bang Club. All these movies deal with legitimate, important topics — nor am I saying they might not be great, award-worthy movies. I’m just asking: are they Canadian-award worthy movies. (And that’s not even mentioning the film Oliver Sherman — the director happily bragging in interviews about how he made sure it was NOT identifiably set in Canada, as if he was somehow pursuing an artistic vision — and not just a U.S. distribution deal — by fighting off all those bad boy executives who begged him to set it in Canada).

And, again — there’s no reason there can’t be room at the table for one or two such films, not at all. It’s when they start to dominate the table, nudging people with their elbows, and reserving seats for their friends, that it becomes more of a concern.

As well, of the ten Best Actor/Actress nominations this year…six went to non-Canadians. And of the four wins for lead and supporting actor/actress…3 went to non-Canadians (which is better than last year, when all the acting awards went to non-Canadians). And let’s make this clear. By “non-Canadian” I’m talking about people who have no connection to Canada, nor interest in being part of the Canadian film biz. Some of Canada’s greatest artists weren’t born in Canada, but nonetheless are as Canadian as snow (well, snow before this whole Global Warming thing). By non-Canadian I’m talking about people who only were in Canada long enough to shoot their scenes…then flew away again. Actually, given that a number of these films were not even shot in Canada…in many cases, the first time the stars might have set foot on Canadian soil is when they showed up at the Genie Awards! (And even then — many didn’t even show up for that!)

Now, this is the dilemma, ain’t it? Should a non-Canadian actor be denied recognition just ’cause they aren’t Canadian? If they gave a kick ass performance, they surely deserve recognition for it. Nor should a second rate Canadian performance be awarded simply through luck of citizenship.

But it does raise a question of what the Genies are celebrating about “Canadian” film when 60 percent of the best actor nominees aren’t Canadian, and many of the films are only deemed Canadian by virtue of who signed (some of) the pay stubs — and not because the talent is Canadian or the movies are about Canada, or Canadian characters.

So in that sense, perhaps it’s partly in the balance. If an American or British actor stars in a Canadian movie, made by Canadians, and set in Canada it’s less problematic than if it’s a movie where hardly any of the key elements in the film are Canadian.

Though I’m troubled by the preponderance of non-Canadian actors nominated (and winning) in the acting categories…I’m not sure I see an equitable way to curb it. That is, I suspect the imported actors snag a disproportionate number of nominations not because they are delivering inherently superior performances to the Canadian actors, but simply because they are imported stars — the more internationally famous the nominees, the more likely the Genie telecast will get better ratings, the more “legitimate” the awards will seem, and the academy voters and selection committees (or however it’s chosen) are, frankly, starstruck. I mean, one can’t help inferring something in the fact that one of the Genie nominees was American actress Michelle Williams (for the film Take This Waltz) and was featured prominently in the TV commercials for the Genie Awards — and Williams was just recently an American Oscars nominee for the movie My Week With Marilyn, making for a bit of cross-marketing synergy, eh?

Perhaps worse — it becomes an inherent reward to producers, a wink and nudge encouraging them to hire imported stars, because even if the movie tanks, and gets middling reviews, at least they suspect they’ll probably get some Genie love. I mean, it used to be producers claimed that hired imported actors because it was necessary to score at the box office…now it seems like it also is a good way to insure Genie Awards notice, too.

Indeed, one can’t help suspecting a lot of the academy voters haven’t seen or even heard of many of the movies being nominated, so that the nominees really are chosen simply because, well, voters at least know who they are — even if they haven’t seen the actual film for which the nominees are being nominated!

Yet to forbid such nominees and winners would be unfair to the imported actors themselves who, after all, are guilty of nothing more than acting their hearts out in a production (one assumes) they truly believed in.

Years ago, the Genies (I think back when they were the Etrogs) had separate categories for Canadian and non-Canadian actors. But that, too, was awkward — seeming to send the message that the Canadians couldn’t compete with the “real” actors” from abroad.

I guess, in a sense, it’s more a character thing, whether you believe in the integrity of the academy and the voters. Either you believe the awards and nominations are doled out according to merit, and nothing more…or you believe they are being skewed to favour the glamorous imported “stars”. And like with too many tests of character — it’s hard to legislate it. Banning imported actors from being nominated would be unfair to them. Separating the two into different groups would be insulting to the Canadians.

But if the individual talent should be free to be judged equally, regardless of citizenship…I do question the production itself. That is, A Dangerous Method should be able to be nominated in various categories (acting, editing, music, etc.) but maybe it shouldn’t be able to be nominated in the Best Picture category — maybe that should be reserved for movies more unarguably Canadian. Now I have no doubt the producers (and their PR flak catchers) would throw a conniption fit if such a thing was proposed. But really — why? I mean, surely the point of such an international co-production is that it already has a leg up on the competition — PR and international distribution most Canadian films can’t even dream about. It doesn’t need a Genie win (or nomination) — indeed, I’m not sure how much of a boon a Genie win is, anyway. Oscars and Golden Globes supposedly boost ticket and DVD sales…but after that, I’m not sure. The DVD shelves are full of movies proclaiming various wins and accolades from a multitude of obscure venues (“winner of Best Picture at the 900th annual East Balkan Arts & Crafts festival”). I’m not sure a Genie win really helps sales. It’s more just a source of pride knowing you were supported by your peers (even if only with a nomination). So again…isn’t it supposed to be honouring “Canadian” effort…not movies that can qualify as nominally Canadian because of some funding loophole?

I suppose one could make the analogy to an athlete hopped up on steroids demanding he be able to compete with all the normal athletes.

Now, to be fair — A Dangerous Method didn’t win Best Picture. For all its money and prestige and international cast, it was beaten by the French-language film Monsieur Lazhar (with, um, its own imported leading actor). So doesn’t that prove I’m making a mountain out of mole hill? Maybe…maybe not. Because it still took one of only five spots for nominees. And even if an award win is of dubious marketing value…a nomination can be viewed as almost as good — DVD boxes never shy about proclaiming something was “nominated” for an award. I’m sure there were plenty of Canadian movies that would’ve been happy to get a nomination, a spot on the team, but couldn’t, because A Dangerous Method took the last free spot — veins popping and red eyed with steroids.

Now recently, the Canadian TV awards — the Geminis — were dealing with a similar dilemma, with big international co-productions, some with only nominal Canadian involvement, walking away with the Best Series award (and three of the five nomination slots). Winning maybe on merit — or, equally, winning simply because they were enjoying more write ups in the press, had bigger budgets, and a “prestigious” international cast and creative team. So the Geminis announced they were going to split the best series category into Canadian series and co-productions (leaving the acting categories as a level playing field where the Canadians in Canadian series would have to hold their own against the international stars in their international productions). Granted, I can imagine headaches arising, trying to decide what counts as what. And though the international co-productions might win a disproportionate number of awards — I’m not sure they make up a disproportionate number of shows, so I could well imagine a category that might only have two or three nominees in any give year. Still, perhaps it’s a good compromise. By keeping the acting categories mixed, it says: we believe, talent to talent, Canadians can stand (or fall) next to imported stars. But by separating the actual series, it acknowledges that an international co-production will have an advantage in terms of budget, and publicity (the voters bombarded with a tsunami of articles and interviews that make the PR surrounding most domestic series seem more like a garden hose spray) that can’t help but influence the voters, regardless of artistic or even commercial merit (I believe The Borgias, which won best series last year, actually had smaller ratings than some homegrown productions).

Though I can imagine a lot of arguing over the nuances of what counts as “Canadian” and what as a “co-production” — a series like Flashpoint is, technically, a co-production, but in any artistic/creative sense is all-Canadian. So it would seem to belong in a category with, say, Republic of Doyle rather than The Borgias or Camelot.

If we were to apply such a solution to films — or even simply disqualify the merely nominally Canadian films from being nominated in the top category — the real question would be: how would you make the decision? Where’s the demarcation?

Well, in radio, when Canadian content regulations are applied to music, I believe the elements of a song are broken down into categories — performer, producer, composer, and where it was recorded. (Or something like that) And a song qualifies as “Canadian” if it has at least two (maybe three) of those categories. Maybe the same formula could be applied to films. Instead of some arcane question about who funded what, which the average viewer has no way of following or understanding (and could care less about), maybe a movie could be broken down into various categories: setting/character (ie: is it set in Canada or about a Canadian character); lead actors; director; writer; filming location; producer. Something like that. And a film would need at least three or four of those categories to be counted as “Canadian” — which still allows for a lot of latitude, and even for international co-productions to still count as “Canadian”. And, yes, if a director of a movie like Oliver Sherman is happily bragging to the press about how his movie isn’t explicitly set in Canada…then he has to accept that he’ll be taken at his word and the film will be judged as not being set in Canada (but the film would probably still count as Canadian because even though its top billed star, and its setting, wasn’t Canadian…I think everything else about it was)

Now the irony is, whenever such things are proposed, there is often an immediate backlash — by the people who have enjoyed the benefits of the current system. Immediately they will scream “censorship” or xenophobia. When it’s actually kind of the opposite. For one thing — this doesn’t preclude someone making the movies they want to make, hiring the actors they want to hire, it merely says shouldn’t the “Canadian” film awards be reserved for, y’know, Canadian movies? As well, shouldn’t we define “Canadian” by  something that involves a lot of Canadian aspects (actors, crews, settings) rather than saying Canadian should be defined simply by a single director, or a producer? Isn’t that the creepier attitude? By that reckoning we should count Hollywood movies as Canadian if they happen to be directed by a Canadian, or star a Canadian — and, yeah, believe me, there are people who argue vehemently for that.

Some years back there was a fuss in radio because a Bryan Adams song was judged not Canadian enough to count as “Canadian Content” (based on those various categories I mentioned before — Adams, the performer, was Canadian, but most of the other elements apparently weren’t). Adams and his supporters were furious — Adams himself denouncing the whole Can-Con thing as something that protects and fosters mediocrity! Now, one can see a certain irony — Adams denouncing Can-Con regulations…because he no longer gets to benefit from it. But the irony about Adams’ anger was that in no way, shape, or form would being disqualified from “Canadian Content” prevent or even hinder his song being played on the radio. It merely meant that instead of a radio station counting his song toward the 30 percent (or whatever it is) of airtime devoted to domestic music, he would be played among the 70 percent of songs that aren’t Canadian — in other words, Adams would just have to fight for a slot among all the big international acts, which is where he and his supporters felt he belonged anyway. At this point Adams was an international star, and wasn’t even living in Canada, so he really shouldn’t need the nurturing protection of Can-Con. Likewise, if a producer makes a movie that in most respects isn’t particularly Canadian…why should they be up-set if they don’t qualify for a Canadian nomination?

Again it all gets back to the question of what is the point of the Genies or the Geminis? If they are not celebrating the best in Canadian productions…then what are they? Simply another generic awards show? Sloppy seconds for films that got snubbed at the Oscars?

Of course, part of the problem is that the Genies remain an awards show in desperate search of something to celebrate. By that I mean, while the Oscar movies enjoy a buzz months in advance, often the Genies arrive kind of like an unexpected guest on your doorstep. Whereas the Oscars will be proceeded for weeks by articles talking about the front runners and the dark horses, big city news papers often featuring columnists ranking the nominees, who will win, who should win, who might win — often in Canada one gets the impression even entertainment reporters who make their living covering entertainment news haven’t seen half the films. Heck — in any given year, many of us might not have seen many of the films nominated for the Oscars…but we still might have an opinion, simply because we’ve read so much about them. Whereas in Canada, often one can look at the list of Genie nominees…and see movies you didn’t even know existed! To be fair, there’s usually a buzz around one particular film — this year it was Monsieur Lazhar, last year it was Barney’s Version. Sometimes there’ll be a buzz around a particular performance (I’m thinking of Maury Chaykin years ago for Whale Music, or even Paul Giamatti for Barney’s Version). But even then, it can often feel like the winner is predetermined, and the rest of the nominees are just there to fill the seats. Unlike the Oscars where there’s usually at least a bit of suspense as to who will have their name called. In Canada, the only time there’s suspense, is not because there are a bunch of nominees with buzz…but because none of them have generated much buzz.

Sometimes that’s because there aren’t any particular stand outs in a category — everyone nominated having done good, professional work, but nothing breathtaking. Sometimes, though, it’s because there is no momentum — the movies having opened and closed months ago, and even if the critics at the time complimented the actors…everyone has long since forgotten by the time the awards role around…even the co-productions which, as often as not, have long since been lost in the log jam of new movie releases.

For that matter, how often do you read a review of a Canadian film where the critic comments that the actor should be remembered come Awards time? They say that about American films all the time. And how much is that a problem with the films, or the actors — and how much with the critic’s mentality? I often see Canadian movies and TV shows where a performance will strike me between the eyes — but I sometimes think with a lot of reviewers, they aren’t looking for that. When a critic watches George Clooney in a movie, they are instinctively asking themselves “how good is Clooney in this role?” but when a lesser known Canadian actor gives a tour de force, do critics just kind of shrug, recognizing it was a good performance…but not taking the next step of highlighting it in their review, or suggesting it warrants “buzz”? Which I think maybe relates to my earlier point about being starstruck.

To be honest, I’m not really sure I’m recommending any changes to the Genies — and despite my frustration at seeing Canadians shut out of the acting categories, as mentioned, I can’t really see it as any fairer to deny Vanessa Paradis or Viggo Mortensen their right to a statue if their performance deserves it. But sometimes it’s worth just, y’know, clearing the air — to say what needs to be said, and to get people thinking about where things have been, where they are, and where they might be headed.

So I guess all one can do is write essays like this one — saying to the academy, you know what you’re doing, I know what you’re doing. I can’t stop you from doing it…but let’s just agree you aren’t fooling anyone.

Looking to Hollywood, re-makes are a veritable sub-industry. Nor is it quite the modern phenomenon some think. Silent movies got re-made as sound movies, black & white re-made as colour, radio shows became movie serials, movie serials became movies, movies became TV series…and back again.

Re-makes can, of course, engender cynicism. “What?” we ask, “can’t they be original?” And we can also feel a bit offended. If they do a re-make of an old classic, and botch it, we think they ruined it. If they do a remake, and do it well…we can feel miffed, as the new generation now embraces the re-make as the “definitive” version.

But maybe there is a cultural and creative value to re-makes — keeping an old story alive, even if in a slightly adulterated form. Is it better to treat a classic film as sacrosanct, knowing that young folks will leave it unwatched simply because it’s old? Or is it better to have it re-made for a modern generation…possibly even bringing the original back into vogue in the process? (How often has a re-make hit the big screens…and suddenly the near forgotten original is cropping up on late night movie shows again?) Some classics become classics…precisely because they are constantly re-imagined. Where would James Bond be if they had stopped when Sean Connery quit the role? Probably another Harry Palmer and hardly the international icon he is today.

There’s even something to be said for remaking bad movies! Movies that had good ideas, but were mucked up in the execution. The late Hollywood director John Huston once made a comment along those lines, that he didn’t see why people re-made good movies…when there were not-so-good movies he’d like to take another try at.

All this got me to thinking about Canadian film & TV. An industry always struggling for success, rarely quite grasping that brass ring. Are there old Canadian movies and TV shows that might warrant a re-make, a re-imagining? Either things that were successful at the time and, possibly, lightning could strike twice…or things that weren’t that successful in their day, but the core idea, the basic plot and characters, held out the tantalizing promise that with a little more finesse, they could’ve worked? And does it maybe lend some credibility to a film if you can say it’s a re-make? Basically suggesting to the audience that the concept has already been taken for a test drive, and was found to be sound…or at least that the bugs have now been worked out?

(And I should mention I’m thinking, as usual, about the English-Canada industry — French-Canada has a history of re-making beloved old classics — such as Les Plouffes and others.)

Curiously, I sat down to write this at a propitious time — because the CBC has recently aired the TV movie Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town which, in addition to being based on a century old book, the material was previously utilized for one of the network’s earliest TV series (back in the 1950s) as well as a radio adaptation (also I believe in the ’50s).

There have been occasional examples of re-makes — or, at least, movies drawing upon the same source material. There have been two bio-pics about Norman Bethune (both starring Donald Sutherland!) and two flicks chronicling Terry Fox’s iconic Marathon of Hope. Though even those examples are few.

Canada perhaps has a legitimate reason to look to remakes — because of the country’s bilingual status. The Two Solitudes, as it’s been called. Might there not be great movies in one language that could find a new audience if re-made into the other tongue? Yet, to my knowledge, there has only been one example of such a translated film — the thriller Liste noire which was re-made as The List. Unfortunately…I didn’t much care for either version (and the English language re-make was set in the U.S. with an American cast to headline; hardly a “Canadian” version of the story). But what about movies with a solid “concept” premise that would probably speak just as well to Anglophone sensibilities as Francophone? What about an English-language La Grande seduction? Or Jesus de Montreal? CBC TV briefly experimented with turning a couple of popular French-language sitcoms into English — Sophie and Rumours. Neither was successful. But maybe there wasn’t enough of a “concept” to them…or maybe that concept didn’t translate well. Personally, I’d think a better candidate for an English remake might be Fortier, a crime-drama about a civilian lady psychologist who aids the police. Or maybe the Twin Peaks-esque Grande ourse. Or the political satire Si la tendance se maintient.

As for old English language movies that might be worth re-visiting? The Changeling was one of a small handful of movies made during the notorious Hollywood North tax shelter era that was actually regarded as pretty good…yet still ended up bombing (not unlike the well-regarded Murder by Decree and one or two others). Everyone who has seen that particular ghost story seems to remember it well…maybe it’d be worth a re-visitation. I’ve always fondly recalled an obscure low-budget thriller called Sudden Fury…yet most people have never heard of it. Maybe it deserves a second audience with a re-make. Or I’ve sometimes thought the alien invasion movie, Starship Invasions, could’ve been a fun little pop corn movie with a little more money and polish. Or private eye Benny Cooperman was featured in a couple of TV movies starring Saul Rubinek — made it’s time to call him out for another case! Maybe Aaron Abrams could tackle the role.

Scanners pretty much put David Cronenberg on the cinematic map, a sci-fi horror movie about telepaths notorious for its gory exploding head scenes. It’s a rare thing in English-Canada to have a Canadian-conceived movie spawn sequels…but Scanners did. A couple of low-budget Canadian ones, with even Americans moving in on the franchise with the “Scanner Cop” movies. Admittedly…I’m not sure what legs the concept has (the sequels all fared poorly). As mentioned, its main claim to fame was the “shock” effect of the violence. Still — it has a “name” recognition factor that might fuel a new movie — or even a TV series (with toned down violence). Hopefully ones with some money and better than the previous, low-budget sequels which were pretty missable. The original Scanners was set in Canada…but the sequels all went the route of being set in the U.S. So maybe it’s time someone returned the franchise to its Canadian roots.

What about Wojeck — English-Canada’s first and seminal TV hit, about a socially crusading coroner? It worked once, it might work again. Granted, it’s a hard formula to get right — DaVinci’s Inquest was a similar idea…but I’d argue wasn’t really anything like Wojeck. Still, worth a thought. So who could play Steve Wojeck today, a role personified by John Vernon as a steely-eyed force of nature? When re-casting signature roles, you don’t want an actor so different that you lose the character…yet it’s probably a futile quest to seek an actor who could just impersonate the original performer. The key is to figure out what is the essence of the character, the characteristics that define him, rather than worrying about whether the new guy looks like the old guy. In that sense, I could almost picture Brian Markinson as a good choice for the takes no guff crusader. For some reason, Currie Graham also comes to mind — maybe ’cause he can look suitably disapproving and he’s got the height more evocative of Vernon.

And what about Strange Paradise? In the 1960s, American TV landed a surprise cult hit with the supernatural soap opera Dark Shadows. And Canadians followed with the similarly themed Strange Paradise — which enjoys a (minor) cult fame even 40 years later! But a re-make of Strange Paradise would only partly be banking on name recognition…and more on simply being, y’know, a wild story about curses and ghosts! Maybe it could be brought back, not as a TV series, but as a mini-series, or a one-shot movie. So who could play the aristocratic and cursed Jean Paul Desmond (played by Colin Fox originally)? I dunno. Maybe Christopher Heyerdahl. Or Colm Feore. Or Eric McCormack.

Adderly was a comic-adventure series (think Republic of Doyle, only about spies) about a secret agent who could give James Bond a run for his money…who had been relegated to a lowly office after an injury left him with a crippled hand. But his small cases usually kept turning into big ones, anyway. I mean, what’s not to like about a series about a suave secret agent with a signature black glove on one hand who, even with a clipped wing, was still the smartest, toughest guy in the room? Just as a series’ premise, Adderly could probably endure a resurrection. But, with that said, a lot of its appeal relied on Winston Rekert’s irrepressible charm and devil-may-care grin — as well as Dixie Seatle as his admiring Girl Friday. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of an obvious replacement…but then, prior to Adderly, I might not have pegged Rekert as so ideal for the role, either. Though part of me could see calling in Vincent Walsh for a line reading.

King of Kensington was a rarity in the 1970s — a successful English-Canadian TV sitcom. Could the trials and tribs of a big hearted corner store owner in a pluralistic downtown neighbourhood stand a dusting off and a re-invention? Perhaps of all the properties here, it’s the one that still retains a certain “name” recognition. I could see Gary Basaraba basically transplanting his performance in Mixed Blessings over to the Kensington Market and taking on the mantle of the King.

And what about the misadventures of…Flavius Maximus, Private Roman “I”? A trademark of the seminal Canadian comedy duo, Wayne & Shuster, was their complex, long form sketches. One of their most famous was their Julius Caesar spoof, “Rinse the Blood Off My Toga” — told as a private eye story about a Roman gumshoe named Flavius Maximus played by Wayne. And the duo reprised Flavius at least once (in a sketch called “The Burning of Rome Caper” or something) only with Flavius now a police officer. I’ve always wondered if there was legs to that concept — either as a movie, or a weekly series — a comedy about a private eye in ancient Rome (that could be billed as “based on the comedy of Wayne & Shuster” — now how’s that for Canada honouring its artistic roots?)

And what about…The Starlost? Even today this early 1970s science fiction series retains a certain recognition factor. Unfortunately, it tends to be a negative recognition factor (as in “Oh, I remember that terrible show”). But, y’know, maybe any recognition is better than no recognition (or as Captain Jack Sparrow said, when told he’s the worst pirate someone’s ever heard of: “Ah…but at least you’ve heard of me!”) Besides — the fact that Starlost is remembered is, I think, because it did have something…a mystique…a feeling that if done right, it could’ve been something special. But though Canadians tend to view it as a Canadian series…I get the impression Americans view it as an American series that just happened to be filmed in Canada. Off and on I’ve heard rumours of re-makes being considered…usually from American corners.

Or how about a big budget, live action version of…Rocket Robin Hood! Yeah, that cartoon of the cheesy animation but the irresistible premise of setting the Robin Hood legend in outer space. Granted, I’m not thinking of hewing too closely to the original in terms of characterization or camp quality…but the basic concept is a great hook. Honestly, if you saw it as a kid, no doubt you remember it to this day! Maybe it could be Canada’s first ever stab at a true summer blockbuster! Seriously…if we don’t do it, it’s only a matter of time before Steven Spielberg or Peter Jackson does, and they probably wouldn’t even credit its Canadian origin (since I’m not sure you can really copyright the basic idea). For some reason I can picture Alan Van Sprang as Robin (maybe because of his Tudors days as the roguish Sir Francis Bryan) with, I dunno, Mayko Nguyen as Marion and Alan C. Peterson or Graham Greene as Tuck and Tyler Mane as Little John.

Or what about The Mighty Hercules? Couldn’t you just picture a live version with Steve Bacic as the title hero, with that wicked cool ring that used to get struck by lightning (or whatever) to give him super powers? And Michael Eklund could play his wacky centaur pal, Newt. Or am I just getting desperate now?

Strangely, some things don’t quite strike me as candidates for re-makes. The 1980s CBC mystery-comedy series, Seeing Things, had a lot to recommend it: funny, yet with clever mysteries, and wrapped around a “high concept” hook of a bumbling reporter with psychic flashes that helped him solve the cases. But as much as I think it’s a classic of Canadian TV, I worry it’d be too hard to recapture its spirit again. Maybe it’s just hard to picture anyone but Louis Del Grande as the star! Still, who knows. Maybe a big screen version with Ryan Reynolds. Likewise, I remember liking the old cop drama Night Heat — but other than the “cops on the graveyard shift” gimmick, I’m not sure there’s anything about it that couldn’t be done in any old big city police drama.

Of course, in Hollywood, where decisions are made by studio suits, old properties are optioned and repackaged with new casts and crews as part of the assembly line mentality of Hollywood. In Canada, where it’s much more artist driven, there’s probably less enthusiasm. Filmmakers want to make their own stories…not re-make someone else’s. But in an industry so woefully lacking in hits…or even moderate successes…maybe a certain mercenary pragmatism is not a bad thing.

Maybe picking through the junk yard of old Canadian movies and TV shows in search of that inspiration, that lost classic that can be polished and re-presented for a new audience, might have its value.

Heck, even just looking through the past simply for inspiration, archetypes, rather than literal, direct re-makes is not a bad idea — pop culture sometimes strengthened by a sense of recurring trends and motifs. Though not a re-make, were the makers of the current Victorian detective TV series, The Murdoch Mysteries, entirely ignorant of the earlier The Great Detective — both set in Victorian Ontario, about a police detective (with a coroner confidant), the stories often revolving around historical minutia and “cutting edge” technology? (Funnily, I’d also wonder if The Great Detective might have inspired the BBC Radio series, McLevy). And one can suspect the biological horror of the movie, Splice, was inspired by the early films of David Cronenberg. The TV series Being Erica has been compared by some to the U.S. TV series, Quantum Leap, but I’d argue the Canadian indie film, Fetching Cody, was just as likely an inspiration.

Mining old stories might prove successful for today…and show respect for the past.

And that’s what culture is all about.

There are a few ideas about Canadian film & TV — where it is, where it’s headed, and so on — I’ve been meaning to opine on…partly just because, well, when I decided to take on the idea of a blog, I promised myself I’d try and post something every few days (as opposed to every few weeks/months as was true with my previous essays posted here). Anyway, some ideas wrap around and overlap with each other, but to avoid a rambling posting, I’m going to try and tackle them in various more focused essays. So today, I just wanted to play a bit of Devil’s Advocate and consider a certain unconditionally accepted trusim of Canadian film & TV — and global entertainment in general — and its relationship to Hollywood.

There is sometimes an undercurrent, when people criticize Canadian film and TV, of implying that those who stay home in Canada just couldn’t hack it in Hollywood…they are either talentless, or cowards.

But you know, I’ve often thought the opposite view could be taken.

Once upon a time, yes, Hollywood was the creative frontier, if you will. Artists, dreamers and mogels trekked out into the dessert (some, in fact, Canadian-born like Mack Sennett, Mary Pickford, and Louis B. Mayer) and, almost as though a biblical fable, literally built an industry out of the sand, using nothing but talent, hard work, and moxy (and, um, yeah, in some cases borderline criminal monopolies and underhanded practices that eventually had to be curtailed by U.S. government intervention). But out of that was built a well-oiled machine that has come to dominate global culture.

But that’s kind of the point — Hollywood, and American industry in general, has become a well-oiled machine. It’s like a perpetual motion device that chugs along almost on its own volition, its true inventors long since turned to dust. It’s an industry that’s greater than any one product, studios that are more than the sum of their executives and stars — all of whom come and go faster than witches in Oz.

One could make the argument that Canadian actors and film makers who head to Hollywood are, in fact, the ones taking the easy route. There may be hundreds, thousands of people competing to get in the doors, but once you get in those doors, the water is running, the pantry is stocked, the beds are turned down, all ready for you. The journey may be hard and fraught with peril…but at the end is a shining metropolis.

To use my initial analogy about Hollywood having once been a creative frontier, one could argue that it is the Canadian film & TV biz that still remains a dilapidated frontier town — the successes are few and far between. The well is frequently contaminated, food scarce, and the bedding has lice and fleas — and everytime you ask for help or improvements, you are accused of demanding hand outs. Even when a movie or TV show is successful, the apparatus to build upon that is creaky, if non-existent. Far from taking the easy route, or not being brave enough to test themselves against the cream of Hollywood, one could equally argue those who stay in Canada are the gutsy ones, the ones still trying to build an industry, still trying to make fertile farmland out of an at times inhospitable wilderness.

It’s the talent that heads south that, in a sense, has thrown in the towel, has given up trying to win a seeming Quixotic fight. They head south where the perpetual motion machine was built decades ago by dead men, and the current generation are not much more than Morlocks keeping it oiled.

I mean, how many times have we read interviews with Canadian actors, writers, directors who have announced they are fed up with their lack of recognition, their lack of success, in Canada (or they’ve had success…but are having trouble following up on it) — and so are heading south where, they assure any and all who’ll listen, they’ll be treated right. Granted, often such declarations are made by people who are never heard from again…or slink back to Canada a few years later. But still — isn’t the subtext that they figure it’ll be a little easier in Hollywood?

Nor do I blame them, really.

So where does that take us? Even if we accept that the successes of modern Hollywood are thanks to pioneers long dead who created an industry and an infrastructure that the modern generation benefits from, and equally, modern Canadian film and TV suffers because its founders made the wrong choices, backed the wrong horses, decades ago — does that point to a solution?

Well…yes, and no.

It’s worth considering, to realize that for all those who gloat over the failures of Canadian film and TV, the modern Canadian film makers aren’t operating on a level playing field with their American cousins. It should lead to a certain rueful sympathy for the toilers in the field if nothing else.

But it maybe suggests that Hollywood’s success, ironic for a country that prides itself on its rebel past and rugged individualism, is partly a result of a certain collectivism — an industry mentality, where even the artists are merely cogs in a vast mechanism. Heck, the very fact that the American movie industry is consolidated in one area is telling.

The Canadian entertainment undustry, in contrast, is still very much about the individual — the artist, the autre — more than the industry. And where even physically it isn’t particularly localized, with a number of centres vying for the title of “Hollywood North” — Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Halifax, even Calgary and Winnipeg all make varying claims to being production centres. Unlike America, in Canada you can often recognize where a movie or TV show is shot based on the supporting actors in it, because there are actors who are based in particular regions and don’t need to stray outside of that area to keep themselves employed.

Whereas in Hollywood a distinction is made between a “mainstream studio” movie and an “independent” film…in Canada, all movies are essentially indie films.

And that’s partly good — in a country as physically vast and culturally diverse as Canada, it’s probably in some respects healthier than the U.S. model. But the negative side to that is does that help keep the industry from coalescing into, well, an industry? Rather than building something up, we’re constantly carving it off into little fiefdoms. There are too many wanna-be captains and not enough navigators. And whereas Hollywood is steeped in tradition and paying homage to its past, one gets the impression that a lot of Canadian film makers take pride in dismissing and denigrating the past — they want to be the “special one”, they want to be the guy or gal who stands above the crowd, and they can’t be that if they acknowledge people did good work who came before them.

Now again, it’s not black & white. After all, given the problematic history of Canadian film & TV, you wouldn’t necessarily want to slavishly revere productions that weren’t very good to begin with. You wouldn’t want the modern generation of TV makers declaring their goal was to live up to the glory of, say, The Littlest Hobo, would you? And would a visionary producer who fancies himself a Hollywood-style mogel be a kind of Moses, leading his filmmaking followers to the Promised Land…or would he a delusional egomaniac, more akin to the Pied Piper…or a chief lemming shouting “Follow me — I know a short cut over this cliff!”? And the problem with putting too much faith in consolidation, in a few companies or visionary producers to build that machine…is that means it’s even easier to knock down, like a house of cards. Maybe having a bunch of production centres, and a bunch of little companies, makes the industry more resilient, more able to whether ups and downs.

A few years back, Canada seemed to be developing its own studio giants like Hollywood, with production companies like Alliance and Atlantis having their fingers in half the film and TV productions in Canada. Then they merged into an even bigger, super production house, and they even bought up a few rising companies. They were shaping up to be Optimus Prime ready to do battle with the Decepticons of Hollywood (or, y’know, Godzilla ready to go toe to toe with Mecha-Godzilla). And then…and then…and then this super company that was almost the galactic core of Canadian film and TV…decided to pretty much shut down its production arm and concentrate on the low cost/high profit field of film distribution. Which is why you’ll still see the Alliance-Atlantis logo today…but generally preceding films (often American films) rather than in the actual production credits. A lot of industry folk were left rather stunned and shattered by that move, like frontier settlers who wake up one morning to find that the fast taking entrepreneur who was promising to put the town on the map and bring the railroad through has skipped town in the night.

And, honestly, that’s kind of the history of Canadian film and TV — dreamers who don’t play well with each other, businessmen who are more interested in short term profits than in industry building. But like plucky pioneers of old, the toilers in Canadian film & TV keep struggling away, through dust bowl and blizzard, still hoping they can build a city where sod huts now stand. But maybe there needs to be more of a sense that they are working toward a goal, toward building an industry — a machine — greater than themselves.

And I do sometimes wonder if the problem in Canadian film and TV is that while Hollywood renovates its existing house, adding new support beams where needed and attaching new wings over the decades, Canadians are too quick to just knock their house down, and try to build from scratch…and then a new generation comes along, and they just bring in more bulldozers to knock it down, determined to start again. And the result is a frontier town that has yet to become a city of dreams.

But that’s just me being Devil’s Advocate.

I keep drafting essays I intend to post — but then a random comment in one will kind of drag my thoughts off in a whole new direction for a different piece altogether. This post ended up morphing out of something I was thinking of writing about the CBC’s recent TV movie adaptation of Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town — and I might get to posting that. But I got hung up on reading a comment from one of the actors in that movie, Peter Keleghan, who was proud of the film and suggested it was a “game changer” for Canadian TV.

Keleghan’s point, I think, was that the movie was (in his mind) so good, it was re-setting the bar for Canadian productions. Now, whether or not you liked Sunshine Sketches, I’m not really sure I would call it a “game changer” — indeed, if anything, it seemed like a bit of a throw back to the kind of period pieces the CBC used to do regularly. Sunshine Sketches was certainly relatively expensive, with a huge cast…but I’m not sure I saw it as re-setting any bars…or, indeed, what exactly that bar might be even if it had re-set it.

But it got me thinking — what were the “game changers”?

Looking back through Canadian TV, were there things we can point to that arguably influenced the productions that came after them? I don’t just mean they were good productions, or entertaining — heck, in some cases they might only be okay, in and of themselves — but you could make a strong case that if they hadn’t existed, the shape of future productions would’ve taken on a different form…or not existed at all. In some cases they might have influenced simply their particular era, in other cases, their influence might be on-going.

And that, too, springs out of a few other essays I was working on (and may still post) musing on the nature of Canadian culture, and pop cultural history — of acknowledging the present owes a tip of the hat to the past.

So here is a rundown of, arguably, 11 of the most influential productions in Canadian TV.

1) Wojeck — this mid-1960s CBC drama about a crusading coroner was important both as being one of the first hour-long dramas attempted on Canadian TV, but also in its blatant earnest-ness. Oh, sure, it did let its hair down with occasional “lighter” episodes that were more straight forward crime/mystery dramas, but there’s no doubt Wojeck saw its dramatic framework as an excuse to tackle hot button issues of the day. As such it arguably set the tone for many “social”-dramas that came after it — from McQueen, Sidestreet, The Manipulators, all the way up to Street Legal, DaVinci’s Inquest and even, possibly, the 1980s cop drama Night Heat which veered into “social issue” plots in a way that wasn’t altogether common for the U.S. cop series it was ostensibly emulating. (It should also be pointed out that most people would argue Wojeck also influenced the U.S. series, “Quincy“) Now, to be fair — “issue” dramas were not unknown before Wojeck, either in Canada or the U.S. and Britain. Indeed, an earlier CBC series, R.C.M.P., though I’ve only seen a bit of it, also seemed to have a kind of Wojeck-ian “gritty” edge, too. In fact, that attitude of drama having to be more than just entertainment was itself a product of the Canadian film tradition which had evolved out of a documentary more than a fiction background. What’s equally interesting is that Wojeck didn’t seem to inspire imitations of its “style” — its episodes often experimental, playing around with chronology, and flashbacks. Many subsequent Canadian series may’ve been inspired by Wojeck’s social earnestness…but tended to be done as more conventional TV dramas.

2) Street Legal (CBC) was arguably one of the first true populist TV drama successes in Canada. A lawyer series initially arising out of that Wojeck-mould to which I alluded, it premiered around the same time as the hit U.S. series L.A. Law — and though still keeping a toe on its socially earnest roots, it was gradually re-shaped more in the style of that Hollywood series, with a greater emphasis on the soap opera of its characters, and faster-paced plots, with multiple stories per episode (as opposed to the first season where each episode tended to focus on a particular partner in the firm) and it became more and more popular and ran a number of years. And I can’t help thinking its success led to subsequent ensemble dramas and “professional” drama series inparticular (ie: series about professionals in a work place) — most notably CTV’s ENG (in which we also had an “ensemble” that was fronted by a woman — a rarity in the 1980s — and in which a sub-plot had her romantically involved with a “younger” hot headed Italian-Canadian hunk…just like Street Legal had done). And, of course, in its turn ENG may have influenced The Eleventh Hour.

3) Night Heat (CTV) may have influenced the direction of Canadian TV in a number of ways. Although initially dismissed by some critics as just an American-style cop drama…maybe that was the point. Despite a certain social earnestness (that maybe lingered from the days of Wojeck) it was a fast-paced, hard-boiled mystery-drama of wailing sirens, and occasional shoot outs that shook off the stodgy image that Canadian TV had and maybe more than anything before it proved Canadians could do pulpy entertainment when they put their minds to it, and could pull it together — in terms of writing, editing, direction, etc. It was also probably the first successful Canada-U.S. TV co-production (there had been others, but usually only lasting a season or two) even proving a programming centre piece for CBS in the States when they were airing a series of first run dramas in a post-primetime slot (their Crime Time After Prime Time block) and so it proved the viability of such efforts and it could be argued essentially paved the way for every co-production since then. Ironically, Night Heart was an all-Canadian production in terms of the stars, the scripts, the directors, whereas many later co-productions would hire American actors to star, and often with scripts (or at least script editors) hired from Hollywood.

4) Due South (CTV) took Night Heat’s ball and ran with it by taking the co-production template and moving it to the next level of prime time U.S. network TV. And just as Night Heat arguably proved Canadians could make credible American-style crime-dramas, likewise, Due South took it one step further by offering an “expensive” American style action-drama, with car chases, stunts, leaps from windows — not to mention slickly presented comic banter and interplay. I’m not sure Canadian TV had seen anything quite as professionally slick as Due South before. Previous series had proven Canada could make things as good as the Americans, as long as they stayed within certain parameters — Street Legal as basically a talking head drama, Night Heat which made a certain low-budgetness a necessary part of a its gritty, street-level atmosphere. Adderly was an action-comedy with stunts and fights…but it had a certain low-budget look to it. But Due South was pure Hollywood panache — and done about a guy wearing red serge! And it became a true international success, with a fandom to this day. And, if you want to talk about “game changers”, it basically re-positioned Paul Gross (already a leading man, but in parochial Canadian productions) as a populist star, who has gone on to be a significant film actor and director in Canada…stuff that probably wouldn’t have happened for him if he hadn’t starred in Due South. Admittedly, Due South’s influence on actual programs was more limited — the short lived action-comedy, Taking the Falls, and the TV movie would-be pilot, Love on the Run, being examples of programs that were probably inspired by it (mismatched-buddy action/comedies). But they weren’t successful, and Due South ultimately did not kick off a trend of similar series.

5) North of 60‘s (CBC) influence is, in a sense, almost more culturally profound than any other production on this list. I mean, sure, it was a slick, night time drama — arguably building on the ensemble drama tone of Street Legal, but anticipating the Hollywood-style gloss and confidence of Due South. And for a number of years after it went off the air, it was maybe beginning to look as though it would also be remembered as the last successful all-Canadian TV drama (but the current crop of drama series are finally starting to show healthier ratings). It wasn’t the first Canadian drama set in the wintery north (the high school drama 9B was there ahead of it) but one could argue it helped show that Canadian drama didn’t all have to be set in American-style big cities. But that’s not why I say it was culturally profound. No, arguably its biggest influence was being a drama set on an Indian Reserve. In a way, maybe the fact that we almost don’t think of that as being so significant is a good sign…but make no mistake — it was astonishingly unprecedented. North American Television had seen nothing like it before. Certainly I don’t think there had ever been something like it on U.S. TV, where Native roles were rare. Critics initially compared North of 60 to the U.S. series Northern Exposure, but Northern Exposure was about white characters with a few token, quirky Indians flirting about the peripheries. So in that sense, maybe North of 60′s roots date back to the days of The Forest Rangers, Adventures in Rainbow County and The Beachcombers which helped establish the idea of Native characters as being a legitimate part of Canadian drama in a way they weren’t in American TV. And there was the precedent of a predominantly Native cast with the youth-aimed series Spirit Bay. But an adult-aimed, expensive, prime time network drama about Native Indians? And even though North of 60 introduced us to the setting through the eyes of a white character (a mounty transferred to the area), it was an ensemble cast, the Native characters driving their own storylines, as much the leads as any of the (few) white characters. It helped make recognizable stars out of Tom Jackson, Tina Keeper, and the late Gordon Tootoosis. Perhaps equally it helped break Native Indian roles out of the archetypes of “wise old shaman” and “angry young renegade” and just let them be people in all their grey shade permutations. Would there have been The Rez, or Moccasin Flats, or Cashing In, or Blackstone, or even the current CBC drama, Arctic Air (with its large contingent of Native characters) without North of 60? Heck, would the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network have gotten off the ground if North of 60 hadn’t both galvanized the Native audience with an enthusiasm to see themselves on TV, and equally proving that Native-focused dramas could grab even a white audience? Well, consider this: since North of 60 aired, there have been, as mentioned, a number of Native dramas on Canadian TV, and Arctic Air boasts not just a number of Native actors in its mixed cast, but even as its top billed star. In that same time period…has there been even one comparable American series? Of course, CTV and Global haven’t really stepped up to the plate, either.

6) In a similar vein, was the CBC’s Codco. On one hand, it was just another sketch comedy series — arguably a little influential, and lasting longer than many sketch comedies that came before. But it certainly wasn’t the first sketch comedy on Canadian TV, nor even the first controversial one (heck, back in the 1960s, I think Nightcap raised a few eyebrows). But like North of 60, it perhaps changed the game by virtue of its ethnicity — by being a Newfoundland sketch comedy. Prior to it, I don’t think there had ever been a Canadian TV series set on the East Coast, and precious few motion pictures. And bear in mind, this was still around the time of “Newfie” jokes — so to have a bunch of Newfoundland comics blast on to prime time with their accents intact and proving as biting, and caustic, and edgy as anyone else, perhaps re-set people’s perceptions of the whole East Coast (I think it was actually shot in Nova Scotia). Not only did it, of course, lead to the long running This Hour Has 22 Minutes, but I’m pretty sure it helped establish the East Coast as a viable production centre for TV and motion pictures, directly and indirectly clearing a path for everything from the sci-fi drama Lexx, to the Trailer Park Boys, to the current action-comedy, Republic of Doyle.

7) Anne of Green Gables was a cultural touchstone long before its early 1980s TV mini-series, but still that particular CBC production set the style for the next few years. Writer/director Kevin Sullivan had already made one or two family dramas, with little wide impact, before he adapted L.M. Montgomery’s classic to the small screen, in the process making lead Meghan Follows a minor star. And for the next few years Sullivan was a giant of Canadian TV, with series like Road to Avonlea, Wind at My Back, and even limited series like By Way of the Stars, even gaining emulators (that surest sign of influence) with series like Emily of New Moon. In fact, family dramas seemed to be one of the CBC’s surest ways to ratings success for a number of years. But times change, executives get replaced with new guys with new vision, and the Sullivan school seemed to fall out of fashion a bit, but that doesn’t deny the significance Anne and Sullivan had for a number of years. Indeed, although the current CBC drama, Heartland, isn’t stylistically cut from the same cloth, the fact that the CBC is once more airing a hit “family” drama in the 7:00 PM Sunday timeslot once held by those old shows maybe suggests an influence still.

8) The Degrassi series (CBC/CTV/MuchMusic) — and no, I have no idea why there’s a smiley face there, but I can’t get rid of it! — are perhaps the most significantly influential un-influential productions in Canadian TV. I mean, the series began in the 1980s as The Kids of Degrassi Street, went through various variations as the cast aged (climaxing in Degrassi High), before stopping…but remaining memorable enough to even warrant references in American films (like those by Kevin Smith). Then the series was revised — this time shaking off the on-the-cheap, cinema verite style of the originals for a slicker, more American style Beverly Hills 90210 vibe and is still going a decade or so later. I mean — you can’t argue with that, a series (at least in name) that has run, off and on, for over three decades! And certainly, there are few Canadians who if you refer to “Degrassi” wouldn’t know it was a teen-aimed TV series. Yet the reason I suggest it may not be that influential (after all, the point of my list) is because I’m not sure how much it affected other shows — but certainly there have been other Canadian teen dramas, ranging from Madison, Edgemont, Northwood, and Renegade Press. Would they have existed without Degrassi to set the tone? Maybe not. And Degrassi was certainly edgy and controversial, some episodes dealing with such hot button topics that they were dropped from airing in markets in the United States (though it rarely caused a fuss in Canada) and that “edgy”-ness might well have influenced other Canadian teen dramas to stray outside the safety zones in which comparable American series play. So Degrassi is a significant pin we can put in the map of Canadian TV.

9) Flashpoint (CTV) follows in the path of Night Heat and Due South, so in that sense one could quibble about its significance — but I think it still warrants its own place as a “game changer”. Initially greenlit as simply a Canadian cop-drama, American executives came sniffing around during a Hollywood writers strike, hoping to find some new shows that they could produce that wouldn’t violate union rules — and Canadian writers and crews weren’t part of the American strike. So a co-production deal was struck. But where Flashpoint was different from most previous Canada-U.S. co-productions was that they were either set in the U.S., or set in an anonymous Anytown, North America, or worked the dual nationality into the story, either about an American in Canada, or a Canadian in America. But Flashpoint was set in Canada with no especial effort to work in some kind of American presence into the story. And unlike almost all those previous series (with the exception of Due South) it found a spot on American network primetime. It proved a ratings success, and immediately led to a number of subsequent primetime co-productions, many, like it, more-or-less admitting they were set in Canada with Canadian actors, writers, directors, etc. One could even make the argument that the ratings success of many of these Hollywood-backed shows, in Canada, helped revitalize the Canadian TV industry, leading to the recent crop of Canadian dramas — even those without U.S. partners — winning solid audience numbers.

10) The irony about The Newsroom (CBC) when it premiered was that a few naysayers simply dismissed it as a “rip-off” of the U.S. cable series, The Larry Sanders Show. And there’s no doubt it shared a stylistic similarity — but I’m not sure I would call that a rip-off. I mean, in film and TV (and art in general) that’s how mediums evolve, someone does something first, and others pick up on it. If they didn’t…we’d still be watching black & white silent movies shot from still cameras. And though the two series shared a similar style — no laugh track, and shot like a drama — and both were media satires, they weren’t the same idea. Larry Sanders was about the apolitical behind-the-scenes antics of a Tonight Show-like celebrity interview series, with the main character the host. The Newsroom was about a TV news show, making it a far more provocative political satire, with its main character the behind-the-scenes producer. You might as well claim Republic of Doyle is a “rip off” of Magnum PI because they’re both about private eyes who live on an island (and believe me, there are people who will claim that — but to most of us, you need a few more specific parallels to cry rip-off). And at that point, I’m not sure network TV in either Canada or the U.S. had seen anything like it (Larry Sanders being a cable series) — I suppose an advantage to the fact that the CBC, and to a lesser extent even Canadian private networks, are often a little more open to off-beat programming than U.S. networks. And it seems funny to accuse the Newsroom of ripping off The Larry Sanders Show…when nowadays it seems half the sitcoms out there use a similar drama/pseudo-documentary style. Anyway, The Newsroom proved a surprise commercial and critical hit at a point when Canadian sitcoms had become an endangered species and it ended up shaping the look, tone and even subject matter (many comedies set within media organizations) of many Canadian sitcoms that followed. Creator/star Ken Finkleman himself became his own little mini-factory, churning out a number of subsequent series. One could even argue it influenced even less stylistically similar series — like Corner Gas, which though a conventional sitcom in tone, nonetheless was shot without a laugh track and on location, rather than before a studio audience. Now to be fair, that had already been tried earlier — with the later seasons of the sitcom Material World. But Material World didn’t really seem to have any immediate influence on the programs of its era, whereas the post-Newsroom series followed quickly on its heels. Granted, many of these series didn’t last too long, but I can’t help thinking that without The Newsroom, there wouldn’t have been a lot of subsequent Canadian sitcoms (from Made in Canada to Twitch City to Big Sound)…or they’d have been done in a significantly different style (including recent shows like Mr. D, Michael: Tuesdays & Thursdays, and even InSecurity). The Newsroom may also have started the trend of actors creating vehicles for themselves, as many subsequent sitcoms (and even some dramas like Republic of Doyle) are created by their stars…in a significantly greater proportion than, for example, American series. Again, The Newsroom wasn’t the first (Seeing Things was created by its star) but it was the first that was so clearly at the front of a trend.

11) And what about CTV’s Corner Gas? Its artistic influence is a little harder to quantify (though the setting of a small prairie town was recycled for the subsequent Little Mosque on the Prairie) but it was probably the biggest, most successful Canadian series of its day, and pumped a shot of adrenaline into the failing heart of Canadian comedy (that had begun to fade away again after The Newsroom briefly kick started it). One could argue the fact that we even have had recent Canadian sitcoms is partly attributable to Corner Gas’s success. Not just that, but writers who worked on Corner Gas have gone on to show run subsequent sitcoms. Though its long term influence is yet to be determined — many of the sitcoms not doing that well, with even those fronted by ex-Corner Gas stars being cancelled after a couple of seasons.

Now as I said at the beginning, I was trying to suggest “game changers” — series that shaped and influenced Canadian TV. I wasn’t necessarily saving these were the “best” series, or that there weren’t equally good, or even better series…but they might not have been as influential. So what are some honourable mentions?

Well, the 1970s sitcom King of Kensington was probably English-Canada’s first successful sitcom, and star Al Waxman was probably recognized as “Larry King” to the day he died. So it was culturally significant…I’m just not sure it had much influence, in the sense of paving the way for other shows, or starting a trend within Canadian comedy. Although there are always behind the scenes influences, in that a story editor on King of Kensington was writer-actor Louis Del Grande…and one assumes Del Grande’s efforts on King of Kensington led to CBC brass okaying him to create and star in the subsequent Seeing Things. Now there’s a worthy honourable mention — Seeing Things was arguably one of the best and brightest Canadian series of its era, a witty mystery-comedy about a psychic reporter. It was a great show…I’m just not sure it had much impact on later series (although the number of subsequent Canadian mystery series about some sort of special, or even super powered, detective — in a country not always prone to “fantastical” TV — maybe owes something to Seeing Things…including the current The Listener about a psychic medic!)

Little Mosque on the Prairie may well go down in Canadian history as a cultural milestone — a sitcom about small town Muslims in North America, and where they were the main characters (as opposed to being about, say, a WASP hero befriending some “alien” Muslims) it smashed ratings records with its premiere and garnered international attention. Like North of 60 before it, it perhaps showed Canadian audiences were more open to pluralistic heroes and environments than you might expect…or might expect on an American network. But its creative influence is less apparent — in themes, or style, or diverse ethnicity. Sure, its brown heroes might have led Global to experiment with its black sitcom, Da Kink in My Hair, but in general, the jury’s still out on whether the future of Canadian sitcoms will be influenced by Little Mosque.

There have been series that ran for a few years, and have their fans — but that doesn’t necessarily mean they were “game changers”. Made in Canada ran years…but it was just following The Newsroom’s lead. The big city drama, Traders, has its fans, and certainly it had some technical influence in that for a while after it, directors and writers would often heavily reference it in their resumes…but it arguably was just reading from the Street Legal play book, without any particular signature moves of its own that we can definitively say shaped future series. Trailer Park Boys was certainly a cult hit, and even spawned successful motion pictures — but I don’t think it has especially influenced or re-shaped Canadian TV (maybe its coarse, profanity laden scripts pointed a direction for Rent-a-Goalie and others…although even then, Canadian series with coarse language had been around before).

Now if you want to talk about a series that should’ve been a “game changer” we could look at Slings & Arrows, the comedy-drama set at a theatre festival. In terms of sheer professionalism and panache, I’m not sure Canadian TV has ever produced anything to beat it — particularly its first season. A Robert Altman-esque dramady — but Altman at his pinnacle, like Nashville or something — done as a weekly series, Slings & Arrows was refreshing, edgy, sure footed, and deliciously complex and ambitious (though I did think each of its three seasons was a little less effective than the one before). But even though it easily warrants a place as one of the best things done for Canadian TV…I’m just not sure I can point to any obvious influence it has had, so far.

We can point to influences and mini-trends — I was thinking of mentioning the CBC mini-series Love and Hate, which landed a spot on American primetime and begat a brief mini-boom of Canadian made (and set!) TV movies and mini-series on American network TV — including Conspiracy of Silence and Million Dollar Babies. Or there was Douglas Bowie’s various pulpy historical dramas on the CBC in the 1980s — which you can hear an echo of in Global’s current hit, Bomb Girls. And one could argue that the dark Durham County was foreshadowed by the limited series Dice. Then there’s The Lost Girl (an all-Canadian fantasy series) which was arguably greenlit thanks to the success of Sanctuary (another all-Canadian fantasy series) and Sanctuary sprang out of StarGate (the actors and writers using their popularity from that series to get Sanctuary into production) and the various StarGate series totalled 3 live action series (and I think an animated one)…but StarGate itself arose out of the co-production trend that, arguably, began with Due South and, before that, Night Heat. So although we can point to its influence…I’m not sure if “game changer” is quite the appropriate designation. Without StarGate, people like Amanda Tapping (Sanctuary) and Michael Shanks (set to star in the upcoming Saving Hope) wouldn’t have become stars…but I’m just not sure the overall course of Canadian TV would necessarily be any different without it — or whether something else would’ve merely arisen to take its place.

Anyway, so there we have it — a little meander through Canadian TV history and looking at the key players (kind of like Max the 2000 Year Old Mouse – say, now there’s an important Canadian touchstone!) Did I miss some obvious ones? Did I overstate the importance of others. Yeah, maybe — but still, I think it provides some food for thought.