The River of Reviews

THERE'S BEEN A BOMB slowly lurking in this blog for months. And it was all set to go off today.

One of the things that I've preached many a time is that Canadian creatives need to build tougher skins about their reviews. There are many stories of people going up to critics at industry functions and complaining about this or that review. Network execs who call a newspaper to complain about a critic's "bias." Changing this kind of whining, unprofessional behavior was one of my 10 Things That Could Make Canadian TV Better.
But, of course, today was also on the calendar as the day that Across The River To Motor City hit the air in most of Canada.

Now, I'm a voluble guy. If reviews were bad, if something that I thought was really unfair got said, would I be able to keep it all in? Would I become the thing I hate? Would I give in to the dark side, realize that my hate makes me stronger, and then scream "nooooo!" as I hurtled down the airshaft, friendless, handless, alone, with my best friend frozen in carbonite and...

Sorry. Got away from me there.

Well the reviews are in. And they're mixed. But the funny thing is -- in all the critical things that get said, they're right. Every one of them. It makes me feel great to know that, you know what, they are watching closely, and they are fair. And perceptive. Yay!

Let's start with the Globe & Mail's John Doyle, who probably gave the most positive review:

Across the River to Motor City (CITY-TV, 10 p.m.) makes excellent use of Windsor as a state of mind. A new, six-part, Canadian mystery-drama, it opens with a muddled first episode, but then develops into an original and compelling story of love lost, lives wasted and toxic suspicions surfacing over and over again.

As a TV drama, Across the River to Motor City (written by Denis McGrath and Robert Wertheimer) broods as intently as old Ben himself. And it is often rescued from its elliptical quality by David Fox in the role of Ben. The theatre veteran is magnificent here. You can't take your eyes off him, even as he sits quietly, assessing what to reveal and to whom. He's a coiled encapsulation of rage, disappointment and shrewdness.

The other key figure is Katie, and Charlotte Sullivan, all blond beauty, optimism and vulnerability, personifies America for Canadians: She's elusive, alluring and out of reach. In the nicely crafted opening credits, a photo of Katie blends into the drawing of the Queen on the old Canadian dollar bill, signalling all the complex connections and

disconnect between Canada and the U.S.

The series often looks stunningly good. Director Michael DeCarlo uses a fluid, striking style in establishing both Windsor and Detroit in two eras. In the opening hour, that fluidity is a problem, and it requires considerable concentration to follow the early threads of the story. Roiz is very good as the angry young Ben and, in the current segments, Anne Openshaw is excellent as Ben's smart, bitter daughter.

This is an entertaining, slippery drama for grownups. It has so much story crammed into it that it calls out for more mining of the Windsor/Detroit mindset.

Doyle keys in immediately to the thing that I loved most about Windsor: how utterly impractical a city it is. Not quite American, Not entirely Canadian. Small city, international crossing point, next to a huge metropolis. Playhouse of gangsters, (Capone visited there in the 20's) lawless place in the 50's, witness to the convulsions of Detroit in the 60's. It's a sleepy place, but a river of really powerful, strange stuff runs under the surface. And we only got to nick it.

Doyle's also right about David Fox and Charlotte Sullivan. And Michael DeCarlo and his DOP David Greene, who get credit for the sumptuous look of the piece.

Vinay Menon in The Toronto Star takes the muddled and runs with it in a review called "Bridge Over Troubled Drama."

Across the River to Motor City (Citytv, 10 tonight) is a new miniseries that tells the story of Ben Ford, then and now. It is also a new miniseries that gambles on atmosphere and forfeits coherence.

On Nov.22, 1963, Ben (Sasha Roiz), an insurance investigator, is celebrating his 30th birthday. As we learn, he has bought an engagement ring for girlfriend Katie Wilton (

Charlotte Sullivan) and plans to propose when she returns from a flight (in the era's parlance, she's a stewardess).

But Nov.22, recall, is also the day John F. Kennedy was assassinated. And after his death, Katie vanishes, setting into motion an epic mystery.

The old man? That would be present-day Ben (David Fox). After collapsing, Ben moves in with his daughter Kathleen Ford McNeal (Anne Openshaw) and her husband Brett McNeal (Peter Stebbings).

Soon, two skulls are seen amid the debris in a landfill. Though Katie has been missing for 44 years, local police make a positive ID in record time and are at Old Ben's front door asking questions.

You may have a few questions of your own. First and foremost: Why is a show that has plenty to truly admire – writing, direction, camerawork, set design, lighting, acting, music – so hell-bent on baffling viewers by jumping back and forth in time without properly setting up the story?

It's like watching a world-class runner crouch at the starting line, unaware his shoes are tied together.

A conspiracy? Cuban businessmen? A cover-up? Italian mafia? Dark secrets? A mysterious airline passenger? Mercury? The Blue Grotto Lounge? The Teamsters?

By the midway point, I was half-expecting Keyser Söze to suddenly appear and whisper "Redrum."

Editing a TV pilot is a tricky job, especially for a mystery miniseries that's anchored in two different times. You need to give viewers a clear sense of the characters and conflict while pacing the exposition.

Deftly handled, you get a story that ropes viewers in; bungled, you get a story that leaves them dangling. And in our age, dangling = change the channel.

Again, Across the River is not bad. But it could have been great.

It works hard to get your attention. You just have to work harder to give it.

Ouch. But he's right. The first hour is challenging to get through, and not nearly clear enough. I can't speak to the decisions that were made putting it together. I saw an early Director's cut that seemed to be rocking the transitions in the script alright. But then I was off on Rent-a-Goalie, and then Vancouver and on and on and obviously somewhere along the way that cut changed for reasons that I am absolutely not privy to. Oh well.
This is actually kind of a great educational opportunity here. Hmmm.
If you click here, you can get a PDF of an early production draft of the first ep. You'll see that originally that there was supposed to be a voiceover - but that voiceover wouldn't have helped with clarity, because it wasn't that kind of voiceover -- focus on the other elements -- the transitions from past to present and back. Are they clear? Clear-er? Bueller?

The secret when you're flipping back and forth in eras is to do exactly what Mr. Menon says above. Balance the exposition and time and place. When you compare script to the cut, was it clearer or not?'m not setting up a straw man here -- I really am not sure myself. Clarity -- how to make sure everyone knew what was going on was always the number one concern at each step of the process. It's what the network asked about. It's something the Producers knew about. It was a concern of the Director. There's not a person involved with the show who didn't appreciate that making things clear was a primary concern for a dense narrative.

Since ATR wrapped shooting, I've been on three series; and I've seen the subtle changes that editing can do to rescue a story. Or not. It really is like a second chance to write the show -- which is why those striking showrunners in the USA are actually making a big, big artistic sacrifice. Standing with your writers in solidarity is brave. Standing with your writers when you know it might mean that someone else is in that room making the final call on the cut -- and that you may never get your chance to nudge it just that little bit to make it better. Well if you're a creative type, that's heartwrenching.

Anyway, the first hour might be a tough slog, but I hope some of you stick through it. There are rewards to come.

Finally, let's look at the Canwest papers with Alex Strachan. (This one's from the Regina Leader Post)

The Detroit River, we're told at the beginning of the occasionally compelling, often maddening homegrown drama series Across the River to Motor City, has been dubbed "the Greatest Commercial Artery on Earth." It separates two North American cities: Windsor, Ont., (pop. 97,210) and Detroit, Mich., (pop. 1,670,144). "Two cities," the narrative scroll reads, "two countries. Two different ways of life."

Well, yes and no. In style and in tone, Across the River to Motor City resembles the stylish, cerebral dramas of American pay-TV channels HBO and Showtime. It wears its ambition openly -- in just three minutes, we're introduced to the main character and the setting: Windsor, Ont., in both present day and Nov. 22, 1963, the day of the Kennedy assassination. The story -- a murder mystery -- will flash back and forth between then and now over the course of the series. Two cities, two periods in time, but with the same characters and the same central mystery.

The "ways of life" between the two countries may be different, but one washes up on the other. The commerce between Windsor and Detroit, the shared culture and the way a cataclysmic event in one country -- the Kennedy assassination -- reverberates in the other have a certain inevitability.

The story is complex and hard to follow at times, but it's tied together by a central thread. A Windsor insurance investigator, Ben Ford, turns 30 on Nov. 22, 1963, the day Kennedy is assassinated -- and the day Ford's would-be fiance vanishes without a trace on a flight from Dallas.

Across the River to Motor City has a tremendous sense of time and place. As written by Robert Wertheimer and Denis McGrath and directed by Michael DeCarlo, the scenes set in the early '60s practically glow with nostalgia. Golden light suffuses everything, from the flight attendants decked out in their orange scarves and peaked caps to the way beams of sunlight stab through the window shades in a Detroit police station. The present day scenes are darker and more grim: the sky is grey and perpetually cloudy, with city lights gleaming off rain-slicked streets at night.

The acting is top-notch. Veteran stage actor David Fox exudes a world-weary heaviness as the older Ford, an elderly loner forced to confront his past. Sasha Roiz cuts a dashing figure as Ford as a young man, an ambitious insurance investigator with marriage and career advancement on his mind. Fate, and history, intervene though, and nothing is quite the same again.

Across the River to Motor City is ambitious and often absorbing, if a little hard to follow at times. Stay the course, though, if you can. It's a messy journey, but patience is rewarded in the end.

I learned so much writing this show. I'm glad an audience finally gets to see it. But there's also a funny dissonance, because this is where I was over a year ago. That's how long it's taken to get to market. People often come up to authors and want to talk about books, and the thing is, they confuse the fact that they just experienced it with you being the person who wrote it -- like you wrote it right now.

But that's not it. So when people say to Woody Allen, "I like your earlier funnier films" that's why it rankles -- because he feels he's in a different place than he was then. It seems slightly unreal to think that that was you, too. It's like being confronted with your younger self in the kitchen, scarfing coldcuts out of your fridge. (And no, I'm not comparing myself to Woody Allen. I might as well compare myself to Woody Woodpecker.)

I'd like to think I'm a better writer now than when I did Across the River to Motor City. But that doesn't mean that it's not nice to get it out there, warts and all.

Across the River to Motor City airs 10pm Thursdays, on Citytv (Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton) And Tuesdays at 10 pm in Winnipeg.