You hear this a lot; it's a standard line that certain companies and members of the CFTPA use to try and encourage another agenda: loosening the rules so that "American" writers can be brought in, as the holy grail to save us. That chorus, while not universal, has certainly increased since Canadian shows started selling to the USA -- despite the fact that there is zero evidence of the need. If you look at the list of commercially and/or artistically successful Canadian shows from the last few years: Durham County, Slings & Arrows, Corner Gas, The Rick Mercer Report, Trailer Park Boys, Flashpoint, Intelligence, DaVinci's Inquest, Being Erica, and Murdoch Mysteries -- to name just a few -- the commonality is that none of them had "American writers" on to "save" them. A bunch of other shows that did go that route, I will not name here. They were not so lucky. They were not saved.
The problem with the "loosen the rules so we can hire real writers" formulation, of course is that they never get to bring back David Shore or Hart Hanson -- guys who are doing just fine in the Hollywood system, thanks. No, this blinkered, short sighted, self-hating-Canadian tub of codswaddle catches 3rd or 4th tier American talent and holds them up because -- Gasp! -- they once worked down in the Ewwwe Esss of Ehhhh. See that, Martha? We done gone got ourefs some 'Murricans!
Make no mistake. As the "industry consultation" process goes on in the promotion of the new CMF (Canada Media Fund, the successor to the CTF) a lot of people behind the scenes are agitating for the relaxation of the 10/10 rule for domestic tax credits. "If you want better shows," the whisper goes, "we need to be able to import American talent! American showrunners!" For they, you see, are the grail.
Mary Darling from Little Mosque on the Prairie has been saying this for years. New behemoth Entertainment One makes this pitch frequently to those with ears in the right places. The latest was Shaftesbury's Christina Jennings.
Luckily, Canadian writers have Maureen Parker and the WGC on point. Here was Maureen's response to that interview in the last issue of Playback. I don't know if there's any truth to the rumor that Playback edited Maureen down, but knowing Maureen, I have to tell you she has plenty more to say on the subject of defending homegrown writers and Showrunners.
Thanks Maureen. (And Playback, too, for printing the response, in whatever form.)
In the Playback article "Who's Minding the Store?" (June 22) - after noting that The Listener's initial ratings were a little soft - Christina Jennings is cited lamenting that Canada has "too few showrunners to fuel its drama-making machine." So if the "winning streak" of Canadian shows airing in U.S. primetime stalls with The Listener, it seems we're to understand that a lack of Canadian showrunning talent is to blame. I completely disagree with this conclusion - so let's talk facts before pointing fingers.Ms. Jennings is right about one thing - after the disastrous 1999 CRTC Television Policy decimated drama production in Canada, some skilled Canadian writers and a few showrunners went south. However, despite this, we have retained and developed many exceptionally gifted and experienced showrunners. And with only seven one-hour dramas in production, and just six more in development, there's demand for only 13 showrunners in Canada right now.A recent Writers Guild of Canada showrunner roundtable drew 30 of Canada's most experienced showrunners - so shortage of Canadian showrunners is not the issue. The fact is there are more seasoned and talented showrunners in Canada than there are shows to run. And on top of that, we also have an outstanding crop of potential showrunners readying in the nation's story departments.But Canadian showrunners must have the professional respect that allows them to do their job. They must be given the creative control necessary to realize the original vision of the show - the vision that was the very reason the networks picked up the show in the first place.Maureen Parker,Executive director,Writers Guild of Canada
25 comments:
Well the thing is, producers here (at least the ones cited in the article) don't want "showrunners" . At best they want head writers but they are certainly not interested in having someone with experience come in and "run" the show.
Part of this is because they think they know best (that is until they fail as is the case of "the Listener") and when that happens they blame people(writers) who were never given the authority to create or run the show for their failures.
I would dispute Maureen's claim that there are thirty people capable of running a show in Canada -- I doubt there is that many in the states -- but there are certainly enough to go around so I don't think that's the problem.
I think the problem lies in the fact that some of these producers who have been courted by the US nets are like the flat girl in high school who grew a rack over the summer and the boys are now interested in her. And she will do anything to keep that interest because she has never had it before -- so she gives up what she wants, what she believes in and what she needs in the long term in hopes the boy won't dump her and while I understand that desperation -- that need to be loved and wanted -- it doesn't seem right to start blaming others (often the ones who tried to make her stand up for her integrity) for the fact that she is now used, lost and alone.
apologies for the somewhat reaching analogy...
Oh Great, Frank. Here I am trying to work and you just made me laugh so hard I think I have to go check my shorts.
Now THAT is embarrassing.
And let's not forget the networks. They're the best friend hanging on to Rack-girl's hand, whispering in her ear "I'm sure he loves you for who you are."
You have to be recognized, more or less, as a 'species' before you can be considered 'endangered...no?
Hmmm. How many Canadian producers who complain about the lack of good Canadian showrunners actually allow anyone to showrun their shows at all? Maybe the issue really isn't Canadian vs. American, but willingness to step back and let the kids play in the sandbox?
Moreover, maybe if more Canadian producers allowed their head writers to showrun, there would be more experienced Canadian showrunners?
Far-reaching analogy aside, Frank is right. But one thing, DMc, they are not hiring "Americans", they are hiring Canadians who reside and work in the US - so they don't lose any points. And the idea behind that is to facilitate a US sale. And on the current crop of US sales - I had heard that certain high-powered agencies were involved.
Recently, said agencies have been on a campaign to sign as many Canadian writers as possible to cash in on our TV business, such as it is. They don't really understand that it is finite, ruled by monies in the CTF. Such a concept is truly un-American.
"so she gives up what she wants, what she believes in and what she needs in the long term in hopes the boy won't dump her" So fricken true. We saw this during the endless, horrific changes at The Listener, much of it because of NBC's meddling, and we are seeing it again now with Copper. Though ABC is not contributing much in the way of money, they sure are ruling with an iron fist. You lie down with dogs you're gonna get fleas.
and the darn thing, what she hasn't figured out, is that "rack aside' what the boys want is her old man's money (that is to say telefilm, etc) so that they can finance American television with Canadian taxpayer money.
Um...
The current Guidelines for CTF funding state "These projects must be initiated by Canadian companies, under Canadian ownership, that exercise creative and financial control from development through production to distribution and exhibition."
If that isn't happening on "The Listener" and "Copper", how are they eligible for funding?
"If that isn't happening on "The Listener" and "Copper", how are they eligible for funding?"
Who's going to tell CTF?
These all raise good points, but to play a little bit of Devil's Advocate here, the one thing I will say is that on most -- MOST -- of the Canadian-sold-to-USA shows I've heard tales of, the notes from the US networks are usually pretty good. Sometimes very good, ie: they really know their demo and what works.
Now the downside is that you might get caught in network politics and be a pinata -- the fact that you're a cheap acquisition means you'll never be as important as a flagship show.
But creatively, the chain that starts here is right because the main problem is that when you don't have the smarts, skills, or writing ability to be able to talk content, and when you're so invested in just being loved by that US partner, you get talked into very stupid notes. Because you don't know any better.
When I was in Banff at the showrunner....mmm... no. you know what. That's actually another post. If I ever get a spare second to write it.
But that's the main thing I wanted to jump in and say here. I don't want to bash the US sales. Sometimes their opinions and notes on creative are jim dandy -- better than that which you get in Canada.
But there's still an imbalance because to them you're not very important -- you're filler. And to the producer, that American opinion is everything.
Recipe for trouble.
@Frank "Dolly" Dillon and @ DMc
Part of this is because they think they know best (that is until they fail as is the case of "the Listener")
[T]he one thing I will say is that on most -- MOST -- of the Canadian-sold-to-USA shows I've heard tales of, the notes from the US networks are usually pretty good.
Sorry for my confusion, but how has The Listener failed?
FOX has already broadcast the show globally, so Canada and the US are actually behind the curve on this. Still, the ratings are looking pretty solid in Canada and the show did amazingly well worldwide.
I have trouble understanding the issue with this show, because I actually like it.
Sure the first few episodes seemed to be a bit more-of-the-same, but like Dollhouse, there came a point where things actually did move in a more interesting direction.
Whatever the behind the scenes fireworks were, over the course of the 13 episodes, the show actually did improve, the characters solidified, and by the last few episodes or so, you really got a sense of what a good "Listener" episode should be like.
Not only that, but some of the more subtle elements, like the ways the writers found for Toby and for others to use his "gift" were quite original, and were something I hadn't really seen on TV before.
Look, Burn Notice went through the same sorts of rough patches, as have many other shows. The Listener is no different in this regard.
I never said the show failed the executve producer did when she voiced her dissapointment at the numbers. I haven't watched it so I don't know if it's good our bad. My judgement of it as a failure was simply a paraphrase of ms Jennings remarks where she expressed disappontment over the shows numbers
@Frank "Dolly" Dillon
Sorry. Your meaning had no chance against the thickness of my skull.
I come at this from a completely different angle but I just wanted to say that Canadian publishers have never complained abut a lack of good witers -- they just keep turning out high-quality, international bestselling novels.
I also didn't say that the Listener failed. Though my personal and professional opinion is that it kind of sucked. I found it confusing, boring and bland. The use and limits of the main character's power was unclear, and changed from episode to episode. It had the hallmark of a show that lurched along without any sort of consistent plan.
And we have to stop saying, "so and so show really found themselves by ep 9 or 10" -- in the current TV universe, the only thing worse than the network cancelling a show after one or two weeks, is somebody trying to defend 7 or 8 eps of flailing.
@DMc
I didn't day that "you" said The Listener failed... there were two italicized comments. Your comment was in regards to US network notes, which I (overly) obliquely referred to when praising the show.
My fault for not being clearer. Sorry.
I will agree with you that the show is a little bland. But that, I believe, is actually a point in the show's favor.
Remember what ol' Bill Davis said about bland? It works. Nobody watches Eureka for the non-stop thrill ride.
In The Listener you got Toby, and his buddy Oz. They show up at a scene, something bad happened, and the deal with it. There is no overarching dark government conspiracy (remember the suck that arc brought to Intelligence Season 2?), no ticking time bomb, and they're not trying to get your adrenaline pumping before every commercial break. That is, it's not meant to be a 24, or The Border.
The heart of the show is Toby, which includes his friendship with Oz (which includes the well written and set up buddy humour), his relationships with different women, and his discomfort and confusion about who he is, and who he should be.
Where I live, in the Middle East, there is already enough life and death, tension, and terror to go around. Watching The Listener made me miss Canada in a way that Flashpoint, Durham County, The Border, and The Guard don't. I felt that sense of ease, that sense of a place where life isn't always lived on the edge of a knife.
The only other Canadian shows that give me that feeling are Less Than Kind and maybe Corner Gas. (Little Mosque just reminds me of where I live right now.)
And that's not a knock against those other shows, especially Flashpoint and Durham County, because Hugh Dillon and tranquility just don't mix. Anything he is in is going to have more than a little bit of a hard core edge.
@DMc (Cont'd)
Bland isn't necessarily a pejorative. I never listened to Disc Drive on CBC Radio 2 in order to rock out on the way home. For many, bland is preferred.
Take most any CBS procedural, and there is more than a little bit of bland there. What distinguishes Numb3rs from Criminal Minds, Cold Case, NCIS, The Mentalist, the CSIs and Without a Trace? Two things - the style of the show, and the MacGuffin. Otherwise they all have an ensemble cast, they are all based around law enforcement, and they all maintain only a light serialization.
ABC does the same thing with it's bevy of reality shows, which are very bland, and very successful. Perhaps that is why the heavily serialized shows do well there. Some sort of counterbalance, perhaps?
I'd argue that NBC had, by far, the best shows on network television last year, and this year, but they kept getting their ass handed to them by CBS every week.
As for the "wait until" canard, I'll agree that the argument that the viewer should sit through half a season of suck just to get to the good stuff doesn't hold water. But that wasn't really what I was getting at. I was speaking more about the form of the show, the "franchise" if you will.
I liked The Listener from episode one. I felt it was a pretty good show, that got better as the season progressed, and by the end of the season, it felt like the show started to really gel.
A lot of great shows go through this transition. I believe House was a good show in the first season, but was a little unbalanced. By dropping one major character, the show really hit it's stride in the second season.
The same thing happened to Burn Notice, Medium, Chuck, Life, NCIS, Monk, and a number other shows.
Because, correct me if I'm wrong, but very few shows hit it out of the park right away. Psych had a killer first season, as did Father Ted, The Hollowmen, The Mentalist, and Lie to Me.
What are you aiming for with The Republic of Doyle? I really hope you guys aren't going to try to sell St. John's as a hotbed of terror and non-stop adrenaline. In fact, I'm praying for some blandness, some quirkiness, rounded off by laugh your ass off character based humor. That's to say, I'm praying you lean more towards Psych/Less Than Kind than The Border/24.
One more thing...about the whole showrunner as an endangered species thing (you know, what your post was really on), the way I see it, has there every been as many good Canadian shows on the air at once as there are now? Because it's looking a lot like we'll be looking back at the period in twenty years and calling it a golden age.
Wow did this sucker leap off the rails and into the ditch!
Then help me outta this ditch...
When Bill Davis said, Bland works, he was not talking about the best government or even good government, he was talking about how to hold onto power. He was being cynical.
The poster asserts that “Bland isn't necessarily a pejorative.” What does that mean – is it an attack on talent? "You writers, showing off, being clever"? Cuz you bet bland is a pejorative when you watch your work be deflavorized in order – so a producer may say - to sell it. But why can’t we sell interesting? We certainly buy it. If a producer turns good into bland, then the producer is the obstacle to good television. If they want to own everything then they can own that, too.
The poster writes that he is pleased that he does not find The Listener very interesting. He likes bland? I suspect homesickness. Nostalgia so cruel that Kraft single thins are remembered as real food and I sympathize, in a Hallmark kinda way.
Now that The Listener has been cancelled by NBC, will CTV pick it up?
Canceled, eh?
Dang.
But that may not be all she wrote. NBC wasn't getting the numbers they wanted in the US, but then NBC doesn't get the numbers for much of anything they do outside of America's Got Talent.
FOX, however, did really well with the show worldwide.
When NBC dropped Medium, CBS opened their arms. Then again, Medium is produced by CBS to begin with. The Listener was part paid for by NBC, so the question now is whether FOX will step in to co-finance, or considering the success of the show abroad, will CTV use this opportunity to take full ownership, and creative control of the show, and possibly reap the full benefits of syndication?
there are a lot of failed american television ventures as well. i for one, as an ambitious screenwriter, understand the allure of travelling south for work; but i could never imagine anything else other than working here in canada. there's enough talent up here that american productions come in and crew up on our professionals so its really all a matter of that one show hitting it right. all it's going to take is that one team to get together under the right showrunner to create something great.
Post a Comment