In early June, while attending the Banff World Television Festival, actor Paul Gross sat down with a reporter to give his opinion on the current rush of Canadian TV producers, distributors and broadcasters vying to team up with American networks. Never one to hold his tongue, Gross – whose show Due South was the first Canadian-made show to win a prime-time slot on a major U.S. network – said things that very few in the gung-ho-to-sell crowd wanted to hear.
First, he warned that the Canadian industry should not rely too heavily on the U.S.-Canada co-production model, saying there is a danger of becoming “an assembly branch plant” for the American networks. “You might be putting in the lion's share of the money, but you do not control the fate of the production,” Gross said. “Sure, it's extraordinarily attractive. You get big exposure in a way you can't generate out of Canada alone. And it certainly helps with foreign sales to have ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox behind it. But it does bring some handcuffs that aren't all that attractive, creatively and for broadcasters.”
Jump ahead one month, and Gross's words seem oddly prescient. A little over a week ago, broadcasting giant NBC, which had teamed up with CTV to simulcast this summer's The Listener , announced it had decided to pull the plug on the Canadian-made drama halfway through its inaugural season.
“Canadians just need to be wary of certain pitfalls,” he adds. “While it's nice to have a U.S. partner, they can take a disproportionate amount of creative control over the show,” and without the U.S. licence fee, the production quality could decline. “On Due South , CBS had a huge amount of input,” Gross says, of the Mountie drama that ran on CBS – simulcast by CTV – for two seasons before the American network cancelled it. (Produced by Alliance Communications, Due South survived for four seasons in all thanks to CTV, the BBC and France's TF1.)
“It's an interesting thing,” adds Gross. “We'd all like [this model] to work seamlessly. But what people forget is that the American failure rate is unbelievably high: 85 to 90 per cent of new shows don't succeed. The Canadian market is slightly more forgiving.”
Another Toronto producer, who asked not to be identified, worries that Canadian broadcasters will begin to rely too heavily on the bilateral model – and only order series based on Canadian-made pilots if there is an American broadcaster attached. “Some writers are reacting strongly against the unfairness of American networks putting in a minute amount of money and having so much creative control over casting and scripts,” he says. “And they worry that Canadian stories could suffer because the thinking seems to be: Unless you sell into the States, your show isn't worthy. That's the risk of playing in these leagues.”
Slaughter's clumsiness and Homer Simpson-like fallibility had also always appealed to the Serbian sense of humour, which is self-deprecating – a trait Stewart believes Serbs share with Canadians. Stewart and Vespi heard time and again that Serbians loved the TV character because he would always come back after being beaten down in a fight. “The most powerful alliance in the world was bombing them, and they had a dictator, but they just kept getting up every morning and trying to get through it,” explains Stewart. “They responded to the goofiness of the character rather than anything heroic.”
10 comments:
Smart man, Grossman. But then he is Canadian.
Sure, the US failure rate is high (maybe not as high as 80-90%) but the successes are big successes. Try having a conversation about your favourite TV shows and see how long it takes before an American show comes up.
So, the question is, can there be those successes with a lower failure rate?
John, I think you're maybe missing the point. Part of what Gross is saying, I think, is that these Canadian series are feeding into a U.S. system that's out of scale with expectations and delivery of Canadian product.
First, they expect a failure rate of 8.5 to 9 out of 10 shows.
We only make 8 shows (in a good year.)
And add to that the fact that they're getting the product very cheaply; so in other words, it's not even that big an investment, and it makes it easy to kill if it doesn't catch on.
In a system where they kill easily ANYWAY, you're the cheap show.
And as much as that U.S. sale might help the intl sales initially how much does the stamp of "CANCELED IN THE USA" help?
So in other words, they get lots of creative control for very little money, and they have a disproportionate power to murder your series in a climate where they're trigger happy for cancellation anyway...
No one denies that American shows are among the world's most popular tv offerings.
But this is about financing, and business, and getting shows made -- and about who has the power and how much power they get for how much money they put in.
And it's out of whack. Period. fullstop.
Oh, I agree with you. This is my first experience in TV and the situation is bizarre.
My next novel will have a different title in the US - that's the only change there will be from what I wrote and the US publisher put up way more money than the Canadian publisher.
I still think, though, that one of the reasons people turn over all that creative control to the US networks is because even though those networks have had a lot of failures, they've have also had a lot of successes. And everybody wants to think their show could be one of those successes.
By the way, I don't mean critical success, I mean big ratings, big profit success. That's what these Canadian shows are after.
It can work the other way, too. A US show died when the Canadian partner pulled its license fee, thereby also pulling the tax credits, leaving a 30% gap in the financing. That doesn't happen very often as Canada will allow just about anything to stay on the air indefinitely.
Canada develops and airs so little product, that they cannot afford to pull series off the air that are not performing. So they just move the shows to the "death slots" and carry on with their real business - the acquisition of US programming.
And is anyone concerned with the issue of replacing resident writers with US writers who were born in Canada? And the fact that the IPA does not protect us as creators? I find these issues more threatening than the US canceling a show that failed to perform for their audience.
I do think there's some serious straw grasping going on if one is holding up Sweating Bullets as an example of Can Con. SB was an entirely generic show (not commenting on the level of craftsmanship etc) that was made for an International audience that, I believe, did include the US.
It is really just another example of a multi-partnered show where the Canadian broadcaster was a minor player.
It's a cute story that Nic Slaughter caught on in Serbia but I doubt that fact that a Canadian company was involved in the show meant anything to the wags that came up with the draft Nic Slaughter movement.
At the end of the day SB was a generic, industrial show much like "the Listener" and was probably even less Canadian in that the show was not even shot or placed in this country.
Yes, this idea of bringing in American writers is really weird to me. As I said, I come from the publishing world and there has never once been a complaint there about a lack of Canadian witers.
If Canadian publishers can consistently find critically acclaimed and international bestselling writers, why can't TV producers (who have a lot more money to work with than publisher)?
They bring in American writers in order to sell it to the American networks. Usually, it's more than a writer, it's a showrunner who is known by the Americans. This gives the show a better chance of selling it in that market.
Oh Frank, Frank, Frank -- can we let go of the Eeyore for just a moment before I eat that bullet that's so lovingly clasped in my teeth?
My only point:
It's proof that making something available in a slot -- which we don't do here, has an impact.
It's also precisely BECAUSE it's such a lowbrow show that the para I noted means what it does.
We ingest culture not in the way teachers or community leaders or anyone else wants us to. We ingest it in surprising ways.
And if someone there wants to connect back to the success of a "Serbian" sensiibility in a Canadian program that is distinct and separate to a similar American program type, then that's their observation to make. And it is interesting, even here, in the land where everything -- EVERYTHING -- must be dismissed.
I speak with tongue firmly in cheek when I suggest more. Of course, it would be silly to hold this up as more than it is.
But the alternative is what we do now, which is to say fuck it, none of it is significant.
And that is the attitude that makes me feel like you guys are going to slouch away your whole country one day.
yes, I can see how the "Homer Simpson" qualities of Nic Slaughter suggest a distinct Canadian voice..
Post a Comment