So there's an interesting thing going on in Canadian TV right now.
Not so much with the talk of the sucking.
Or at least that should be the story -- in Canada, it seems, it never is. The problem with a lot of Canadian TV criticism is that it ping pongs back and forth between undeserved boosterism and lukewarm or lazy sins of omission.
But one thing gets Canadians interested real fast. Always. Predictably...
the second the United States takes notice.
That's why Canadian TV is interesting right now.
First, the Trailer Park Boys went to BBC America, and made the leap to a Ivan Reitman -produced big screen incarnation, debuting sometime next year. If you haven't seen TPB, well, let's just say it's an acquired taste. But if you acquire that taste, the taste is not unlike the crack. (Not that I know anything about the crack. I'm taking poetic license here.)
Next, Slings & Arrows got rapturous reviews -- and eyeballs --on the Sundance Channel.
Corner Gas may not show in the US, but thanks to internet buzz, there's curiousity about it, and anyway, even without US interest, it continues to pull about 1.5 million viewers a week -- which is an astounding number for a country of only 30 million people.
Let's not forget that Cold Case, that CBS hit show, actually got to its beat second, after years of a grittier show on CTV called Cold Squad -- which had the exact same premise (more or less.)
Finally, last month, came the last linchpin: DaVinci's Inquest, a truly superior crime drama, debuted in syndication in nine U.S. top markets, and lo and behold...it's killing.
DaVinci is just about the only thing on the Canadian Broadcasting Corproration drama slate that they should be desperately proud of. It's that good. It's also the show that has a strong writer-showrunner behind it (Chris Haddock.)
It amazes me that the CBC doesn't realize the value of the writer-showrunner system. They have slate shows that go to auteurs: George Walker on This Is Wonderland, Ken Finkleman's increasingly vanity-driven projects, but there it is, the one show they've had for years that's undeniably good, and they don't think "hey, why is it good and how do we do more shows like that?"
It's tough when you live in a country where it seems like they're always trying to re-invent the wheel. In any case, if you're an American that's just discovered DaVinci's Inquest, you may find it interesting to know where it's going...
Read about it here.
4 comments:
The greatest piece of Canadian TV in the past 12 months was "The Tournament".
That wouldn't travel well outside the American snowbelt, but... wow.
Do you really think so? Mm. I know one of the actors on the show, and I think the performances were all dandy, but something about the show didn't gel for me. I think it's either the fact that the fauxdoc style wasn't consistent, or...you know, now that I think about it a little more, it's this:
Canadian TV suffers from two sins: earnestness and smugness. (Sometimes at different times, sometimes at the same time.) I didn't enjoy the Tournament because I always felt that the material was judging the characters, and that took the wind out of it for me. Compare that to the complete guilessness of Guffman for instance - or maybe the better example is The Office, where David Brent could obviously be horrible, but they still showed you his humanity leaking through. The Tournament's flawed characters had too much of the grand guignol about them for me to really care.
But obviously lots of people agree with you: they're doing Tournament II right now.
I saw in an article a few days ago (Starweek, I think) that Da Vinci's Inquest had to reinvent itself as a totally new show (City Hall) for government funding reasons. The article said that after 7 years, they had to either start a new show or switch to made-for-tv movies, a la North of 60.
I don't suppose you can shine any light on what rules are applying here, and why our government would squash a show for having longevity and success?
By the way, I believe that Da Vinci is right up on par with the best tv being made today. It stands up against the Sopranos, Deadwood and West Wing.
Did the article really say that?
I would be surprised. Or it might be a spin thing...
As far as I can tell, face it, most dramas have run a certain course after seven seasons. Creatively you want new challenges.
Chris Haddock and Di Fiore had explored that DaVinci millieu pretty thorougly. Plus keep in mind that with DaVinci, the truth is stranger than fiction. The character's based on the real life ex-cop, ex-coroner of Vancouver, who did run for Mayor and won.
I doubt it's as cut and dried as change or lose your funding.
However, there's also an argument to be made if that is the case. Should a government run fund have to contribute to a show that runs for seven, eight years? At what point is it simply welfare for Production companies? Tax breaks are one thing. Direct Telfilm or CFC contriubtions another.
Post a Comment