Wednesday, Dec. 12. We are at ICS Headquarters. A stroke of genius, good fortune or divine intervention has landed us the Rochester Ferry Terminal, at the bottom of Cherry Street in Toronto, as the permanent location for our offices. Benno Tutter, our inspired production designer, has transformed an empty shell into a spectacular palace of high tech monitors, computers and glass panels. The south and west walls are floor-to-ceiling windows, offering views to Toronto's cityscape and out to the Eastern Gap and the Leslie Street Spit. This is the starting point for the visual style of The Border. This is our home.
for more, click the link above.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
McGowan's Diary
MORE FROM James McGowan's diary filming the last week of season one of The Border.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
That's the guy what did the Verizon commercial, eh?
I just watched the first episode, and had a mixed reaction. I live in the Middle East, and have a number of friends who assisted in cases such as Maher Arar's, specifically in regards to the special security certificates that so few Canadians seem to know about. In light of what I know about that, the heavy handedness of security officials as depicted in the show seemed to make sense. But the characterization of a deputy minister as a sinister power figure seemed a little off. Maybe it is just the Canadian skeptic in me, but I have a hard time seeing any of our politicians or bureaucratic mandarins as powerful and terrifying figures.
On a side note, I liked how the opening scenes at Pearson were a mix of tension and droll banality, though perhaps the scenes could have used a few of the K-9 units who regularly sniff me up and down every time through Pearson.
A final note... the mention of "homeland secrity" and American officialdom as a looming powerful authority that the Canadians are fearful of and seem to feel subject to. How real is this? It almost smacks of CD Howe and the end of the Avro Arrow. I had figured that such was not the case today.
Yeah. It works particularly well because the Toronto waterfront is such a hot bed of criminal and terrorist activity.
Uh, yeah. And the Doctors really do sleep together like on Greys. And Forensic techs investigate crimes all the time like on CSI. And also, police detectives regularly wear Armani and look like models.
I mean, come on. Critiques are great, but at least bring A game.
Mr. James, I've met a couple of dep mins in my time that I wouldn't classify as sinister -- but then again, Holland isn't sinister either. He's perfunctory and annoying, and bureaucratic, as you'll see in upcoming shows.
While, in general, I enjoyed the show there were a few things that seemed a bit off to me. Some of them may be a result of opening night jitters although I understand the pilot was shot some time ago so they could have been repaired if the powers that be thought that was necessary. Evidently they didn't...
1. The biggest problem I had with the show as whole is two-fold -- the resolution and how the lead character employed his solution. The solution itself -- tell the press and bring out the last victim to make the government rescind its earlier decision -- seemed a little easy and unbelievable.
I've never like this in story-telling because it always seems a little bogus to me ( a problem I had with the 11th Hour as well) in that I have rarely seen this happen in real life. The press routinely reports on horrible things the government and private individuals have done and there is usually little response to it unless the din gets so loud that it is unavoidable.
So, in my opinion, the lead's action would not have provided the desired result. That said that is just my opinion and if we are to believe he would have "won" by doing what he did, let's consider HOW he did it.
Why would a guy (who has not really be portrayed as a MAVERICK in the episode) do what he did in such a public way? In any kind of real world he would be relieved of his post at the conclusion of the episode. It is great when a character does a heroic thing but why didn't he back channel it and get a second or third party (the RCMP, Toronto City Police etc) to bring innocent man one into custody.
If he is supposed to be, in essence a spy or someone wise to the ways of spiedom, why did he do something that would directly come back on him?
Again if he had been protrayed as someone who had "no respect for the rules" etc then I could have bought it, as it was it just seemed a stupid thing to do when he could have found some way to do what he did "behind the scenes" and embarrass the government without directly making himself the cause of the government's embarrasment. To me it makes him dumb not honourable and really impacted on the "beleivability" of the series and I think this matters because I know this show wants to take itself more seriously that something like "counterstrike".
2. The "the way we treat people etc is going to turn them into terrorists" thing.
Because it seems too coincidental that "bright young scientist" was already going down the path of becoming a terrorist before his teacher was arrested for talking to a terrorist one has to conclude that "bright young scientist" became a terrorist becuase of the way the "cops" treated both the folks in the mosque and the teacher. I might be wrong here but that is what I inferred from watching the show. I know he visited the mosque a few times but it just wasn't clear -- in that no one really investigated the reason for these visits -- so I can only assume the arrest of his teacher was the "tipping point".
This is in itself a fine story and in some ways more interesting than the "a story" of the episode in that it says that if we march lock step with American policy this could be the result.
I feel it was given short shrift. Becuase of that I felt that the reveal at the end that he was involved in some kind of bombing or bomb making didn't have the resonance. I did not know if I was supposed to sense that our heroes were "too blame" for this (ie they turned him) or were "too blame" becuase they couldn't find the terrorist connection earlier.
3. I know it is a TV convention but I have grown to hate the whole Frank Furillo/Joyce Davenport thing. I know how hard it is to keep relationships alive even when you want the same thing. When two characters professional goals are so diametrically opposed I am now at the point where I can no longer buy it. When i can't buy it I can't buy into the drama. Fucking Mary Matalin and James Carvelle -- what have you wrought?
4. Nigel Bennett's characterization of CSIS guy. All that was missing was having a seventeen year old rent bou masochist in the back of the limo at his beck and call...
it's funny f.d., i didn't have that reaction to the solution although i admire the coherence and thoughtfulness of your critiques.
i'm going to leave *spoiler* room even though anyone reading this far kind of knows the story.
I thought Kessler's solution was pretty good. the threat is that the previously railroaded guy who had went away more or less quietly would now cause CSIS and the Canadian governent a tonne of embarassment would galvanize them to get the bystander released, particularly if Kessler was claiming that the originally railroaded guy, ORG, was part of the new RG investigation.
now there should be repercussions but it would actually pretty hard just to fire him. it's not like he shut down a reactor that is the only supplier of isotopes that are necessary for the most routine diagnostic tests.
now can Kessler be marginalized or not trusted and targetted by bureaucrats? sure. maybe that will happen and maybe it won't. my sense is that he'll pay a price and i'll be a little disappointed if he doesn't (he may have paid a price in his personal life)
was there a little too much "it's showtime" and "let's roll"? for my taste? yeah, but i bought the solution for the A story. i thought it was an effective lever and within the bounds of televsion reality. and the reveal of the kid at the end was good and i didn't see that coming.
the proof to me will be how some of these characters that are introed in the first ep briefly, so almost have to be one-dimensional, are fleshed out. smoking daughter, i'm looking at you.
i liked it though, and will watch the next couple of eps at least.
mark
mef -- like i said, i can accept buying into the solution (ie, the press will save the day) becuase that's how it works in tv land
but
i do believe he could have brought shame on the government without making himself a target.
yeah, i hear you fd, i just feel that (and this is obviously subjective) at the end of the ep, the ep had worked. Especially the part that is most important to me, the story. sure timelines are collapsed and you (one not you) can quibble at the neatness of how things were tied up but the ending was messy enough (in term of the kid reveal) that i thought it worked.
and if i had to guess i think that the series is going to work.
all that said, i have been wrong many times before.
Uh, like, okay. Fair enough. I was just trying to be pithy and annoyingly sarcastic, but I'll try and bring what I can there big shooter.
I can't sit through Grey's Anatomy so I won't speak to whether or not the doctors really sleep together or wear Prada or whatever it was you said, but I did manage to sit through the opening episode of The Border, and its not really that big deal to me, since arguing about television at some point becomes like arguing about your favourite flavour of potato chips to me, but I do watch it and actually enjoy some of it, as I often get a kick out of the comment section of this blog, and I did stop by and drop that initial comment so I'll play.
Now my big problem with 24 (another show that I can't sit through, and the constant reference of The Border by its own creators in the press) - beyond just how fucking stupid it is - is that it has actually had a very pernicious and insidious effect upon American public policy. All the gleeful, easy and effective torture. Now everyone knows the shit they are going through down in the States with regards to all the 'torture' that has gone on during The Bush Administration. They are ripping their guts out. The guy most responsible for 9-11 that they actually have in custody at Guantanamo Bay - can't actually be put on trial (if they actually wanted to do that) because he has been waterboarded, and that violates American law and so if they actually did put him on trial whoever was his lawyer would have to try and get him off. And you know that's not going to happen. And then there was Abu Ghraib. The prison at Bagram air force base in Afghanistan is overflowing. And the real question of whether or not "the surge" is working in Iraq is how crowded and how many innocent Iraqis are being held in American guarded prisons without charge. Lots. And now the one guy running for President who has actually been tortured - John McCain (perhaps the only time that has ever happened, oh the irony) - has stated publicly on many occasions including appearances on The Daily Show that he feels that the willingness on the part of some of the American public to approve of such policy is a direct result of the popularity of 24. And he continually points out - like any expert - that it doesn't actually work.
But 24 isn't The Border you say? Get to the fucking point.
Okay. I will. The one thing that seems to redeem 24 in the minds of friends of mine who actually like it - or critics who enjoy it like Doyle - is that neither they nor it apparently takes itself all that seriously. (Despite the fact that its producers are Republican wankers prone to keeping some very disreputable company).
So I was heartened to hear that The Border won't engage in "torture porn" like 24. And I applaud you on that. I do. I figure its the least you could do. So hopefully The Border won't contribute that same deeply insidious effect upon the public up here. So no, The Border isn't insidious, but based on what I saw the other night its just ridiculous. And its ridiculous to me, (despite what you're inevitably going to come back at me with about 'wait 'till we blow shit up'/its just entertainment/we're trying to creat pop entertainment that the Canadian people will love thing) is how seriously it is taking itself. You may not take it that seriously Denis, but every time I read an interview with The Producer in the newspaper he seems to like to go on about how he isn't "really so much a filmmaker but an activist" and all that and how he wants The Border to reflect that. Even in this Comment section you come back at me with your "it's just TV, it's not real" thing while at the same time intimating to Mr. James that you "have known some dep mins" in your time. (Where - at Heritage? Over at the Film and Television Fund. You're right. That is some sinister shit.) So your message it seems to me is trust us, we producers at The Border - we know. While at the same: Hey. Let's blow some shit up!
Well I don't think you can have it both ways though I'm sure you think you can. And if you want to push your supposed verisimilitude in this "new war" on the public, why can't we call you on it without your invoking the "Entertainment Excuse". Mr. James is absolutely right it seems to me. As far as I know and based on what I saw of the Arar Commission on TV every government functionary and cop who took the stand seemed to run the other way every time the man's name was evoked. They hung him out to dry and it was far from heroic. It was the man's wife who was the real hero because it was her dogged determination that got him released. But in the opening episode of The Border the wife is this passive creature looking starry eyed up at the heroic Customs guy (former "JTF-2", nursing some really bad wound from something "really horrible"that took place" back in Bosnia), practically begging for help. And when she handed him the prayer beads I thought I was going to barf. And of course heroic customs guy saves the day. So if you evoke the case of Maher Arar and then go about revising it, which is certainly anybody's right as writer and producer, you're then shocked when somebody making the inevitable comparison to the reality that you yourselves (Border people) are making artistic use of points out the inconsistencies?
So it's this preening liberal conscience - these pretensions - this "24, but with a conscience" thing - coming in the guise of an action/espionage show that I find most ridiculous. Hilarious really. So if you're going for that really slight way in which most people (but not me apparently) enjoy 24, then I think you're probably going to achieve it. And all the power to you. It's not unlike the West Wing in a way when you think about it. Where Sorkin's God awful sentimentality would often derail a very good political procedural.
But hey. It's just "entertainment". So knock yourself out.
And yes, it's probably unfair, but because I live here I can't get past how ridiculous it seems to me the Toronto waterfront as a location for this show. Its just seems funny to me and I can't get past it. I'll wait for the episode of The Border where some kid takes too many mushrooms at 'Wakestock' and passes out with a really bad sunburn and our intrepid, crack Customs A-team (or whatever) is called to the scene with some #13 sun block. But they can't revise him. So the agent who speaks seven languages - realizing she doesn't speak stoned hoser - takes some herself and drifts off never to be seen again. The team is at a loss, and so somebody finally places a call to Julien and Bubbles, and these two true Canadian heroes, once again save the day. A little cross-network programming there, and you guys can have it for free.
I have fucked the dog at work so many a time with this blog, and many others, and so for that, I thank you.
Cheers, and happy viewing.
Wow, now THAT'S a comment. Set course for the centre of the sun, baby!
Believe it or not, I really don't have any intention of debating what worked or didn't in the show -- I'm loving seeing the back and forth here. It's the easy glib that I don't cotton to.
And after the expansion of your comments, what really is there to say? You're crystal clear about where you're coming from. If you don't enjoy 24, if you didn't like The West Wing, I don't see a hope in hell of you liking this show no matter how it's executed.
This isn't a case where I'll bust out the "it's just entertainment" defense. But I think it is a good illustration of how every show that gets produced in this country staggers under a set of impossible expectation. When you do five or six shows total in a calendar year, it's not enough to be a diverting show or a good show or a silly show. You carry the freight of a whole industry on you. There's not a drama alive that can do that -- and there sure as hell isn't a comedy that can do it.
What seems ridiculous to you might click with somebody else. Bill Brioux's kid loved Jpod. A friend of mine nurses a secret shameful JAG addiction. People I otherwise respect really love Private Practice. I watched ten minutes of Hannah Montana, sick as a dog on the couch and unable to find the remote, and laughed twice.
So it goes, man. So it goes.
But seriously man, thanks for that opus. That shit was awesome.
Post a Comment