Clouds Taste Bionic

IT'S NOT HARD to see the pitch for a new "re-imagining" of The Bionic Woman. (First Step: Lose the 'The'. When we re-imagine, we drop articles entirely.)

NBC-UNIVERSAL is clearly hoping to hit a few demos at once. They're hoping to catch the female viewership that increasingly drives network TeeVee. They're hoping to pick up nostalgia points from grown up geekboys like me, for whom, let's just say, Lyndsey Wagner provided some new, uncomfortable sensations in the tummy back in the day. And then there's the sci-fi and genre fans, who'll watch two episodes of anything they think is vaguely in their wheelhouse. (Note to fanboys: it's time to stop with the letter writing campaign -- Earth2 is not coming back.)

So on a deep level, I was rooting for David Eick (Battlestar Galactica) as he took his shot at making Bionics cool again. Believe me, folks, in the 1970's -- Bionics were the shit. Seriously. The only thing cooler than Bionics was Evil Knievel. Who, come to think of it, had so much metal in him that...

...I digress.

Okay, if you're a spoiler-free person, bail now.

I'd say the pilot for Bionic Woman is competent. (Proviso here: I've seen the same one that's been floating around for months, with Mae Whitman as Jaime Sommers' deaf sister. The part has since been recast and, um, de-deafed) It's got that moody look of everything shot in Vancouver. Michelle Ryan is fine as Jaime Sommers. Her creepy boyfriend who makes her bionic is that great mix of "is he evil/creepy or besotted or both?" Miguel Ferrer shows up playing the Miguel Ferrer part -- the part that Miguel Ferrer has been playing since Twin Peaks. Good thing I like Miguel Ferrer.

And then there's Katee Sackhoff. Ah, Katee.

Katee Sackhoff managed to take the sexist, loudly carping fanboys to the woodshed and beat them around the woodpile with her fearless, brave, funny, awful performance as Kara Thrace on Battlestar Galactica. In Bionic Woman, Sackhoff plays Sarah Corvus, the first Bionic Woman -- the unhinged Bionic Woman. There's a hint, too, of "is she evil or just screwed up?" that makes for delicious speculation.

And Sackhoff isn't the only BSG alumnus that Eick and Co. leaned on. A few others show up in various roles. And right at the end of the pilot, you get the brief appearance of Mark Sheppard -- so memorable as Romo Lampkin in Season 3 of BSG -- as the man who's obviously destined to be Jaime's super-duper nemesis, and potential father-in-law.

The action sequences are okay, if a bit by the numbers. But there's no escaping the fact that what this show has most going for it is leftover goodwill from the first show, and hope for the premise.

Because everybody hopes, I think, that Eick has had a little of that Ronald Moore mojo rub off on him.

The fact is that the potential of this show goes way beyond what the title might suggest -- just like Battlestar Galactica. The reality is: will NBC allow Eick to mine that premise as effectively as Moore did on Galactica?

It's an open question. This isn't cable. It's network. It's not that an ongoing action show with bionic women beating the hell out of each other -- like Alias on Crystal Meth -- wouldn't be fun. It just probably wouldn't be something that held my attention for very long.

What Eick and Moore got really good at on Battlestar Galactica was in sneaking deeper subtext -- even uncomfortable, thought-provoking, dislocating subtext -- under the basic action adventure premise.

How could that find its way into Bionic Woman?

Well, first, I think it bears noting that the original Bionic Woman, as everybody knows, was a spinoff of The Six Million Dollar Man. They're even using that show's iconic narration: "Better, Stronger, Faster" as the tagline for the new show.

But no one is trying to revamp or revise The Six Million Dollar Man. And I think there's a good reason for that. Nobody wants to see a Bionic Man.

The Bionic Man has been lapped in our culture. On the one hand, you have Jack Bauer, who's basically a superhero -- a Bionic Man without any of the electronics. You have Jason Bourne, who can do amazing things without relying on technology. Sure, these guys are damaged in other ways -- but they kick ass something fierce. On the other hand, you've got The Terminator and Transformers. Machines are cool, man. Why have to deal with the middleman -- all that fleshy stuff?

No -- and here's where I get into dangerous waters -- the appeal of Jaime Sommers has never been how strong and powerful she is. That's just how you sell it. The appeal is her weakness. And how she struggles with what's inside her -- metaphorically and literally.

In the original series, which was a product of a less enlightened time trying to be better, I'll grant you -- Jaime was forever coming up against foes that fucked her up royally. There's that famous clip floating around YouTube of the fembot fight...where Jaime is overpowered and then jumps from too high a height and screws up her circuitry. There's always something about the wrong arm, or the powers failing her, or the fact that the deck is stacked against her.

The great potential of Bionic Woman in 2007 is not hard to see. Here we are in a culture where women regularly contort their bodies, undergo all manner of surgeries to cheat aging, or conform to a ridiculous cultural ideal. All of these things are presented as empowering -- of giving women choice...but I have a hard time seeing vaginaplasty as a victory for ... um... just about anybody.

On the one hand they're superwomen who can have it all...but no one has figured out, really, how to career track and have a baby... You can do anything, except bust through the glass ceiling.

Now here comes a woman who's stronger than any man...except, um...she was made that way against her will by a boyfriend. She's "improved." But at what cost? And is it really an improvement? And what about Sarah Corvus? She's labeled a runaway, a loose cannon -- but the glimpses we get of other plot elements in the pilot more than hint that there's a more complex backstory there, too. I think -- I hope -- as the series progresses, we'll start to see that Jaime and Sarah have more in common than either one of them ever dreamed.

Battlestar Galactica started as a way to comment on social cohesion and society in a post 9/11 context. It, like the show's Cylons, evolved into something messier and more interesting, when it started down roads of dramatizing occupation, religious fundamentalism, and the notion of what makes a terrorist, and how far does one go when resisting an occupying army? The show took political concepts that divide America, and put them in the mouths of characters you didn't expect to feel that way. And then, every once in a while, they pulled out a good old fashioned mindfuck.

Women -- and Men -- receive some pretty crazy mixed signals in our culture today. If Eick's able to hide and tease out the provocative subtext at the heart of his series, and not just fall back on the action-adventure tropes that the network will push -- then Bionic Woman could be a very interesting show indeed. I'll be rooting for that show. I hope it shows up.

Bionic Woman premieres Sept. 26.

Ohhh.

Shiny.

TV Done Got Good

SO THE TV season seems set to start whether we like it to or not. For me, it's mostly not. I didn't get my usual summertime layoff from the tube this year. Oh, it wasn't just the hype around The Sopranos ending. Between Burn Notice, Saving Grace, Damages, the return of Weeds (which I'm counting, even though I haven't seen 3rd season episodes yet) and Mad Men, I'm hardly the first to observe that this was the strongest summer for original scripted programming probably ever.

And that's with colossal misfires like John From Cincinatti and Californication in the mix.

Time was I used to enjoy coming inside in August and feeling the cool, cool top of my TV. Cool from lack of use -- such a nice contrast from the heated binging on televisual goodies that characterized the fall.

I intend to write something about all these shows -- hopefully before the deluge of the fall starts in earnest. First up will be Bionic Woman -- maybe later today. But I'm also in the middle of a first draft, so we'll see. Til then, keep clipping those coupons.

Across The River To Motor City Preview

THERE 'S A PREVIEW up on YouTube for the miniseries I co-created and wrote last year. Wow. It's funny how time can go, and the way that moving from project to project can distort the sense of time passing. It's only been a year since I was working on ATR. But you learn, you change, you grow so much through every project that now it feels like I worked on this show when I was nine. But, be that as it may. I think this trailer, while a little hammy, does give you a bit of a taste of the show -- if not quite a true picture of the starmaking turn from our lead, Sasha Roiz, and the always dependable David Fox.

“Across The River To Motor City”
Premieres Monday, November 19th and Thursday, November 22nd
Citytv Winnipeg - Monday, November 19th at 10:00pm CT
Citytv Toronto, Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver – Thursday, November 22nd at 10:00pm
(CityTV Toronto also available in HD)



Here's one of about, oh, ninety-four descriptions I had to write for the series while we were doing it. I like this one better than the one in the CityTV press release, which I feel gives a little too much away:

Benjamin Ford is an ordinary man living in extraordinary times. On a sunny Friday in November 1963, his girlfriend takes a flight to Dallas – and disappears. Nothing will ever be the same. Not for Ben. Not for anyone.

A mystery that begins the day of the Kennedy assassination reverberates through to the 21st century, pulling in Ben’s adult daughter, Kathleen, and her family. ACROSS THE RIVER TO MOTOR CITY is set against the backdrop of two remarkable eras, seen through two unique and entwined communities.

Detroit and Windsor couldn’t be more different in outlook, size, and temperament. Yet they’re linked as solidly as the steel of an auto assembly line, like the beat of a soul classic: as we all are linked inexorably to our past. The forces that shape and bind us, the mysteries that propel us, the regrets that consume us – ACROSS THE RIVER TO MOTOR CITY explores two nations, two decades, and one unforgettable mystery. It’s about people caught in the sweep of great events – and how families weather the storm of history.

Your Weekend Reading

NOT TO BE gross here, but I'm practically plague worthy right now -- with a sty in one eye and a raging ear infection. If either manages to overpower the antibiotics I've acquired, please tell all relevant scientists that I fully consent to my bionic makeover. I will do whatever bidding you require.

While I suffer on the last weekend of the summer (proof, Will, of your axiom that writers do not get hiatuses. I upset the natural order of the universe and am being plagued for my impertinence) I point you to a couple of particularly good posts by Jaime J. Weinman, on his excellent Macleans Blog, TV Guidance:

In the first he does something that I can't believe none of the blogging smartypants have done: he profiles the writing staff of Friday Night Lights. It's often hard for newbies or even people who aren't writers to understand how the different gifts and strengths of writers with differing skillsets can coalesce into a unified whole, where the whole really is greater than the sum of the parts. I think taking a look at shows that get it right might actually help. You can't catch lightning in a bottle, but if you parse writing staffs that are functional and working at the top of their game (and I think anybody would agree that does indeed describe the staff of Friday Night Lights) maybe you might start to see something of the different kinds of writers you should be considering for a staff job.

In the second, he points to a MTM jem that's now on YouTube (and sadly, will probably not be released on DVD ever, which is a problem, since many people believe it to be the greatest comedy episode of all time.) Then Weinman manages to crystallize the whole "why's the sitcom in trouble" thing in a way that maybe you might not appreciate -- but maybe has a bit of truth to it.

Notice also that the two-act structure of traditional sitcoms -- I know that we're supposed to talk about "three act structure," but the shows themselves have two acts: Act 1, commercial break, Act 2, commercial break, tag scene -- requires a lot of buildup time before the actual plot of the episode takes shape: until the very end of the first act, we don't really know what the episode is going to be about. One of the reasons that the sitcom is having trouble these days is that a traditional sitcom story requires a rather slow buildup before the story really kicks into gear, and slow buildups are not really tolerated by modern audiences.

So you see, audience. It's all on you. Chew on that this weekend. Have fun. Be safe.

I have to go put gel in my eye.

Gross.

Of Clomps and Keesters and Total Stupidity

SAY FOR a moment that you had an industry, selling...oh...let's call them clomps. And the clomp industry went very seriously awry, because for years and years, clomps had been sold in the clompity-clomp format. Then they switched to the Mark II Clompy. Oh, along the way they tried to get people to buy the 8-Clompy and ClompyMag and other stuff. But when they went to the Mark II Clompy, they jacked the prices and for a while the clomp industry was flush because everyone went and replaced their clompity clomps with Mark II clompys.

But then somebody came along and figured out a way to squeeze out the clompy juice and send 'em shooting through a series of tubes for free. The clomp industry was pretty dumb about this, and did nothing for a long time, and then they turned to lawyers, which was even dumber, and sued their customers. Which was dumbest. And the clomp industry basically imploded.

And the one bright spot in this was a magic fairy named Jobby who figured out a way to make a no-fuss service where people could get the clompy juice through the series of tubes, but pay a really small fee for it. And a lot of people went for it, because not everyone thought that they had a god given right to drink clompy juice for free.

Now say those stupid clomp fuckers wanted to bung it all up, and wreck the thing that Jobby fixed and they couldn't make work.

And worse, say there was another industry, selling, oh, I don't know...let's call them Keesters. For the longest time, you had to buy Keesters in a hard format. And then, like with the clomps, somebody figured out a way to extract the juice from the Keester Plant and shoot it through the tubes -- for free. And at the same time, they were trying to get people to choose between Keesters that came in black and Keesters that came in blue, and the blue Keesters wouldn't play on the Black Keester machines, and most people were saying...hmm...no...no...maybe the thing to do is wait and see if we can skip over the whole Hard Keester thing altogether. After all, with all those clomps and keesters, nobody had any shelf space left anymore.

So one day Jobby stepped in and said, "No, no -- wait, let's not let this get out of hand. Let's set a fair, small price and maybe most people will get in the habit of buying the no-muss, no fuss version, and enjoy their Keester juice our way. Let's all remember what happened with the clomps. We don't need another clomp catastrophe."

And say, even though that made a whole lot o sense -- let's just say that the Keester maker who was really not doing very well at all in the Keester popularity contest, decided that wasn't good enough and they wanted more dosh for their Keester juice, even though the thing was catching on really really well, and even though they were competing with the people drinking the Keester juice for free. And all this, even though they'd already seen what happened with the @#%!^ing clomps.

You'd think they'd wise up, wouldn't you? You think they'd listen to the magic Jobby who was the only fecker who made the thing work, don't you?

Nope.

Which just goes to prove:

You can be a big time executive, but that doesn't mean that you don't deserve to get clomped in the keester.

Sheesh. I mean really. Sheesh.

Ladies And Gentlemen, I Give You ... Canadian Film!

From today's Toronto Star, in advance of next week's Toronto International Film Festival, Peter Howell strives to make the point that most Canadian films at the Festival are about disconnection. But something in the article makes me feel a little...rangy:

Prairie prophet Guy Maddin thinks the phenomenon might have something to do with how Canadian filmmakers "are allowed to not be so profit-driven," because nobody expects a blockbuster north of the 49th Parallel.

"We're allowed to be more personal and we're allowed to vent," he said in an interview from his cottage in Gimli, Man.

"We might treat the movie set like a psychiatrist's office. I think everyone wants to be as honest as possible, and all sorts of nagging feelings make their way onto the screen."

That's certainly true of Maddin's My Winnipeg, his highly personal and typically idiosyncratic look at his hometown, "the coldest city in the world."

Maddin alternately loves and despises his home and native town, a place he sees filled with nagging moms, threatening urinators, angry squirrels, agitated parakeets and, above all, sleepwalkers.

Winnipeg holds some kind of record for the most sleepwalkers. It's an apt distinction for a people who, to Maddin's eye, drift through their days not sure if they wish to remain in the city and build it up, or to simply abandon it altogether.

Quoth Maddin: "Everything that happens in this city is a euphemism."

Question: who is missing from this equation?

Anyone? Anyone?

Sorry. I'll just go back to my TV cranny now.

Is It Late September Yet?

YEAH, YEAH, Everyone in the world is posting this, but here at Dead Sticks Labs we like to be trailing edge.

And speaking of kickass creative promo....

What It Takes in "The Ipod Moment"

AN INTERESTING story moved on the AP wire today about the promotion that ABC is throwing behind Pushing Daisies:

A hybrid drama-romantic comedy about a man who can reverse death, "Pushing Daisies" has been heaped with critical praise based on its beautifully executed pilot episode. ABC, sensing the potential for a hit that could bolster its schedule, is lavishing the series with promotion.

The "Daisies" pushing started early with summertime spots running in movie theatres. Then came the public screenings, including one at the Hollywood Forever Cemetery here, at the increasingly influential Comic-Con pop culture convention in San Diego and at the New York Television Festival on Sept. 8.

Thousands of daisies, with tags attached touting the show, are being handed out to the public in big cities. Some magazine readers will see glossy, eye-catching ad that reveals a pop-up paper daisy.

Then, of course, there's the on-air radio and TV promotion as well as billboards.

The goal is to create early enthusiasts who will talk up the series before its Oct. 3 premiere, said Michael Benson, ABC's executive vice president of marketing.

"The most important resource is our on-air promotion, and No. 2 is word of mouth," he said.

For those of us who have seen the full Daisies pilot, this is undoubtedly good news. It's delightful. Romantic, breezy, funny, visually vibrant, with tons of heart. This is a show that you want to watch on a big screen, not an Ipod screen. But...Bryan Fuller fans have had their hearts broken before, whether it be Wonderfalls or Dead Like Me.

This strategy of ABC's is one that they've been pursuing for a few years. They pick one or two shows from their fall crop and give them an extra dollop of promo love. The catholic in me says it's almost like they break out the extra-special oils for the anointing. It's a sound strategy, and it also shows just how much work it is to really get out there into the public consciousness in a post-You Tube, too-many-choices-for-distraction age.

A few years back, the chosen shows for the fall for ABC were Desperate Housewives and LOST. And if my memory serves me, those shows probably did A-Ok in returning that initial investment. Amidst all the clutter of that fall, you simply could not get away from Housewives and Lost... if you had any interest in TV at all, you knew when they premiered, and you knew they were on ABC. Last year, Ugly Betty was the same way.

Unfortunately, here in the land of hockey and TimBits, there is a distinct anemia when it comes to this kind of promotion. There's a general feeling that, "well, it doesn't work" or "we don't have the money for it." What there isn't is an acknowledgement that this is the game. And if you don't get creative like this in your promotion, you are no longer playing.

We find ourselves arguing over things like "coming ups" or "previously on's" (The last 4 shows I've worked on, there has been extensive conversations about this -- when pretty much that ship has sailed everywhere else. Do you have anything serialized AT ALL? Do a previously on. Next.) We argue about whether to do a title sequence or just a title card and straight into the story. (Are you on broadcast? No title sequence. Are you on Cable? Do a great one to establish your look and tone. Next.) In other words, we're so busy fighting the battles from five years ago we don't have our eyes on the ball.

There's another wrinkle, too. For most of the Canadian Private Nets (CTV, Global -- um...er...wow...that's it - tanks, media concentration!) picking your promotion means shining up your small dollars and pimping your U.S. buys.

Driving around Toronto yesterday, I spotted bus ads for "Private Practice" on CTV, and "Gossip Girl." They will be joined in the next couple weeks for all sorts of promo for all sorts of shows. But there won't be any really creative promotional stuff. Why should there be? They can piggyback on the promo that's coming from the USA.

And there's the rub. They don't know how to sell, because they rely on others to sell for them.

No WONDER promo here falls flat! They're doing it with training wheels on!

Do you remember how CTV sold The O.C. when it first came out? Me neither. But boy, I definitely remember the postcard campaign for the show I saw in South Africa, where it aired on the youth channel Go!

Picture of the cast. Cutline: "What do these kids do for fun after school? Each other."

Now THAT, my friend, is promo. Also, that's what we can do in Canada that they can't in the USA -- we're not as uptight. We could actually push the boundaries a little more. If, you know, we weren't so Canadian.

Truth be told, if Canadian channels wanted their homegrown shows to be a hit, they could do it -- because they're only ever running one or two homemade shows at a time. You don't even have to choose which child to love!

There have been flashes of trying...when Falcon Beach started, Global went heavy on Bus Ads and bought out entire subway cars to tell us "It's hot!" Not the most original campaign, but a solid B for effort.

CTV only really got behind "Corner Gas" when they realized, you know what, people like it.

There is stuff in there that Canadian Creatives need to do too -- like come up with series that have a clear, easy marketing hook that sticks in the mind and won't let go. But there's no doubt in my mind that the major flaw in the ointment (yeah, I know what I just did there) in this country is in awareness.

Has anyone learned the lessons of Little Mosque? I doubt it. I've already heard grumblings about how Mosque was a fluke, etc, etc. But it wasn't. And while the CNN stories and articles in the Times were great, there, too, was the creator and executive producer helping to make a giant shwarma in Dundas Square in Toronto. They got a great picture of her, laughing in her hijab. It was nice. It was fun. It made me feel good about the show and want to watch it.

The Rent-A-Goalie guys took shots outside Union Station -- it got a slight ripple in the press, but nothing too major. But that shouldn't discourage. More. More. Go outside Toronto. Raise the consciousness one person at a time. Launch those websites early...have them be more than wallpaper...go for the sell, and sell the sex, and don't apologize.

But most of all, sadly, most of all -- step up. If the channel doesn't step up -- they're not serious about wanting the show to be a success. And if they're not serious about wanting the show to be a success, then maybe maroons like Jim Shaw actually have a point.

If Pushing Daisies doesn't wind up -- forgive me -- pushing up the daisies, I'll be happy. But I'd be a whole lot happier if I saw Global do more for Da Kink in My Hair or The Best Years...if CTV pushed a brand new Canadian show the way they do Private Practice, and if Across The River To Motor City got more than a few weeks of wild posters in major centres and promos on the affiliated channels. (That's unfair -- since they haven't really started promo'ing this show yet. I remain quietly hopeful.)

If you're not willing to sell your stuff, well, then let's just all admit Vinton Cerf is right and throw in the towel now. As much as I love finding cool stuff on the net, 90% of what I consume on the net is something recommended by a friend.

In the non-bit world, that equivalent is promo in all its lovely forms. It's the cost of doing business. Period.

Ah well, look on the bright side. Maybe there will be a strike down south, and the U.S. nets will start buying Canadian shows. Then we'll get to see how promo's really done.

Think that's far fetched? Maybe. Maybe not.

Californication, Ep. 3

YEAH, UM.

I think I'm done.

Honestly, it's like, an honour (or something) just to be nominated. (I'm kind of embarrassed, really, please don't look at me.)

SAID THE self-effacing Gemini nominees.

That's right. The nominations for the Canadian TV Industry's annual orgy of self-congratulation are out. The awards will be handed out in 27 nights of award shows in Regina, Medicine Hat, Red Deer, and, um...Dildo Nfld. *

*some items might not be factual.

The TV Noms I Care About Are:

BEST DRAMATIC SERIES

Intelligence
p. Chris Haddock, Laura Lightbown, Arvi Liimatainen
(Haddock Entertainment)

JOZI H
p. Alfons Adetuyi, Amos Adetuyi, Adeelah Carrim, Tony Dennis, Alyson Feltes, Marva Ollivierre, Stephen Turnbull, Mfundi Vundla
(Inner City Films, Morula Pictures (PTY) Ltd.)

ReGenesis Season III
p. Christina Jennings, Tom Chehak, Manny Danelon, Scott Garvie, Laura Harbin, Avrum Jacobson, Shane Kinnear
(Shaftesbury Films Inc.)

Slings & Arrows Season III
p. Niv Fichman, Sari Friedland
(Rhombus Media Inc.)

Whistler
p. Kelly Senecal, Noreen Halpern, Janet York
(Uphill Productions I)

BEST TV MOVIE

Best TV Movie
This category will be presented during the Gemini Drama, Variety and Comedy Gala on Wed. Oct. 17th, 2007.
Doomstown
p. Pierre Sarrazin, Suzette Couture, Susan Murdoch
(Sarrazin Couture Entertainment)

Eight Days To Live
p. Christina Jennings, Scott Garvie, Ken Gord, Graham Ludlow, Laurie McLarty, Virginia Rankin, Kelly Rowan
(Shaftesbury Films Inc.)

In God's Country
p. Christina Jennings, Scott Garvie, Robert Green, Julie Lacey, Graham Ludlow, Laurie McLarty, Kelly Rowan, Paul Stephens
(Shaftesbury Films Inc.)

Last Exit
p. Richard Lalonde, Daniel Iron
(Production Last Exit Inc., Forum Films, Foundry Films)

The Robber Bride
p. Christina Jennings, Brian Dennis, Scott Garvie, Julia Stannard, Simon Wright
(Shaftesbury Films Inc., Working Title Television)

BEST DRAMATIC MINI SERIES

Answered By Fire
p. Michael Prupas, Roger Le Mesurier, Barbara Samuels, Roger Simpson, Andrew Walker
(Muse Entertainment Ent. Inc., Beyond Simpson Le Mesurier, Muse Entertainment Enterprises, Terra Rossa Pictures)

Dragon Boys
p. Michael Chechik, Howard Dancyger, Ian Weir
(Anchor Point Pictures Inc)

BEST COMEDY SERIES

Corner Gas
p. Brent Butt, Paul Mather, David Storey, Virginia Thompson
(Prairie Pants Productions Inc, Verité Films, 3/35 Productions)

Odd Job Jack
p. Jonas Diamond, Adrian Carter, Jeremy Diamond, Denny Silverthorne
(Smiley Guy Studios)

Rent-A-Goalie
p. Chris Szarka, Christopher Bolton
(RAG-TV Inc.)

Royal Canadian Air Farce
p. Roger Abbott, Don Ferguson
(Air Farce Productions Inc, In association w/ CBC Television)

This Hour Has 22 Minutes Series XIV
p. Michael Donovan, Geoff D'Eon, Mark Farrell, Jack Kellum, Susan MacDonald, Jenipher Ritchie
(22 Minutes XIV Limited)

BEST CHILDREN/YOUTH SERIES

Alice, I Think
p. Gabriela Schonbach, Brian Hamilton, Jon Slan
(Omni Film Productions Limited, Slanted Wheel Productions Inc.)

Degrassi: The Next Generation - Season 6
p. Linda Schuyler, Stephen Stohn
(Epitome Pictures Inc.)

Jacob Two-Two
p. Vince Commisso, Scott Dyer, Steven Jarosz, Marilyn McAuley, Doug Murphy
(Jacob V Story Ltd, 9 Story Entertainment)

Spirit Bear: The Simon Jackson Story
p. Heather Haldane, Cheryl-Lee Fast, Mary Young Leckie, Raymond Massey
(Screen Door Inc.)

Wapos Bay
p. Dennis Jackson, Melanie Jackson, Derek Mazur, Anand Ramayya
(Wapos Bay Productions, Wapos Bay Productions, National Film Board of Canada)

BEST ANIMATED SERIES

Captain Flamingo 2
p. Kevin Gillis, Lani Barcelona, Trevor Bentley, Suzanne Bolch, Rob Davies, Mimbi L Eloriaga, Karen Lee Hall, Ira Levy, John May, Kirsten Scollie, Peter Williamson
(Breakthrough Films & Television, Breakthrough Animation, Heroic Film Company, Atomic Cartoons, Pasi Animation, YTV)

Naughty Naughty Pets
p. Steven DeNure, Neil Court, Wendy Ann Gardner, Kym Hyde, Beth Stevenson
(Decode Entertainment Inc.)

Ruby Gloom
p. Scott Dyer, Patricia Burns, Jocelyn Hamilton, Doug Murphy, Rita Street
(Nelvana Limited)

Skyland
p. Vince Commisso, Steven Jarosz, Marilyn McAuley
(Skyland Canada Productions Ltd., 9 Story Entertainment, Method Films)

Sons of Butcher
p. Max Smith
(S & S Productions Inc.)

WRITING NOMS

BEST WRITING DRAMATIC SERIES

Chris Haddock
Intelligence
Down But Not Out

Jesse McKeown
Robson Arms - Season II
Mussolini and Me

David Moses
Robson Arms - Season II
Saultology

Susan Coyne, Bob Martin, Mark McKinney
Slings & Arrows Season III
That Way Madness Lies

Martin Gero
Stargate Atlantis: McKay and Mrs. Miller

BEST WRITING, MINISERIES

John Doyle, Lisa Porter
Above and Beyond

David Sutherland
Doomstown

Ian Weir
Dragon Boys

Tassie Cameron
The Robber Bride

Moze Mossanen
Roxana

BEST WRITING, COMEDY AND VARIETY SERIES

Paul Mather
Corner Gas
Blog River

Mark Farrell
Corner Gas
Gopher It

Brent Butt
Corner Gas
Kid Stuff

Alan Rae
Little Mosque on the Prairie
The Convert

Paul Mather, Greg Eckler, Chris Finn, Rick Mercer, Tim Steeves
Rick Mercer Report
Episode 5

BEST WRITING, CHILDREN'S-YOUTH SERIES

Sean Cullen
Grossology
Fartzilla

Gary Wheeler
Jacob Two-Two
Jacob Two-Two and the Hockey Seat Hoopla

David Acer, Ramelle Mair
Mystery Hunters
Giant Shark

Sara Snow
Renegadepress.com IV
Blackout

Trevor Cameron
Wapos Bay
Something to Remember

So there it is. I saw quite a few of the nominated shows, and some I liked very much. As always, special congrats to friends of the blog Paul Mather and Mark Farrell for their Corner Gas noms.

And lookie lookie -- though Canadian screenwriting bloggers are woefully underrepresented in the nominations -- David Moses makes us not look too embarrassing for his fine nom for Robson Arms.

I'll be rooting for two shows I worked on -- Skyland and Rent-A-Goalie....and who knows, by next year something I wrote might actually be eligible. And then I'll say what I'm going to say now:

Come on, people -- it's an honour just to be nominated.

Good luck to everybody!

The Sins

WAS THE NAME of a pretty good miniseries starring Pete Postelwhatever a few years back. You know the guy -- Mr. Kobayashi from The Usual Suspects. (I am on hiatus, people. I don't look up shit.)

It's also my idea for a little peevy list. One for which I'll need you Canadian, professional working writers to decloak and pitch in.

You know how conversational topics go in waves? Like, three weeks ago I had never heard of assembly kitchens, and now I've had three conversations about them in a week? Well, another topic on that score has my nomination for example one of The Sins.

I was talking to a fellow screenwriter yesterday, and among the many, vast differences he cited in his experience working in L.A. versus Canada was the attitude toward contracts.

In L.A. and in Canada, the letter of the law is exactly the same: if you're a guild signatory, you don't start work without a signed contract.

In L.A., my friend says, this is pretty much the rule. You're not going to be writing or working in a story room unless your paper is signed.

In Canada, the rule is observed only in the breach. In the last four years, I have had my paper signed before I started working exactly once.

When I talk to other writers, I find that this is, in fact, absolutely the norm. (And yes, I know this is endemic in the arts.)

The problem is that it's getting worse. Time was on a longer project, I'd find paper getting to me after I started but not too far after. Now, I regularly hear about people who don't have contracts until after they're finished work.

Where it gets really scary is on the subject of payments.

The WGC is very clear on the concept of the production fee -- it's to be paid on the first day of principal.

So how is it possible that episodes get shot -- fully shot -- and people haven't been contracted for the script, never mind the production fee?

Other writers also have reported to me a peculiar militance when they try to police these contracts. Accounting departments that say, "you'll get paid when you get paid," who think that "you're paying paid too much anyway." Or just people who get annoyed when you ask.

What the hell is this about?

For many people, that lump payment may be one or two checks they get for the whole year. Mortgages are due, installment taxes must be paid. This bizarre sense that by asking to be contracted or paid in a timely fashion, writers are somehow being annoying or not team players -- where the hell does that come from? How did "oh my god I'm so sorry we're just getting that out to you," become "we'll get to it when we get to it?" When did writers become gap financiers?

I mean, we work in an industry where you have to make deadlines all the time. You have to apply for funds, you have to get tax credits in, you have to start prep, you have to schedule and cash flow and everything else...none of those deadlines can be missed without consequences.

...so why can't anybody -- and I mean ANYBODY, get contracts out, and get writers paid on time?

And what's our recourse? I mean, the reality is that on most of these projects if you didn't work without the contract the projects would sink. There's always too much urgency. But the urgency seems to go only one way.

If you have horror stories about non-contract and non-payment (WGC union stories only please, we all know non-union is the Wild West.) I'd love to hear them below.

What is it about the Canadian side of things that encourages this behavior? And what can we do to improve it? (And no: refuse to start work isn't an option. C'mon.)

Poky contracting and poky payments -- I nominate you for The Sins.

Summer Shmummer Bring On Da Fall

MAUREEN RYAN has the first handicapping of the fall season and it's a pretty good one, I reckon.

Last year, I loved the pilot for "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" and thought “30 Rock” was all over the map.

Within a month or two, “30 Rock” had become one of the gems of the season, while “Studio 60” took a swan dive in the quality department. So keep in mind that these impressions of the new fall shows are just that - first thoughts. And I reserve the right to change my mind about just about everything, which is one of the best perks of this gig.

If the networks’ clutch of new shows doesn’t appear to contain, at first glance, an instant game-changer such as “Lost,” be patient. Something great might emerge from this fall’s crop. Or not.

We’ll just have to keep watching.

Will probably focus myself on the fall toward the end of the week. Meantime, continue the fray below. Amuse me, citizens.

Know Thine Enemy

SO, ON THE weekend the Globe & Mail Report on Business ran a profile of errant cabler Jim Shaw. It's an instructive profile. Yes, yes, it's the business section. So the general self-congratulatory sloppy softball hagiography is to be expected. I mean, just look at the title of the article:

Confessions of a cable guy
The industry is chugging along, and the money is rolling in. With everything in check, it's the future that's on Jim Shaw's mind.

It gets slightly worse from there, but the upshot is this: Jim Shaw and the Shaw family have made a lot of money off Canadians. They've made it in the cable business.

They made it in the cable business because the CRTC had protectionist policies in place. These protectionist policies allowed the Shaw family and the Rogers family etc, etc, to grow Canadian-owned cable companies that didn't have to compete with American firms.

The other edge of the Canadians love American TV sword is this: there are an awful lot of people out there who would have loved to sign up to get US networks like HBO, FX, Sci-Fi, USA, Showtime and the like. As the CRTC dearly points out -- there are many Canadians who would love to watch U.S. commercials during Superbowl. But they can't. Because the CRTC says they can't. Unless you break the law and go for, say, a Grey Market satellite. So the CRTC put the kibosh on that kind of foreign competition, and the Shaw family prospered.

A little over ten years ago, times were getting a little harder for Cable. They saw satellite coming and didn't like it too much. So they were given a series of further regulatory perks. And in payment for those perks, they were mandated to give something back: they were to contribute to a new fund to produce homegrown Canadian shows: The CTF, or Canadian Television Fund.

Now earlier this year, Jim Shaw threw a fit and said he wasn't going to make his contributions anymore. He doesn't like the way his -- meaning your -- money is being spent. And a whole fooferal ensued, culminating in an investigation into the fund, and disastrous recommendations for reforming the fund, which I've blogged about endlessly.

So here's how Jim Shaw, protected monopolist, spun his behavior in his puff piece in the Globe this weekend:

With cable steady, Mr. Shaw has found other ways to keep busy.

When not involved in Shaw's operational matters, he attacks the Canadian Television Fund, a $265-million federal program that doles out money to produce domestic TV shows. The cable industry is required to pay more than half of the budget, through fees collected from customers on monthly bills. Mr. Shaw has become increasingly upset in recent months that the fund doesn't disclose how and where that money is spent. He wants to see a balance sheet similar to the accounting public companies must produce, and threatened to pull his payments eight months ago.

It has become such a hobby horse that he often does the work at night.

“This is good fun. This is the most fun I've had in a long time. It's my best file,” he says, motioning toward a stack of papers marked CTF. “All of the other financial stuff that I have to do – boring. Not only is this fun, I think it's important.”

Mr. Shaw has sent a barrage of letters to the CTF, most recently questioning why auditors have not yet produced financial statements for the program, which were due a few months ago.

He wants the fund to be accountable to the people who pay into it, and he figures the money could be better spent, suspecting that most Canadians couldn't name five TV shows the dollars are used to produce. And he wants the CTF to get an equity stake out of its investment, so that when successful domestic series are sold internationally, funds are put back in.

The CTF has always stuck in his craw, but it didn't become his cause célèbre until an adviser to former prime minister Jean Chrétien told him that if he wanted to change things in government, he would have to raise a ruckus. “He said ‘If you want to make it an issue, Jim, make it an issue.' So I did.”

In February, after Mr. Shaw dug in his heels and threatened to pull his payments and refund the money to his customers, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission chairman Konrad von Finckenstein agreed to a review of the CTF, but threatened legal action if the company didn't get in line.

“I will litigate, trust me, if there is a further breach,” Mr. von Finckenstein told a Canadian Heritage committee.

Mr. Shaw is not intimidated.

“That's a tough role, boy, we have lots of lawyers too,” he said. “I don't know if I'd be heading down that trail.”

Ottawa doesn't enamour Mr. Shaw either, but he enjoys shaking things up for issues that he believes in. “That Ottawa, that is the town that fun forgot,” he says. “Brutal.”

It's vintage Jim Shaw, the cable guy at 50: He cares about what people think of his company, but he's apt to blithely disregard what people think of him.

Okay. Let's break this down.

A rich guy, who inherited the company Daddy built, wants to be able to decide what programs get made in Canada.

And now we come to the problem of the hammer. You know the hammer, right? The guy whose solution to every problem is to nail something? Well, Jim Shaw is a pipe guy. Cable is pipe. So what we have here is that the guy who owns the pipe wants to decide how to build the house. That sound groovy to you?

The problem is he's got his facts wrong. Like a true pipe guy, he don't know nothin bout birthin no houses.

In the many interviews and attention he got for his stampy-feet routine earlier this year, Shaw was devestating about the shows that no one watched. Problem was, one of his examples was Trailer Park Boys -- a bonafide, quirky, completely Canadian success. Jim Shaw, being a rich white old guy, doesn't get it. So he uses it as an example of what bad programming comes out of the CTF.

That's substituting personal taste for judgement. That's not dealing with reality. I have zero interest in Jim Shaw's tantrum, because I know the way that the drift has actually gone, and I know that in the midst of the worst, leanest funding crisis the domestic production industry has ever known, we are somehow managing to produce the best shows we've ever produced: shows like DaVinci ,or Cold Squad, which finally are being syndicated. Durham County, which rivals Britcrime shows for quality. Corner Gas, Little Mosque -- Slings & Arrows, which gets raves from the NYTimes. Genre stuff like Blood Ties that sells around the world and develops a loyal fan following. And yeah. Trailer Park Boys -- good enough that Ivan Reitman went and produced a movie.

By the way, in a stackup between those two on the content front, uh, I'd back Reitman.

Are there problems with the CTF? Absolutely. Do changes need to be made? Probably. But right now what Jim Shaw wants to do is substitute his judgement for those who are there.

And in his statements thus far, he's proven, unequivocably, that he does not know what the fuck he is talking about.

What do we know that Jim Shaw doesn't?

Plenty, when it comes to this subject. The danger, though, is that Canada is a country that very much loves to listen to its Jim Shaws. Look at the ridiculous CRTC recommendations for the CTF. Jim Shaw's loud voice, bought with your money, backed up by fawning profiles in business-friendly magazines, is shaping the cultural story of Canadian TV.

Do you think that's right?

Cause he has more money than you?

I don't.

Which is why if you are someone who works in Canadian TV, or watches Canadian TV, you need to make sure that the Jim Shaws of this world aren't the only guys being listened to.

We need to make sure that the false narrative -- "Canadians don't want to watch Canadian shows" gets put to rest. We need to remove the comfortable, cozy relationship where outlets that make money on U.S. simulcasts don't tank homemade shows just because it's bad for their business plan.

In the USA, people send nuts to save shows. In Canada, sending a letter or a postcard might just help all the shows.

If you're a Shaw cable subscriber, you may have gotten little mailings in the last little while. They've been playing games with stuff like online surveys with loaded questions that seem to suggest big support for Shaw and his "anti CTF crusade." Do us all a favor, and the next time you pay your bill, send a letter to Shaw.

Wait I have a sample letter for you. Here it is:

Dear Jim Shaw,

Nice Globe article. You're pretty full of yourself.
No offense, but I'd rather have the CTF decide what gets made, rather than a rich white guy who'll point to shows that are successful and popular and claim they're failures.

Stick to laying pipe.

Rock on,
(Your Name Here)

Oh but wait...right...Jim Shaw doesn't care what anyone thinks of him.

I got news for you bubby. Anyone who spins that line in the press -- cares a whole heckuva lot what people think. That's how massive ego works. You know Warren Buffet? There's a guy who doesn't care what people think. Donald Trump? Cares an embarrassing about.

Jim Shaw is way more the latter than the former. Tell him what you think.

And here's the ironic thing: he's not 100% wrong. Some of his ideas -- like having successful shows repay into the fund -- are actually pretty good.

But he's not an expert in this area.

You are. Cause you've got the remote. You're the one with the power.

Jim's just had it so good for so long that he's forgotten that.

Tumbleweeds

WELL, I didn't get my full outline revised and off to the CBC so there'll be cleanup over the weekend.

And the hardworking crew of The Border will be shooting well into the wee hours tonight. But after that, most of us will be on hiatus for a week. Not all - there's some second unit in Ottawa and Vancouver...but that's small by comparison.

Everyone's limping into the weekend, and I hope to read some books -- actual books - this week, see a play, some friends, acquire some life experience, you know -- all the stuff I don't do because I'm chained to a laptop.

Last night I was at The Spoke Club here in Toronto catching up with an old friend who's just shot a new pilot. Much shop talk, much fun, much bumping into old friends and colleagues with news and gossip and yore...

One of those delightful people, friend of the blog Jenncow, sent me an email this morning with a simple little tagline that I think sums up the quest in this business better than most...

Have fun, be nice, do good work.

So I guess I'll leave you with that. Blogging will be light til Labor Day. Have fun.

Don't Just Get MAD, Get Caught Up.

WELL, THAT'S PRETTY smart.

If you dropped off after the pilot or never got the chance to tune in, AMC is giving you all another chance to see MAD MEN.

Starting 9 a.m., Sunday, Sept 2, AMC will run the first 7 episodes in a marathon.

So there you go.
H/T to Maureen Ryan.

And what's all the fuss about? As she puts it:

Some shows are really good at one or two things (for instance, "Psych" is really good at inspired physical comedy and generally entertaining silliness). And that's just fine -- doing one or two things exceptionally well is no small accomplishment.

But then there are shows that wow you in a whole bunch of ways, and "Mad Men" is one of them. I love the detailed period sets and costumes; the cynical, witty dissection of the ad industry; the complicated gender politics; the dispassionate look at what it takes to achieve the American dream; and the startling glimpse of a time when racism, anti-Semitism and sexism were not only routinely ignored but hardly even seen as important issues.




And then there's the acting on the show, which is nothing short of spectacular. All the characters at the fictional Sterling Cooper ad agency are instantly intriguing, and Don Draper, the mysterious ad man played by Jon Hamm, is more fascinating every week. Who is Draper? What makes him tick? In a way, we know even less about him than we ever have, even after five episodes of the show have aired.

Mad Men airs Thursday nights at 10pm on AMC.

Panic in the Streets of L.A.

I'VE BEEN really enjoying Kay Reindl's blog of late. She rings truthful on so many things, and has a front-line reportage style and matter-of-factness that I appreciate.

Yesterday I asked about what people were looking forward to from the new fall schedule. It was partly a plant (and I knew this) because, of course, on the net everyone always favors the sci-fi or fantasy genre shows. But the other reason I was asking was because of the whispering. The whispering I hear-- even waaaaaaaay up here in Canada, is that nobody's too impressed. And there's a lot of dread going into this fall. But what the hell, I'm a million miles away. Let Kay tell you what it feels like in Studio City, CA:

Starting Monday, we've got a meeting a day all week. It feels like development season is cranking up. The studios seem to have just realized that holy CRAP, Labor Day's coming up! MUST BUY PROJECTS! I didn't think it was possible, but this year's even more fucked up than last year. Networks haven't bought a lot yet but the stories about pitching are pretty much the same across the board. Nobody wants to commit to anything. I think part of that is because of the mess that the fall season has become. More shows are in trouble at more networks than ever before. The networks and studios don't have any faith in the product they're putting on in the fall. They can't even pretend they do, because we've all heard the rumors. And you know what? Big effing surprise. The shows they bought are pilots, not TeeVee shows. They constantly order shows that don't have engines. There's a lot of firing of showrunners and actors going on. Too much. The main reason television works -- a vision -- is being excised from the process. So new showrunners are stumbling around in the dark, being forced to start from scratch with a show they didn't conceive.

Think about the best shows you've seen. They can all be traced to a singular vision, can't they? All I see with the fall season is TeeVee by committee, which has never worked. The show I'm enjoying the most right now is Mad Men and boy, does that have a singular vision. It's also got a complex, not always likeable lead character. This isn't something you get with a committee. Every episode of this show is a dark little gem. In episode three, we got to see the three different generations and how they saw each other. A WWII vet, a Korean war vet, and somebody who didn't serve. They don't understand each other at all, which is relayed in a brilliant piece of dialogue delivered by the underrated John Slattery. And last week, we learned more about Don's past. The last scene with his brother was one of the most complex, dark scenes I've seen on American TeeVee in a long-ass time.

Ever since they started talking about the "showrunner school" I've been a little filled with trepidation by what I saw as the erosion of the U.S. writer-showrunner culture. Here in Canada it's my honest opinion (and Lord knows, I've said it before) that the main thing preventing us from creating truly superior product is the lack of this singular vision Kay talks about.

Shows in Canada seem to come largely in three stripes:

1. Inexperiened creator who is "helped" by more experienced producer/director (ie: nibbled to death by ducks or gothic power play between the different positions)
2. Tv by committee (where the network notes are dived on slavishly, everyone gets to weigh in, and the product is reduced to a fine paste)
3. Neverwas shows: shows by someone "with a track record" -- except that "track record" is usually as a U.S. line producer where the closest they ever go to creative was their lunch order.
   

Kay's dead right about Mad Men. Part of why this show is ricocheting like a bullet in my brain is because the layering, the detail, and the slow reveal is just so...measured. Professional. Well executed.

We have had these shows before in Canada: Durham County, Corner Gas, Trailer Park Boys, Our Hero, DaVinci's Inquest, Intelligence, Slings & Arrows.

We just need to make more.

But it's awfully hard to make that argument when you see the edifice crumbling to the south of you.

Aw, bag it. Who wants pie?

CSI Why?

KATE TAYLOR has been taking a kick at the TV beat in the Globe & Mail in the absence of John Doyle, who I hope returns quite bloody soon. It's been hit and miss. But she absolutely nails CSI today:

I have been desperately catching up on my CSI watching in recent days because the CRTC has me spooked. Usually we can trust the broadcast regulator to nothing much of anything that might stand between Canadians and their American television shows, but recently it actually made a ruling. Its ruling was that History Television has until January to dump CSI: NY from its schedule.

History is a specialty channel with the mandate of providing programming that is historically significant to Canadians. It tried to argue that the show's occasional references to the events of Sept. 11 meant that CSI: NY fell within that mandate. For once, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, an organization much given to swallowing whatever codswallop Canada's private broadcasters have on offer, was not buying.

Okay, seriously, I have been watching the CSI shows, ubiquitous in summer reruns, only because I wanted to prove my thesis that CSI is not only the most watched dramatic series on television, it is also the most unpleasant dramatic series on television. The crimes it depicts are brutal and gory, and the forensic specialists who solve them are know-it-all, cold and glib with little sympathy for the bereaved (who often turn out to be murderers themselves or at the very least adulterers, gamblers or alcoholics).

Meanwhile, anyone who has been stupid enough to wind up as a dead body is subject not merely to a messy autopsy but also to contemptuous quips from the forensics team. These jokes are never funny, which may explain why no one in a CSI show ever laughs: These self-important dramas are completely humourless.

So why do millions watch CSI? I have two words for you: The first one is death and the second one is sex.

The forensic scientists themselves, the first ones in the history of policing to conduct interviews with witnesses and to wear Armani suits under their lab coats, never lose their cool. They never scream, they never cry; the most they ever do is squint a bit or make earnest declarations about the cause of justice.

In that same episode of CSI: NY, Detective Mac Taylor (Gary Sinise) began to explain to Det. Bonasera why they had to correct a past forensic oversight that was about to get some guy wrongfully convicted of murder. Taylor was earnest, perhaps a trifle more earnest than he usually is, but to describe him as passionate on the subject would be an insult to lovers everywhere. Bonasera, however, proceeded to tell him she had not seen him this happy and animated about anything in the years since his wife was killed on Sept. 11. To me, the guy looked only one notch above catatonic, but that's what she said. (I hope that, in passing, you took due note of that significant history lesson: People who lost relatives on Sept. 11 are still sad.)

She goes on to stick it to David Caruso in CSI: Miami -- and here's where it gets interesting for me:

In the particular reruns I was watching, he comforted his sister-in-law - if you find deadpan delivery and some crinkling of the crow's feet a comfort - an awful lot. His brother, her husband, is an agent who is supposed to be dead, but actually has gone underground. She is, of course, very beautiful. (She's played by Sofia Milos and is long gone from current episodes of the show.) She, not being a forensics expert, sometimes gets tearful. He narrows his eyes.

Like all possible relations between CSI principals, this one can never be consummated. Sleeping with your sister-in-law! Please, that's the kind of low behaviour one might expect from a secondary character.

Heh heh. Thank God. Anytime someone looks at a CSI show and goes, "huh?" I feel a little bit better about the fact that I CANNOT STAND THE FRANCHISE. The coldness, the humorlessness

How much do I hate CSI? Last Christmas, I found myself in a hospital emergency room with a sick relative. I was there waiting for 4 hours, at 2 in the morning. There were no magazines. The only thing to do was the one TV where Showcase was rerunning 3 episodes of various CSI's.

I opted to stare at the wall.

By the way, Sofia Milos is a very fine actor indeed. Which is why we're so very jazzed to have her in a multi-episodic guest part on The Border.

She's awesome. And in January, you'll get to see how awesome for yourselves.

Golick breaks down Blood Ties

JILL GOLICK'S GOT a breakdown of the Blood Ties pilot up at her digs. Go read.

On the mystery side, Mohan follows not only the investigation but also the villain. In many mystery series, we see the crimes only from the detective's p.o.v. Starting right in the second scene of the teaser, we meet Norman, the villain (he's one of the villains anyway and the guy who calls the evil demon into action). This is great for cranking up the stakes and this storyline provides the scenes for every act breaks except the final curtain on Act Four.

On the premise side of the story, Vicky is introduced to us in the first scene of the teaser. As a result we see her as the central figure in the series and since she's a former cop turned private detective, we quite naturally follow her into the mystery. And since her ex-partner-ex-beau is the cop investigating the same crime his involvement is also organic.

But the third player -- Henry the vampire -- is a little trickier to pull into the story. Mohan introduces him in the third scene of act one. Like Vicky, his first scene is purely for character purposes and only in his second scene does he learn of the crime that he too begins to investigate. He's investigating because the crime looks like it was committed by a vampire and he's afraid that he'll be blamed.

By mid-way through Act One, we have two story lines that are independent investigations of the third story which features the crime unfolding. That puts all three on a collision course.

Short Hits

RIGHT NOW, I'm limping toward a hiatus. There are DVD's piled up beside my TV's that I want to watch. There are six or seven candidates for "book I'm going to read" auditioning themselves on the table beside the couch. And I'm trying to get feedback on one outline and give it on another.

I've got idears for posts, but I'm vamping for a bit while I find the time to do them. Let me break it down for a minute, baby:

• There is now a completely linked and inverse relationship between my love for Entourage and my love for Flight of the Conchords, which HBO recently gave a second season. The latter is as fresh and winning and smile-making as the former is dreary. I thought it was interesting that Entourage this week was a whole lot better simply because Ari was involved with the boys' plot. I don't care about his kids' school. I never did. As for Flight of the Conchords, there simply is nothing bad anyone could ever say about Bowie's In Space:

• Thanks to a friend at NBC/Universal, I've seen the Bionic Woman pilot, and I have thoughts. I'm hoping to write those up in the next couple days. I'm bummed they canned the deaf sister subplot though. I thought that was pretty cool. Oh, and I hope the series stops looking like it was shot on Planet Vancouver.
• I went back and forth about getting a pass for the Toronto International Film Festival this year. But the combination of the fact that I'll be in prep for an episode then, and the fact that they bumped the Industry Pass by 100 bucks on August 7 kind of made my decision for me. But that doesn't mean I'm opposed to seeing films. If you've got your suggestions, or better yet, stray passes to this or that, feel free to set daddy up.
• I'm interested in a reader poll, and here it is: One show from the new fall lineup, and only one -- that you're looking forward to. Not two. One. If you could only watch one, what would it be? I'd like to see if there's any difference between the Americans and the rest of the world on this one.
  

Just Between Us Girls

I SAW A rough, rough cut of my first episode of THE BORDER today.

Episode 103 -- Directed by John Fawcett.

Edited by Brett Sullivan.

And...

Um....how to put this?


Yessssssssssssssss.

When you can see the show and get excited about it at the rough cut, well nelly, you may just have something there.

Across The River To Motor City Canadian Dates Set

FRESHLY CONFIRMED. Read the Playback story here.

Across the River to Motor City will face Global's Shark and CTV's Big Shots when it goes to air this fall, stepping into the Thursday 10 p.m. slot on most Citytv stations in late November.

The six-parter by Devine Entertainment and Jonsworth Productions will bow on the Citys in Toronto, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver on Nov. 22. That date is also the 44th anniversary of the JFK assassination, which seemingly has something to do with -- although producers have been coy on this point -- the murder mystery at the heart of the series, which is set half in the present day, half in 1963.

Winnipeg will be the first to see the series. The City station there will debut Motor City on Nov. 19, at 10 p.m. CT.

The series was co-created by Robert Wertheimer (Charlie Jade, Bollywood/Hollywood) of Jonsworth and the very busy Denis McGrath (Blood Ties, The Border). Wertheimer was also showrunner, cowriter and exec producer, working with execs David Devine and Richard Mozer. Michael DeCarlo directed with David Greene as DOP.

Nov 22 preem date = way cool.

More later -- the "very busy Denis McGrath" has to run off to a read through.

Bless Me Shelley For I Have Sinned.

EPISODE TWO of Californication, and...

...still interested.

And for the life of me I don't know why. I'm not like Alex at Complications Ensue, who generally has a problem with unlikable main characters. But this guy has so little to recommend him. The middle aged writer who women of all stripes throw themselves at is a ridiculous construct. But there's something about the other people that I just find compelling. And Duchovny too, I guess. Although he better do something quick or I'm gonna get bored. And Evan Handler hasn't been this wasted for a long time. And every time I see Pamela Adlon, I mourn Lucky Louie.

At least they got the new husband character right. However much you don't like Duchovny, that guy's way worse.

It can't be just that, like the main character, I hate L.A., can it? I mean, that's crazy talk.

Meanwhile, Mad Men is turning into some heap big interesting Walter Mitty gothic fantasy -- with the revelation that Don Draper's greatest sales job is his own identity. I know I'm not the only one who thought when he went into the box in the last ep that maybe, just maybe, he was going to take care of his newfound brother Sopranos-style. It's testimony to the fact that you don't know this character at all. You don't know what he's going to do -- which was always the sick fascination with Tony. Me likey.

Will has been speculating lately that the stake has finally been driven through the "tv season" and I tend to agree. I fully expected that once the Sopranos, uh...stopped in mid frame, I wouldn't turn on my TV the rest of the summer.That's pretty much been my practice for the last several years. But this year it seems that there was always something to fill a (lighter) viewing schedule. There was enough to watch that I even was able to opt out of some stuff: I didn't go back to Big Love, I dropped out of Rescue Me -- I should have dropped out of John from Cincy after the big parking lot speech...'m on the edge of doing the same for Entourage -- though I kind of want to see the big Cannes episode.

Anyway, if anyone can tell me why I like Californication, I'll offer you a guided tour of my soul. Bring a poncho. The first three rows are going to get wet.

I don't even know what that means.

Blood Ties Tonight!

THE WAIT is over for long-suffering Canadian fans. If you receive via your cable box thingy either the Toronto or Winnipeg feeds for Citytv, you get your chance to see the two hour premiere of Blood Ties tonight at 8 pm.

Calgary and Vancouver, you're up later this week.

Vinay Menon in the Toronto Star has an ouch-y but quite hilarious review -- just click the "Toronto Star" link back there a few words, like.

Enjoy.

The Terrible Twos.

I GOT IT wrong last year. Turns out that today is actually the second anniversary of my first post.

And, as is traditional on this date, I reveal for those who occasionally ask, how this blog came to be called "Dead Things on Sticks."

I've had a run in the last year that even I can't believe. There's a sick sense when you hit a run of being in demand -- you know it's not forever, you feel like you can't possibly turn anything down, lest you never get another job again.

But there's just no getting around the fact that I've had a great run of luck, in an industry that's perpetually on the brink. I am extraordinarily grateful for that good fortune.

Since I started the blog, I've worked on six series. I've story-edited about seven or eight projects for other writers. I've had four shows in development -- one of which was greenlit. I've worked on two other projects for friends of mine -- one of them was a comedy series that so deserved to be on TV that I will always be shocked by the decision not to pick it up. But that's the game.

When I started the blog I was feeling dislocated and disconnected. It was hard to feel the "where" of this industry. In Canada, TV production is spread out in a way that it's not in the USA. And the mechanics of the industry here almost feels sometimes like it's designed to keep writers apart.

One of the aims I had starting this blog was to figure out where and if the heart of this industry lay; if there were other writers out there who thought like I did.

I don't know where that heart is any more than I did then. But I know that it's a tenacious bastard and that anybody trying to kill it better bring the big fucking hob-nailed boots. We will not be stomped under easily.

I have met, through this blog, more people than I can count. We are a community that has not rallied in the past, and I think that's changing, however slowly. That change can't help but be good for the industry.

I'd like to thank a few of the people who have taught me much about what I do, through their insights, comments, and general examples -- Alex Epstein, Will Dixon, Jim Henshaw, Mark Farrell, Shelley Eriksen, Peter Mitchell, John Rogers, Rob Sheridan, Bill Cunningham, Jill Golick, and all the various and sundry others who've stopped by and joined the conversation. (Also, apologies to anyone I'm forgetting and to anyone whose clever little handles I haven't managed to decode yet. Cheeky monkeys.)

I also want to publicly apologize to Diane Kristine, who I managed to infect with the desire to track Canadian TV. It's a measure of just how inadequate publicity in this country is that her "TV, Eh?" site has become the defacto starting point for anybody looking for info on Canadian TV. And it's entirely a labor of love...not even love, exactly, because Diane, like all of us, has a fraught and sometimes puzzled relationship to Canadian TV. When our heads start to disappear up our collective recti, it's the Dianes of this country we have to remember.

There's a new generation of people working in this country who love TV, and want to make TV not as a consolation prize because it's too hard to get into film -- but because that's the medium they love best.

It's worth it, guys. Despite everything. If you don't mind working your butt off, suffering the occasional WTF??? and putting your life on hold sometimes to meet your deadline, it's so worth it.

The WGC, by the way, I think, has figures showing that over 85 percent of their members earn their living in TV... that's food for thought, hmm?

And while we're on the subject of the WGC, I gotta tell you guys, if you haven't joined yet -- consider moving up that timetable. The WGC has come to my aid on several occasions already. Maureen Parker, the Executive Director, works harder for Canadian writers than anyone can possibly know. If we hang on, we hang on largely because of the efforts of Parker and her team.

I write TV because, I'm convinced, I'm not really qualified to do anything else. It's what I love to do. I managed to go to a gathering last night that was essentially a 20th High School reunion. Being able to say, honestly, that you love what you do and you're satisfied, even happy with your professional life? Like the ad says -- it is priceless.

I come from the school where you complain constructively, because you want things to be ever better. I believe "good enough" isn't good enough -- and that that attitude needs to be scourged from our industry because the audience deserves better. I have seen great talent, and great talent that's coming up. Speak up. If you don't, you deserve to be taken advantage of.

This blog picked up some readers through Blood Ties -- so thanks to Peter Mohan for bringing me on board that show. I can't wait for viewers to see my episodes, cause I think they turned out really well. If you came for hot vampire lovin' and stayed for the babble, then thanks for that, too.

And my agent, Glenn Cockburn, deserves a shout out, along with everybody at Meridian Artists, because they've always supported what I try to do here even if it has occasionally made them a bit nervous.

I keep hearing that there is a date for Across The River To Motor City -- and I will put it out here when it's confirmed. And The Border starts in January 2008 -- so it should be a busy couple of months.

When I started this, I thought maybe I'd get a hundred hits a day. I'm humbled by the number of people who tune in and drop by to read what is essentially a very, very narrowly focused conversation. I relish the discourse and the introductions this blog has brought me. It's been a positive force in my life, and I thank you all for being part of that, and for putting up with my perpetual first drafts. First drafts suck, you know. So you've been very gracious about them. But no, I'm still not going to write shorter entries. Too hard.

By the way, my couch is very very comfortable. So don't let anyone ever tell you that there's no such thing as progress.

The Crystal Moment, or Why You Can't Write This Shit.

SOMETHING EXTRAORDINARY happened on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart last night.

I don't think it's much of a leap to predict that any author who came on, having just published a 400 page hagiography of Dick Cheney, was going to get a rough ride.

That being said, Stephen F. Hayes had to be feeling like one of those loose heat tiles on the Shuttle as he tried to bring his Daily Show experience in for a landing last night.

What Hayes couldn't have predicted when this appearance was booked weeks ago, was the appearance over the weekend of the video of Cheney in '94, declaiming in his angry Dad way, all the horrors that would have followed had the U.S. tried to take out Saddam in the Persian Gulf War.

That video, which Stewart also did a piece on last night, has some people scratching their heads. It's on the record that Cheney said these things before, about the first Gulf War...why is this unearthed clip causing such outrage?

It's worth watching from the beginning, just to chart the evolution of the interview. Hayes is obviously uncomfortable off the top -- he knows the question about the Cheney tape is coming. In many ways, Stewart is formidable in these book interviews precisely because he actually does read the books (or at least has a staff who does a really good job of highlighting the relevant points.) In any case, he won't let a happy talk answer stand. How sad that in this media age, that alone makes him stand out.

Hayes goes where you expect he'll go...he tries to have his cake a bit and eat it too, going to great pains to categorize Cheney's likely defense: "Things changed after 9/11" (yes, that again) as HIS response, not mine. But Stewart won't let him wriggle away.

In reaching for the core of why this thing upsets him so much, Stewart tries to do what he does: be funny. But when that doesn't work, when Hayes tries to use it to wriggle away, Stewart does the thing that is breathtaking whenever I see someone on TV smart and brave enough to do it: he asks the very thing the audience is thinking. He won't let it go. And when the answer is unsatisfactory -- how could it not be? -- Stewart goes for his main point: it's not just that he knew and lied. It's that he knew and lied, and along the way, pointed to anyone who didn't buy his disingenuous spin as gospel and questioned their patriotism.

The outraged gasps from the audience are palpable here. It feels to me like an accountability moment.

And that's why that video out there, being played, replayed, sent, resent, chopped up, animated, and referenced on talk shows is important. There are photos from My Lai that started the majority of the American people's turn against Vietnam. The "Smoking Gun" tape was the thing that finally finished Nixon.

With that tape, that small little interview, floating around -- what happens the next time the Republicans try the "criticize our efforts, you help the terrorists and disrespect the soldiers"? Because...the Republicans are still pulling this trick. But I wonder, after that Cheney video, if this video provides the "macaca" moment for that tactic. Probably not.

Because, you know, everything changed after 9/11.

Oh YouTube, you are going to make for one interesting election next year.

The true fun starts a little over halfway in.

How'd I Get To Meet Your Mother In the First Place?

REVISED OUTLINE, you are my nemesis.

But Carter and Craig seem like nice guys, and they get pretty detailed into the "big break" question, which I know everybody always wants to know about...so maybe I'll just keep banging my head against the wall and linkslut this "Watch With Kristin" interview with Carter Bays and Craig Thomas.

On any given day during the production of How I Met Your Mother, what are you actually doing? How do you go from a blank page to the product that's ready for air?
Well, in two years of doing the show, Craig and I have sort of discovered what's important and what isn't. And what is most important is story. So, we'll sit down with—not the whole writing staff—but me and Craig and usually two other writers in a room, with a dry-erase board, to figure out what the episode is going to be about.

You know, Phil Rosenthal wrote a book called You're Lucky You're Funny, which Craig and I are both reading right now. He talks about how Carl Reiner, on The Dick Van Dyke Show, would shut all the writers in a room and say, "What happened at your house this weekend?" And that's where the story comes from.

So, it sort of starts off as a few hours of therapy, talking about what we're feeling. You know, we'll be talking about what secrets do you tell your partner, and what do you keep from them, and that will eventually turn into [the] Robin Sparkles [episode]. Or we'll say, "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if Robin was a Canadian pop star?" and we'll work our way backward, figuring out how you get to that. We sort of chart it all on the white board, and then we can assign that story to one of our writers.

When the story is broken and the scripts are locked, is the bulk of your job done, or are you heavily involved in what's happening on set and in the edit?
Well, it seems like so much of the great stuff comes out on the set and in the edit room, but if a script is solid, it is like a huge, weeklong sigh of relief. But with some scripts, you know, when the actors are rehearsing scenes for camera, to figure out angles, we're completely rewriting those scenes in the midst of it.