Nice Place To Start Out...

...but I wouldn't expect to have much of a career there.

Denis McGrath has an excellent post up this morning about a number of issues facing the Canadian TV industry...and he makes some great points about how easy it is to get started in this business in this country, but really difficult to keep a career going. Read it HERE.

Nothing we do seems to create anything to build on. Admittedly, a lack of public interest in original home-grown programming combined with an over-reliance on U.S. service work using tax credit rebates and government subsidies doesn't help, but it sure can get demoralizing and frustrating.

Denis also references what has been going down recently out here in Saskatchewan.

If you're not a resident of Saskatchewan, you may not yet be aware of the latest doom n'gloom in the Canadian TV industry. In short, last week, Saskatchewan's only true local station, SCN, was shut down. In addition, the government refused to increase subsidies and tax credits to the province's film industry to help it keep up with other provinces, and an equipment supplier who'd set up shop in Regina is pulling out.

Basically, the entire film & TV production industry in that province is imploding. This is an industry that was built up through a bit of service work, and mainly on the back of Corner Gas. But with that show shuttered, the dollar high & times hard, everything is tumbling together at once.

In Canada, it seems, it is ever thus.

Okay so his facts may be a little off regarding how the industry was built up (believe it or not there was a small but thriving community here before Corner Gas (and Little Mosque, and Renegadepress.com)), but the sentiment is well-intended and well-taken.

I was part of a small group here in Saskatchewan 20 odd years ago that joined SMPIA (Sask Motion Picture Industry Association) and helped lobby for SCN and SaskFILM. And it worked. And then I moved away and more hearty and determined souls pushed and lobbied and got a Tax Credit rebate program and a state of the art Soundstage and numerous other pluses and advantages for this small industry.

It didn't come simply and easily, but it all helped create and maintain a film and TV industry infrastructure that allowed us to tell our stories and be able to get them out there to be seen.

And then the government changed hands and the world had a recession and the film and TV business financing model as we knew it got broke and new media stormed the scene...and here we are today, starting over again it seems.

The abrupt shutting down of the Saskatchewan Communications Network was a shock and deals a serious blow to local film and television, especially for emerging and up and coming filmmakers. Its closure should not go unquestioned and without protest.




Go HERE and show your support for SCN. And if you live in Saskatchewan please get involved and join SMPIA to help your voice be heard, but not to try to get the old SCN back. Seriously. That horse has left the stable. We need to move forward and push for a new local network or "broadcaster" (however that will be defined in near future) that not only encompasses digital strategy and delivers local/regional programming to the province, but also has the ability to trigger investment from the likes of federal agencies like Telefilm and the Canada Media Fund. THAT needs to be the next "lobbying" agenda.

Getting off soapbox now. Spring has sprung and I'm going outside to try to enjoy it.

I hope you can enjoy your day too.

LOST!

Friday fun and uber cool is this Lost title sequence given the Saul Bass treatment.

Lost vs. Saul Bass from Hexagonall on Vimeo.

Because it makes me smile.

From The Master Of The Romantic Thriller...

...some Friday Fun on Thursday, I give you Birdemic!




Shock and terror indeed! There is no craft to be learned here...but that doesn't mean we still can't marvel in awe and wonder. The Behind The Scenes EPK is almost as awesome!




Co-produced by Carl Daft. Seriously.



PS Please go show your support here for regional pubcaster SCN (Saskatchewan Communications Network) ...they may not have turned out "Birdemic", but they sure helped a lot of emerging filmmakers and TV producers over the years while always remaining legitimately a "local" television network.

CRTC Reports Make Me Crafty

Brain is still aching after wading through the CRTC's new TV policy report (HERE) from yesterday and today's Value of Local Television Signal report (HERE)...38,000+ words to suss and parse. And my puny thoughts thus far are that for every step forward there seems to be another step back or sideways...Denis McGrath covers it all really well in this overview HERE at Dead Things On Sticks...so instead I am going to continue what began this week in my Mamet post with more screenwriting crafty goodness.

The One Pager.

There's an excellent post HERE from the UK's Michelle Lipton on writing the "one page outline" or as she describes..."a one page selling document designed to generate interest in your project from producers."

I like this post a lot because even though we hear that producers and broadcasters need pilot scripts and bibles or mini-bibles or treatments or season arcs and character bios when you pitch them a potential project, if, at the end of the day you can summarize your concept in one clear concise effective and entertaining page, I feel you will come out further ahead more times than not. Prospective buyers or optioners of your projects will say they need all of the above to judge the value of your property, but in reality they don't really want to read all that stuff.

At least not at first.

As Lipton writes in her post:

I like to say what it is right at the top underneath the title so that whoever you’re giving it to knows what they’re reading before they start. I think it makes a difference to how you think about it as you go through the outline if you know it’s a one-off play, a long-running drama series, a three part serial, a sitcom or what have you. It especially helps to know whether it’s a comedy or a drama, and if it’s a specific genre, that helps too.

Logline

AN INTERESTING CHARACTER has a GOAL, in the way of which are various OBSTACLES which he overcomes/does not overcome and ultimately LEARNS SOMETHING.

This is a very formulaic approach to writing a logline, but it works. Telling your story in one sentence is not an easy thing to do well, and it might well take longer to get this right than it does to write the rest of the outline. But it’s worth it. It not only narrows your story down to its essence and keeps it clear in your mind what your story is really about, it helps a producer coming to your outline cold so they know what they’re being offered.

Look at it from the producer’s point of view. You’re busy working on loads of different projects in different stages of development. You’re honing pitches to take to commissioners, giving notes on drafts of scripts, dealing with casts and budgets and technical or practical problems on projects already in production, you’ve got media, marketing and press to deal with, agents and contracts and legal departments to worry about – and on top of all that, you’ve got a mountain of new material to wade through to decide which projects you want to put into development next. Some of these will be from agents, some will be from writers you already know or have worked with before, and some will be from writers you’ve never heard of who’ve dropped you a polite email asking if you’d like to look at their outline…

There is every chance that the project you, the writer, is developing and trying to sell, will be too close to another project already commissioned or in development for them to be able to take it any further. A producer might also have preferences about which genres or types of stories they’re personally interested in. If they can tell right from the off that this is a project they’re interested in because they’ve read a good logline summing it all up right at the start, they’re going to read the rest of your proposal with a more open mind.

I think Lipton's exactly right. And her post proceeds to walk you through the process section by section and makes some really good suggestions as to how to put your one page pitch...erm, outline...together. Seriously good...go read it. Now.


And as to whether having a good one page pitch will work in a new Canadian TV landscape after the CRTC decisions? Well, I need to reread those 38,000 words again to see if any of my current ideas would be appropriate for the likes of Star! or TVtropolis, which is where I could see a lot Cancon ending up in the very near future.

LETTERS FROM MAMET

This is basically just a cut, lift, and paste (courtesy Kevin Parnell) from Karen Walton's Ink Canada facebook group discussion board. It's a letter David Mamet purportedly sent his writers on the TV series The Unit a few years back. And even though it's mostly advice he's relayed previously in books like On Directing Film I'm a bit of a Mamet groupie, so um...read, absorb, and enjoy. The ALL CAPS can make it seem like you're being lectured or shouted at, but still... screenwriting crafty goodness.


TO THE WRITERS OF THE UNIT

GREETINGS.

AS WE LEARN HOW TO WRITE THIS SHOW, A RECURRING PROBLEM BECOMES CLEAR.

THE PROBLEM IS THIS: TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN *DRAMA* AND NON-DRAMA. LET ME BREAK-IT-DOWN-NOW.

EVERYONE IN CREATION IS SCREAMING AT US TO MAKE THE SHOW CLEAR. WE ARE TASKED WITH, IT SEEMS, CRAMMING A SHITLOAD OF *INFORMATION* INTO A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

OUR FRIENDS. THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO COMMUNICATE *INFORMATION* — AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.

BUT NOTE:THE AUDIENCE WILL NOT TUNE IN TO WATCH INFORMATION. YOU WOULDN’T, I WOULDN’T. NO ONE WOULD OR WILL. THE AUDIENCE WILL ONLY TUNE IN AND STAY TUNED TO WATCH DRAMA.

QUESTION:WHAT IS DRAMA? DRAMA, AGAIN, IS THE QUEST OF THE HERO TO OVERCOME THOSE THINGS WHICH PREVENT HIM FROM ACHIEVING A SPECIFIC, *ACUTE* GOAL.

SO: WE, THE WRITERS, MUST ASK OURSELVES *OF EVERY SCENE* THESE THREE QUESTIONS.

1) WHO WANTS WHAT?
2) WHAT HAPPENS IF HER DON’T GET IT?
3) WHY NOW?

THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE LITMUS PAPER. APPLY THEM, AND THEIR ANSWER WILL TELL YOU IF THE SCENE IS DRAMATIC OR NOT.

IF THE SCENE IS NOT DRAMATICALLY WRITTEN, IT WILL NOT BE DRAMATICALLY ACTED.

THERE IS NO MAGIC FAIRY DUST WHICH WILL MAKE A BORING, USELESS, REDUNDANT, OR MERELY INFORMATIVE SCENE AFTER IT LEAVES YOUR TYPEWRITER. *YOU* THE WRITERS, ARE IN CHARGE OF MAKING SURE *EVERY* SCENE IS DRAMATIC.

THIS MEANS ALL THE “LITTLE” EXPOSITIONAL SCENES OF TWO PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD. THIS BUSHWAH (AND WE ALL TEND TO WRITE IT ON THE FIRST DRAFT) IS LESS THAN USELESS, SHOULD IT FINALLY, GOD FORBID, GET FILMED.

IF THE SCENE BORES YOU WHEN YOU READ IT, REST ASSURED IT *WILL* BORE THE ACTORS, AND WILL, THEN, BORE THE AUDIENCE, AND WE’RE ALL GOING TO BE BACK IN THE BREADLINE.

SOMEONE HAS TO MAKE THE SCENE DRAMATIC. IT IS NOT THE ACTORS JOB (THE ACTORS JOB IS TO BE TRUTHFUL). IT IS NOT THE DIRECTORS JOB. HIS OR HER JOB IS TO FILM IT STRAIGHTFORWARDLY AND REMIND THE ACTORS TO TALK FAST. IT IS *YOUR* JOB.

EVERY SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC. THAT MEANS: THE MAIN CHARACTER MUST HAVE A SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, PRESSING NEED WHICH IMPELS HIM OR HER TO SHOW UP IN THE SCENE.

THIS NEED IS WHY THEY *CAME*. IT IS WHAT THE SCENE IS ABOUT. THEIR ATTEMPT TO GET THIS NEED MET *WILL* LEAD, AT THE END OF THE SCENE,TO *FAILURE* – THIS IS HOW THE SCENE IS *OVER*. IT, THIS FAILURE, WILL, THEN, OF NECESSITY, PROPEL US INTO THE *NEXT* SCENE.

ALL THESE ATTEMPTS, TAKEN TOGETHER, WILL, OVER THE COURSE OF THE EPISODE, CONSTITUTE THE *PLOT*.

ANY SCENE, THUS, WHICH DOES NOT BOTH ADVANCE THE PLOT, AND STANDALONE (THAT IS, DRAMATICALLY, BY ITSELF, ON ITS OWN MERITS) IS EITHER SUPERFLUOUS, OR INCORRECTLY WRITTEN.

YES BUT YES BUT YES BUT, YOU SAY: WHAT ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF WRITING IN ALL THAT “INFORMATION?”

AND I RESPOND “*FIGURE IT OUT*” ANY DICKHEAD WITH A BLUESUIT CAN BE (AND IS) TAUGHT TO SAY “MAKE IT CLEARER”, AND “I WANT TO KNOW MORE *ABOUT* HIM”.

WHEN YOU’VE MADE IT SO CLEAR THAT EVEN THIS BLUESUITED PENGUIN IS HAPPY, BOTH YOU AND HE OR SHE *WILL* BE OUT OF A JOB.

THE JOB OF THE DRAMATIST IS TO MAKE THE AUDIENCE WONDER WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. *NOT* TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT JUST HAPPENED, OR TO*SUGGEST* TO THEM WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

ANY DICKHEAD, AS ABOVE, CAN WRITE, “BUT, JIM, IF WE DON’T ASSASSINATE THE PRIME MINISTER IN THE NEXT SCENE, ALL EUROPE WILL BE ENGULFED IN FLAME”

WE ARE NOT GETTING PAID TO *REALIZE* THAT THE AUDIENCE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND THE NEXT SCENE, BUT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WRITE THE SCENE BEFORE US SUCH THAT THE AUDIENCE WILL BE INTERESTED IN WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

YES BUT, YES BUT YES *BUT* YOU REITERATE.

AND I RESPOND *FIGURE IT OUT*.

*HOW* DOES ONE STRIKE THE BALANCE BETWEEN WITHHOLDING AND VOUCHSAFING INFORMATION? *THAT* IS THE ESSENTIAL TASK OF THE DRAMATIST. AND THE ABILITY TO *DO* THAT IS WHAT SEPARATES YOU FROM THE LESSER SPECIES IN THEIR BLUE SUITS.

FIGURE IT OUT.

START, EVERY TIME, WITH THIS INVIOLABLE RULE: THE *SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC*. it must start because the hero HAS A PROBLEM, AND IT MUST CULMINATE WITH THE HERO FINDING HIM OR HERSELF EITHER THWARTED OR EDUCATED THAT ANOTHER WAY EXISTS.

LOOK AT YOUR LOG LINES. ANY LOGLINE READING “BOB AND SUE DISCUSS…” IS NOT DESCRIBING A DRAMATIC SCENE.

PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR OUTLINES ARE, GENERALLY, SPECTACULAR. THE DRAMA FLOWS OUT BETWEEN THE OUTLINE AND THE FIRST DRAFT.

THINK LIKE A FILMMAKER RATHER THAN A FUNCTIONARY, BECAUSE, IN TRUTH, *YOU* ARE MAKING THE FILM. WHAT YOU WRITE, THEY WILL SHOOT.

HERE ARE THE DANGER SIGNALS. ANY TIME TWO CHARACTERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.

ANY TIME ANY CHARACTER IS SAYING TO ANOTHER “AS YOU KNOW”, THAT IS, TELLING ANOTHER CHARACTER WHAT YOU, THE WRITER, NEED THE AUDIENCE TO KNOW, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.

DO *NOT* WRITE A CROCK OF SHIT. WRITE A RIPPING THREE, FOUR, SEVEN MINUTE SCENE WHICH MOVES THE STORY ALONG, AND YOU CAN, VERY SOON, BUY A HOUSE IN BEL AIR *AND* HIRE SOMEONE TO LIVE THERE FOR YOU.

REMEMBER YOU ARE WRITING FOR A VISUAL MEDIUM. *MOST* TELEVISION WRITING, OURS INCLUDED, SOUNDS LIKE *RADIO*. THE *CAMERA* CAN DO THE EXPLAINING FOR YOU. *LET* IT. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERS *DOING* -*LITERALLY*. WHAT ARE THEY HANDLING, WHAT ARE THEY READING. WHAT ARE THEY WATCHING ON TELEVISION, WHAT ARE THEY *SEEING*.

IF YOU PRETEND THE CHARACTERS CANT SPEAK, AND WRITE A SILENT MOVIE, YOU WILL BE WRITING GREAT DRAMA.

IF YOU DEPRIVE YOURSELF OF THE CRUTCH OF NARRATION, EXPOSITION,INDEED, OF *SPEECH*. YOU WILL BE FORGED TO WORK IN A NEW MEDIUM - TELLING THE STORY IN PICTURES (ALSO KNOWN AS SCREENWRITING)

THIS IS A NEW SKILL. NO ONE DOES IT NATURALLY. YOU CAN TRAIN YOURSELVES TO DO IT, BUT YOU NEED TO *START*.

I CLOSE WITH THE ONE THOUGHT: LOOK AT THE *SCENE* AND ASK YOURSELF “IS IT DRAMATIC? IS IT *ESSENTIAL*? DOES IT ADVANCE THE PLOT?

ANSWER TRUTHFULLY.

IF THE ANSWER IS “NO” WRITE IT AGAIN OR THROW IT OUT. IF YOU’VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS, CALL ME UP.

LOVE, DAVE MAMET
SANTA MONICA 19 OCTO 05

(IT IS *NOT* YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW THE ANSWERS, BUT IT IS YOUR, AND MY, RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW AND TO *ASK THE RIGHT Questions* OVER AND OVER. UNTIL IT BECOMES SECOND NATURE. I BELIEVE THEY ARE LISTED ABOVE.)


Good stuff.

PS: I also liked Peter Mitchell's advice in the Ink Canada comments:

"Here's a super simple trick. Once you've written a scene or a script look for the "question marks" after each character's speech. Is the question being asked so that the other person in the scene can provide exposition. if so, consider revising it so the "exposition" comes as a declarative statement rather than an answer."


Excellent.

Clapper Loader F*ckin Geneeeius!

This is a little bit inside baseball, but the 2nd Camera Assistant on a movie crew loads raw film into the camera mags and operates the clapperboard. Geraldine Brezca (according to imdb) worked as 2nd AC Clapper Operator on Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds, and she called out the slate by assigning fun words to the letters that follow the shot number and delivering them with unbridled enthusiasm.

This made me happy on so many levels...mostly because it brought flooding back how great it can be working on a film set.




And because it made me smile.

But Where's BJ & The Bear Or The Littlest Hobo?

It's piano playing Youtube week here at Uninflected Images...enjoy some of your favourite TV theme songs in this creative little medley. (twins or split screen?)



The end.

Obsolete Says What?

Next Monday afternoon the CRTC will release a TV Policy report including decisions on a group-based licensing approach to conventional television and on fee-for-carriage or value-for-signal. I'm hearing whispers that a 'skinny basic' cable package of local/Canadian TV channels will be created or recommended but channels won't be considered *must carry* anymore so negotiation of value for signal will need to take place between cable providers and TV networks...but who really knows for sure - we'll just have to wait and see.

But while you're waiting and seeing I suggest you go and watch The Great Debate panel that took place in Ottawa in February at Prime Time 2010. The topic was: Be it Resolved that Broadcasting and Distribution Regulations are Obsolete In an age of seismic shifts in content creation and consumption, what will be the role of the CRTC and of regulation in five or ten years time?

Find the video for the first part HERE at The CFTPA Channel. Actually, just start with PART 2...that's where it really gets going.

With 8 parts it's a long haul, but well worth your time.

Chat Us A Song You're The Piano Man

Chatroulette is the latest social media-like time-wasting craze to sweep the nation...and everybody seems to be enjoying checking it out, until someone gets hurt of course. But even though it's quickly become just a site to show off your junk, that still doesn't keep creative people from having some fun with it.



Nice one Centurion...well played. I just hope no one asks him to put bread in his jar.

How Does Trending On Twitter Work...Really

What began yesterday as a simple and innocent enough tweet: "It's my secret dream to one day see my name trending on Twitter, as long as it's not for doing something really stupid...or followed by RIP." generated a flurry of twittering from lots of fun online friends using the hashtag #wcdixonRIP...and my resulting fake demise trending #1 in Canada by late afternoon.

That's right...number 1 in Canada.

It seemed too easy, or certainly spoke to it being a very VERY slow news day in our country. But I did find it a fascinating experiment in trying to determine the power potential of social media. Because once on the trending list, it opened the door for complete strangers to check out wcdixon and why is he RIPing. And then they tweeted their followers, who tweeted their followers, and so on and so forth.

Now most of the comments or messages I received were of the "Who the ef is wcdixon?" or "wcdixonRIP? WTF?" nature, but still, the word was spreading. And it did show me if it was promotion for a new film or TV project, one could potentially reach a lot of tweeps. But it has to happen organically - ask or tell people to do it and it probably would've died a quick death, no pun intended. Oh and I did feel bad for a few friends who arrived on Twitter mid afternoon and saw the hashtag and were initially surprised: wcdixonRIP...seriously? The irony is that when I do eventually kick the bucket I doubt very much any trending will occur. But still, t'was fun to see what it might be like...like Friday Fun (even though it was a Thursday).

Because it made me smile.

How Does The Internet Work...Really

This HERE old post of mine has been getting 100+ hits a day from all over the world for the past couple of months or so, but I can't tell how people are finding it. I mean, it's not like they're coming from google searches or links to the post on other blogs or websites...they're all just *showing up*.

Weird.

How To Tweet A Good Joke

Last night I took in the Oscars telecast at home on the television...but also in the company of many smart and funny Canadian TV/Media Twitter partners in crime connected via the hashtag #glush. (Don't ask what *glush* means exactly because I don't really know. It was conceived back during the Golden Globe awards ceremony and is some kind of amalgamation between the words Globes and Glug and Lush in order to convey the sentiment of "drinking games and snarky comments while watching big awards show". It just sorta stuck....not to mention it is quick and easy to type.)

Anyway, during the presentation of the Best Short Documentary category some funny business went down that was a little awkward and unusual and unsettling even. Roger Ross Williams took the stage to receive the Oscar trophy for "Music By Prudence", but before he got three words of his thank you speech out, a seemingly agitated older woman also took the stage and commandeered the microphone. She yelled out a few things and he smiled uncomfortably and then they cut the mic and the orchestra played them off.

Now when tweeting these events in a group setting a la #glush, there is pressure to be funny. Oh sure you can just comment: "Cool!" or "Yay!" or "Nice dress!", or offer an opinion: "Boring!" or "This sucks!" or "I wish Whoopi was hosting"...but generally you try to tweet something clever or witty. I try to be clever and witty, but my brain doesn't tend to work as fast as some, and most of my tweets kinda just lay there.

So when the above described incident transpired, I tweeted:

Not bad, but more of an observation than a joke per say. The closest I got to comedy territory was the #callsecurity hashtag.

But at the same time I tweeted the above, someone at @funnyordie tweeted:



And I was like: "Doh! Now that's a joke." (and thus Retweeeted it...the Twitter version of kudos)

Observing that something unusual took place during the Oscars and commenting on it isn't really a joke. Tying what happened on stage last night back to Kayne West's infamous hijacking of Taylor Swift's mic during the MTV Video Awards to proclaim Beyonce should have won is a joke.

And judging from some of todays headlines like HERE about said Oscar incident, several other people made the same comedic connection....though they had time to think about their headline, whereas the Tweeter at @funnyordie made it up on the spot.

I'm not sure what the writing lesson is in all of this, but I know I learned something: as in, anybody can tweet their opinion or an observation...but it takes a special talent to spontaneously tweet a good joke. It also reminded me what it takes to succeed in the TV and show biz racket...you not only need to be good, you also need to be fast.


In other movie news, please find below for your viewing pleasure a great send up trailer from Cracked.com for "every Academy Award winning film ever":

A Trailer for Every Academy Award Winning Movie Ever -- powered by Cracked.com

And finally, ABC's Modern Family Oscar-themed commercial from last night...that we didn't get to see up here in Canada due to simulcasting:




Funny!

Someone Coughed In My Mouth

Sick as a dog with the wickedest cold I've had in a long time (thanks, but we didn't really need to know that, Will), so not feeling very Friday Fun...in which case, pull out the Louis CK. He may be NSFW most of the time, but he's always funny.



And as backup go watch Jon Stewart take a hilarious run at Chat Roulette on the Daily Show last night HERE , or maybe HERE....depending if in Canada or US, of course.


Because they made me smile.

Own The Prejudice

Springboarding off DMc's most excellent Gold Is Everywhere post yesterday and some tweets that made me go: "Hmmm..." (also from yesterday, courtesy @camdocorg, @klashton27, @gregobr, and yours truly)













Not long ago my kids were watching Family Channel... Naturally Sadie was on I think...and at some point my daughter shook her head and said, "Ugh!" I asked what was wrong, and she muttered something about how much the show bugged her. And I mentioned it was Canadian-made, and her eyes lit up and she exclaimed: "Well no wonder it sucks!" My son agreed wholeheartedly.

When queried as to why they felt this way, they referred to the same vague criticisms that I've heard from other "regular folks" over the years - the lighting or sound seems different...the acting is kinda lame...the jokes or the writing isn't that good....it's just too earnest or serious or stupid even. And conversely, when I pointed out to them that a few shows they did enjoy (Life With Derek, 6Teen) were homegrown, they seemed at first surprised and then almost disappointed, like their image of said programs was now tainted or spoiled.

Where did this negative attitude come from? It's not like I gather the kids round the dinner table each night and teach them the glorious ways of the American television broadcasting model whilst puhshawing and spitting upon that which is Made In Canada. How had this come to pass?

So I pressed the issue, and this is what my kids told me... 1) since our prime time schedules are primarily made up of US imports and that constitutes "the norm", the few shows we do make stand out and are more open to scrutiny and attack. The other thing I heard from them was... 2) the lack of promotion, or more like the over-promotion of US import shows on our networks made our Canadian series, again, stand out as being unworthy or certainly less worthy of a show to get behind and support and, god forbid, enjoy.

This has created a stigma. A negative image of and lack of pride for our homegrown programs. And that stigma breeds prejudice against them.

Now, imagine if you will, our prime time schedules filled with homegrown sitcoms and comedy shows and cop and doctor and lawyer shows and singing and dancing and dating/Bachelor-like competitions.... and then a couple of times a week you had a House or a 30 Rock slotted in. What if that was "the norm" - do you think the anti-Canadian TV show stigma would still be so prevalent? I don't.

And as for promotion, 1.9 million tuned in for the premieres of Hiccups and Dan For Mayor last Monday night. Those are some huge numbers by Canadian standards. And just as importantly, the numbers stayed constant throughout the hour...as in, people didn't just tune in for the first 5 minutes and then click away. They stuck around. And this was aided immensely by the fact that CTV promoted the shit out of them throughout their coverage of the Winter Olympics.

Look, I know bad is bad and good is good, no matter where shows are produced. The viewer is the ultimately decider. And the shows we make have to engage and entertain when they get to air, that's our job and responsibility as creators and makers of Canadian TV. We need to deliver with gold...much like how many of our Canadian athletes delivered with gold medal performances in Vancouver recently. But in order to do that we need the support and backing and yes, money, from the Canadian TV networks and funding agencies in order to make them as good as they can be using the finest talent this country has to offer. And our shows also need to be promoted as worthy of the general public's time and attention. Positive promotion creates value and pride which in turn reduces negative stigmas and prejudice.

Coming full circle, during the Olympics I asked my daughter if she would watch Hiccups and Dan For Mayor. She shrugged and said they weren't really her cup of tea, but she might check them out. I reminded her that they were both Canadian shows. And she thought a minute and then shrugged and said that didn't matter because "...they looked alright."

We aren't born with prejudice already inside us - it is taught. And in the case of Canadian TV it isn't overt and obvious teaching like via parents or church sermons or teachers in classrooms, but in a more subtle subversive manner...like making so few homegrown shows, the lack of promotion for them, the ghetto time slots, and pandering reviewers: "It's not bad, for a Canadian show."

Teach our kids differently - show them more homegrown shows, promote them accordingly, and the stigma will be removed. And maybe we in the Canadian TV industry can also own the podium.

Dan For Mayor Has Hiccups (No, Not Really)

I joked last week that CTV's ads during the Olympics for a new episode of Corner Gas entitled "Dan The Mayor Has Hiccups" or something like that looked pretty good...I hope my friends and colleagues who work on the two shows knew I was just kidding....guys? Guys? Bueller?

Yes there are two shows, two new half hour comedy shows, that premiere back to back tonight on the CTV network. First up, from the very funny mind of Brent Butt, is Hiccups starring Nancy Robertson. Second up, from the very funny minds of Mark Farrell and Paul Mather and Kevin White, is Dan For Mayor starring Fred Ewanuick.

Unfortunately, I'm not on any 'screener lists' so am unable to offer up a review or even a preview, but I do wish the two shows the best and strongly encourage everyone to check them out. I mean, they can't be any worse than The Marriage Ref which got 14.5 million people for its premiere last night, can they? Can they? Bueller?

And if you want to try to live chat with the stars of the two above programs, you can find out how to do so HERE.


Also, 18 To Life returns with a new episode tonight on CBC TV, co-written by another Corner Gas alumnus Rob Sheridan.

And finally, some of today's must read posts about Canadian TVland: Jim Henshaw snarks in a good way about Telefilm's recent 'actor issues' HERE; and Denis McGrath posits HERE that last night's Winter Olympics closing ceremony was a game changer of sorts for the neverending Canadian identity crisis.

Enjoy!