From the files of Rob Ford's psychiatrist

Most people are unaware of the incident that traumatized Rob Ford as a child:

My Canada 150 Presentation: "The Creative and Competitive Economy"

What follows is an expanded version of what was supposed to be a five minute presentation at the Canada 150: Halton conference - and a MUCH expanded version of the 2 1/2 minutes I actually got to speak.
____________________________

Canadian Culture in the Digital Age

Canada has always faced unique challenges to establishing our cultural identity. We are geographically vast, culturally diverse, sparsely populated, multi-lingual... and we sit right next door to one of the most prolific producers of film, television and music in the world.

All we have to unite us as a people and as a culture across such vast divides are our stories, whether told through film, television, literature, music or journalism. But we need two things: the ability to create those stories, and the space to share them.

Looking at the rather vague subject of this challenge as a creative person, two questions interest me:

1) How do we develop funding models for the arts, film, television, and journalism in the digital age?

This is a problem not unique to Canada. The cultural industries and institutions of countries all around the world - especially in North America - are facing a crisis due to advances in technology and profound changes in how people access information, entertainment and culture.

Up until recently, reproduction and distribution of books, newspapers, music, film and television programming has been an expensive endeavor, requiring the participation of record companies, book and newspaper publishers, television broadcasters, film studios and so on.

Today, the function of these entities is eroding as technology enables many artists to produce and distribute their own work, and for their audience to access that work directly, all for minimal cost.

The problem is, people are used to the idea that they are paying for physical media. They buy records or CDs, not music. They buy DVDs, not films; books, not words; newspapers, not news.

Without physical media, how do we value these works, and how do we ensure that artists and writers are compensated for their work? Can we continue to use advertising and sponsorship as the primary means of monetizing broadcasting and news, or will we need to find more direct means as the functions of television and print media are increasingly transfered to the internet?


2) Is there still a need to protect Canadian culture?

The sad fact is, we know more about American history and American democracy than our own because these things aren't just taught in schools - they are taught by the movies and TV shows we watch and the books we read.

One example: my son's grade 9 Canadian History class did a unit on World War II, and spent 11 hours of class time watching 'Band of Brothers' because the teacher couldn't find any film or television productions which depicted the Canadian experience in that war. I find that horrifying.

Another example: during the coalition 'crisis', many Canadians were under the impression that they had elected our Prime Minister directly - possibly because they were influenced by watching the electoral goings on south of the border.

When I was a kid, I lived in the suburbs. But I knew about downtown Toronto by watching King of Kensington, where people of many cultures, races and ethnicities all lived and worked peaceably together. This contrasted sharply with what I was seeing on American shows like 'All in the Family'.

I had never travelled to the west coast, but I knew what it was like there from watching The Beachcombers. In fact, my first impression of Native Canadians was from watching that show.

I have never travelled to Canada's arctic, but I feel that I know what life is like there from watching 'North of 60'. The U.S. show 'Northern Exposure' aired during the same period, and I remember watching it and thinking, "what's with all the white people? I thought this was the North!"

Ensuring that Canadian stories are told in film and television isn't just about nationalism or patriotism - in a country this vast and disparate, this is fundamental to how we know ourselves and understand each other. Short of moving into someone's house, film and television are perhaps the most powerful means of generating understanding between people because they allow us to see through another's eyes and walk a few miles in their shoes.

Without that ability, misunderstandings arise and soon fester. If 'King of Kensington' had been set in Calgary, we might not have some of the problems we have today.

So, what do we do about it? To start, here are three practical things I would recommend:

1) Abolish simultaneous substitution in television broadcasting.

When you watch a show on NBC or CBS that is also being shown on CTV at the same time, CTV overrides the signal coming in from the U.S. and substitutes their own - including their own commercials. In other words, Canadian broadcasters are double dipping, and are therefore rewarded for re-broadcasting hit US shows all night long.

Our private broadcasters have long claimed that Canadian content regulations prevent them from being competitive, and lower the quality of Canadian productions by shielding them from competition with American shows. But in reality, it is simultaneous substitution that is in fact protecting and shielding the broadcasters from having to compete.

By doing away with simultaneous substitution, Canada's private broadcasters will no longer have a monopoly on the airing of U.S. programming in Canada, and will therefore have an incentive to create something different from what the U.S. networks are airing. Something, perhaps, Canadian.

2) Don't take the punitive copyright protection approach.

Copyright doesn't protect artists - it was never intended to. It was originally designed to protect the state's licensing and control of publishing and theatre, and today serves mainly to protect publishers, broadcasters and film producers.

One example: a member of my family who shall remain nameless does props and wardrobe work in the film and television industry, mainly as an independent contractor. On one recent production, he decided to make a duplicate of one of the pieces for himself on his own time.

When he tried to sell this piece online, he immediately heard from the studio lawyers who informed him that despite the fact that he had designed and made the piece himself, had never sold it to the studio, and had never signed anything giving them rights to his creation, it nevertheless was their intellectual property.

He was told to not just remove it from sale, but to physically destroy it and submit photographs as evidence of its destruction. Which of course he did, immediately, because we're just not the kind of people who can afford to hire a team of lawyers.

So no, copyright law is not generally designed to protect artists.

Instead of following the U.S. example of locking up teenagers for downloading movies and music, or digitally locking down media so that it cannot be transfered or converted by the person who bought it, look at alternative ways of compensating artists such as levies on recordable media including IPods and MP3 players.

3) Focus on funding Canadian film promotion as well as production.

Your average Hollywood film production spends nearly as much on advertising and promotion as on making the film itself. In this country, Passchendaele succeeded largely because they spent money promoting it, but most other Canadian films are produced on such minimal budgets they can't afford any form of promotion or advertising at all.

The result is that even the best films this country produces cannot begin to compete at the box office or even the video store because no one has ever heard of them.

Case in point: the two most nominated films for this year's Genie Awards are 'Polytechnique' and 'Nurse. Fighter. Boy.' You may have heard of 'Polytechnique' because there was some controversy about making a film about the Montreal Massacre, but most of you probably aren't aware of 'Nurse. Fighter. Boy.'

I can almost guarantee that you didn't see either of them in a movie theatre, unless you live in Quebec.

I went to Blockbuster recently to look for 'Nurse. Fighter. Boy.' hoping that the multiple Genie nominations might have inspired them to get at least one copy. I spoke to the manager, and not only had she never heard of the movie - she didn't even know what a Genie Award was.

While tax incentives and program funding are essential to film production in this country, more funding needs to be channelled into promotion and distribution. The government should also look into creative ways of promoting Canadian film and television in more general terms, as there continues to be an absurd stigma attached to our homegrown productions.

The digital revolution has created both challenges and opportunities fo Canadian culture. While technology has broken down many of the barriers we once used to protect our culture, it has also removed many of the financial barriers our creative community has faced relative to other countries by making production and distribution of their work affordable and accessible to all.

In a sense, digital technology and the internet have leveled the playing field. Musicians can create and sell digital copies of their own music without the need for studios or music labels. Film makers can finance relatively high quality films on a couple of credit cards and promote them independantly. Bloggers are challenging traditional journalism as the line between the two continues to blur.

Even television broadcasting is being transformed by PVRs and streaming video, destroying traditional restrictions of scheduling and dial position, opening up the potential for quality programming - Canadian programming - to finally break through the static.

With the right policies in place, 2017 will be a good year to be a creative Canadian.

And now back to our regularly scheduled blogging...

My dad recently asked me to explain the "Local TV Matters" / "Stop the TV Tax" ad wars to him. I developed brain lock and suddenly couldn't remember any of the information I'd read over the past few months regarding the CRTC hearings and the complex fight over fee-for-carriage.

Tonight I'm sending him the link to this op-ed in the Montreal Gazette, written by Robb Wells of TPB fame. Impressive. He's managed to summarize the entire ludicrous battle in two or three easily digestible paragraphs, while at the same time drawing our attention to the real elephant in the room:

Ever wonder why we have Canadian cable companies and Canadian broadcasters, if all they air is American programming and still charge us a fortune? Couldn't we just cut out the middle-man and pay NBC directly for their TV shows?

... Being able to tune into Canadian TV drama and comedy is critical to the cultural health of our country. How do we know what it is to be Canadian if we can't see and share our experiences, our own lives, our communities, our heroes, and our history on TV, the most popular and pervasive cultural medium in history?

So what can be done to make sure Canadian TV is actually Canadian?

Revenues from fee-for-carriage must be seen on the screen in the form of new, original local, dramatic and comedic programming - broadcasters can't be handed a bag of money to take on their L.A. shopping sprees.

Indeed.

When I started this blog almost three years ago (!), it was with the intention of discussing matters such as the disappearance of Canadian television dramas and scripted comedies. Shows like Da Vinci, The 11 Hour, ReGenesis, Made in Canada, The Newsroom, Wonderland - I loved them all, and one by one I watched them die after not nearly enough seasons.

Such is the life of a TV fan. But instead of being replaced with other Canadian dramas and scripted comedies, they were all replaced by American police procedurals and Canadian clones of U.S. talent shows.

Today, there's nothing left. Even Corner Gas is gone. CTV still has 'Flashpoint' for at least as long as CBS keeps paying for it, but will probably drop 'The Listener' now that NBC isn't. CBC has nothing new this year except for more reality show knock-offs and the Ron James Show, which is sorta, kinda scripted comedy. Global has 'The Guard'.

And that's it. Literally. Even if you count reality TV (I don't), that's two hours of prime time Canadian content per week on Global and three on CTV. CBC is legally bound to run something like 80% Canadian programming, but even they manage to get away with only 5 1/2 hours of scripted comedy / drama per week - and that's counting The Tudors, which as far as I can tell has no actual Canadian content whatsoever.

All of which brings us back to Robb Wells' opening question: if the Canadian commercial television industry produces nothing, creates nothing, and simply serves to re-package and re-broadcast another nation's stories as expensive backdrops for their clients' advertisements, what exactly are we paying them for?

Kiefer Speaks! or... Spoke!

Yesss!! Tommy Douglas' grandson has finally done a PSA for U.S. health care reform!



I've said all along (although not, apparently, on my own blog) that Kiefer Sutherland would be the perfect spokesperson for U.S. health care reform - not only because of his family, but because Jack Bauer is the ultimate ass-kicking, terrorist-torturing hero of the right-wing. If they're going to listen to anyone, they've GOT to listen to Jack, right?

But wait a minute... I went looking for the full ad and ran across the original video - which was recorded three years ago as part of a Tommy Douglas tribute at the 2006 NDP Convention.

But no matter. It's too late. Kiefer Sutherland has been outed as (gasp) a Health Care-Loving Canadian Socialist! Now he'll HAVE to start speaking out.

Please. Kiefer. Call Rachel Maddow.

(H/T to Dammit Janet!)

Denis McGrath on Canadian Identity

I think I've mentioned Denis McGrath before. Television writer, producer, blogger, occasional activist, and one of the most passionate and eloquent defenders of Canadian television, Canadian culture, and... well, Canada, that I have ever read.

Maybe it's because he used to be an American that he can see things clearly that we are too blinded by our own ludicrous, obsessive self-loathing to see.

Right now, dear Denis is out on the Rock working as an honest to God showrunner on the new CBC series, 'Republic of Doyle', and took some time out to knock some sense into the rest of us:

The exciting becomes transcendant when you find yourself in a place that's new and exciting to you. I felt this way when I first went to South Africa. I feel it again here in St. John's.

It happens in little ways, as you peel back and discover other elements of the culture that makes this rugged land and this beautiful city so very, very different. It happens when you drive winding roads and look out to sea and see your first Iceberg. It happens when your charismatic lead actor and Executive Producer reminds you that he's a first-generation Canadian; the son of people born into the separate nation of Newfoundland. It happens as you contemplate the hundred different little ways the culture here is different, yet undeniably alive. It makes you think, think of all the other places you've been in this great nation -- Alberta, where they never met a U.S. idea they didn't like, and where they hate the CBC like it's a religious rite. I think of the Calgarians I know who seem as surrounded as liberals in Austin, Texas. I think of Vancouver, aloof and a little smug about its beauty and wonder; as I stare now out the window at its easy equal. I think of winding stone streets in Vieux Montreal, the steps leading up to the Chateau in Quebec City. I think of the few days I spent up in Thunder Bay, another few in Halifax, the sunny times spent on Parliament Hill or wandering the Byward Market in Ottawa. I close my eyes and picture the ferry ride to Vancouver Island, lovely and still through the summer fog of morning. I recall my own teeming, shiny, stinky and occasionally humid Toronto, and how beautiful and majestic the Legislature looked at night the one time I visited Regina, and viewed the place where Medicare began. I think of this wonderful, different, vibrant country -- its parts seemingly ever at war or resentment with each other.

And as I prepare to help craft stories that show off one beautiful part the way it hasn't been shown before, all I can think of is what a gift Canadians miss by not being able to see stories told about all the funky, silly, crazy, wondrous, scary, nifty and puzzling people I've met in all these wonderful cities in this great and vast and puzzling land.

The difference between Denis McGrath and the politicians who make lovely speeches and pretty words about Canadian identity and culture is that Denis GETS IT. He LIVES IT. He's one of the people who creates it and reflects it back to us every day. He understands that without our own stories and storytellers, there is nothing holding us together as a nation and a people.

Nothing at all.

Think of this, oh ye haters of Canadian television: imagine if there wasn't any. What if there had never been a CBC? What if there were no requirements for Canadian content at all? What would we know of each other, and why would we care?

I remember when I used to watch Sesame Street when I was little, I often wondered about that house. You know, the tall narrow one with the steps up the front? I had never seen a house like that in Toronto, but I thought it was neat that those steps were a sort of social centre. I never knew that there were even more interesting houses in Montreal that had those ornate fire escape-like stairs going up the front to the second floor.

I had never been to British Columbia, and wouldn't until 2008, but I kind of knew what it was like from 'The Beachcombers'. That was also the first TV show where I'd ever seen Native people in a modern setting - i.e. not getting shot at. Later, I'd watch 'All in the Family' and wonder why there were people who had a problem with people of other races and religions when everyone on 'King of Kensington' seemed to get along so well.

Still later, I learned a great deal about what life is like in Canada's Arctic by watching 'North of 60'. 'Northern Exposure' was on around the same time, but watching it and comparing, I always wondered why there were so few Native people in Alaska. I never did learn much about our Maritime provinces from TV, except for Anne Murray and the erroneous notion that the Irish Rovers were from Newfoundland. But now I know that all the very best music and comedy in Canada comes from down East, and I look forward to learning more from 'Republic of Doyle'.

I hadn't travelled to any of these places when I watched these shows, but somehow I understood them. Their lives, their issues. If I hadn't had that to go on, I might really have thought that towns in the Canadian Arctic all looked like Gold Rush movie sets filled with eccentric white people. I might have imagined that people in our cities were all either black or white and only barely tolerated each other. And I would never have given a second thought to our western provinces at all. Why would I, when the television was filled with the shiny, polished lives of people in California and New York and Texas?

What goes for geography and culture goes doubly so for history and politics. How many Prime Ministers can you name? How many U.S. Presidents? What do you know more about - the story of Confederation, or the American Revolution? The Canadian parliamentary system, or the workings of the U.S. government ("I am a Bill, I am only a Bill, and I'm sitting here on Capital Hill...")? The Upper Canada Rebellion, or the U.S. Civil War?

This is not a failure of education - it is a failure of culture. Our children are taught Canadian history and Canadian civics in school until their eyes glaze over, but when the teacher gets lazy and needs a movie to show in class, what do they get? 'Band of Brothers'. Which is an excellent series about America's involvement in WWII, but not at all relevant for my son's grade 10 Canadian History class. Happily we now have 'Passchendaele' to show in schools, because otherwise the pickings are pretty slim.

All of these things we know about America - their history, their culture, their government - were not taught to us in school. No. We learned them by watching American TV and movies. That is the reality of this media-saturated century, and yet we seem perfectly content to hand over more and more of our cultural education to a foreign land because we tell ourselves it's 'better quality', or 'more entertaining'.

What it really is is exactly what we've been conditioned to believe, through constant exposure, that movies and TV shows are supposed to look like. It just doesn't look anything like us.

Maybe I should have written in 'Denis McGrath' on that ballot.

And Now, Your Moment of Bollywood

No reason. Just because Deepa Mehta is one of my favourite Canadian directors, "Bollywood/Hollywood" is one of my favourite movies, and these two musical numbers make me very happy.

Enjoy.

Passchendaele: Review #2

I managed to talk Murray Townsend - who claims to hate all Canadian movies - into seeing and reviewing 'Passchendaele' for our monthly review for the Milton Champion. I had already reviewed the film here, so I just had to edit it down to our 3-4 paragraph limit.

I don't get to see Murray's reviews until the day they're published in the paper, so I've been anxiously awaiting his verdict. Here's what he said:

If nobody said a word in Passchendaele, I would have thought it was one of the most beautifully filmed movies I’d ever seen.

The cinematography was amazing. From the scenery to the mood setting, everything about it was good enough for Academy Award consideration as far as I’m concerned.

But then, as with all Canadian movies, somebody has to go open their mouth and ruin things. And there’s no doubt this is a Canadian movie, even if it’s possibly one of the best ever made. Some of the acting is weak, at times it feels like a Hallmark production and some of the climatic scenes are eye-rolling — even laughable. The cross-carrying scene is just ridiculous.

I give it four-and-a-half stars for a Canadian movie and three stars in general. And stick around for the final credits, where the pictures create a more realistic emotional impact.

I know it's hard to tell, but that is actually glowing praise from this guy. Which means that I WIN!!! I finally found a Canadian movie that Murray LIKES! And by 'likes', I mean 'gave more than 2 1/2 stars to'.

Yippee!

(Both our reviews are in today's Champion)

Passchendaele

In addition to the movie Murray made me see this weekend (review to be published tomorrow), I saw two other films that I actually wanted to see: Repo! The Genetic Opera, and Passchendaele.

_______________________


I had heard that Passchendaele had gotten mixed reviews when it opened the Toronto International Film Festival, so I was a little reticent about going to see it. What if I didn't like it, but then started to wonder if I was being overly critical because it was a Canadian film? What if I did like it, but then started to wonder if I just liked it because it was a major Canadian film with a lot riding on its success and I wanted to like it?

Does anyone in any other country on the planet go through this kind of angst over their own movies?

In the end, I decided to rely on my gut, and on the reality check question I always ask myself the day after seeing a movie: do I want to go see it again?

The answer in this case is most definitely: yes.

Passchendaele is a romance sandwiched in the middle of a war movie. The romance is intensely passionate, especially given the historical setting, but Gross doesn't take his lovers in any of the expected directions. Instead, he builds their relationship slowly, adding layers of complexity as they learn more about one another. Confronting each others demons only draws them closer.

The war begins and ends the film, and from the first sequence you feel that yes, this is what it must have been like. Brutal. Filthy. Surreal. In an interview, I heard Paul Gross say that his grandfather (on whose experience the movie was based) had told him that he could rarely see or even be aware of what was happening more than fifty feet away from him, so that's the way Gross chose to shoot it. The result is an almost claustrophobic intensity, with only the occasional boom shot to give us an overview of the carnage.

Paul Gross learned well from his grandfather. There is one remarkable scene where Gross' character goes to considerable lengths to explain to a superior officer the importance of dry matches to a soldier in the field. In another, reference is made to the widespread but probably mythical story of a Canadian soldier crucified on a barn door by German soldiers - a story which takes on some significance later.

Details like that add a richness and authenticity that I appreciate both as a history buff and a movie goer.

Passchendaele is not without its flaws. Sometimes the details get a little too detailed, to the point where it seems like Gross is trying to cram everything he knows about his subject into the film. The transition from the intense opening battle sequence is a bit abrupt and it takes a while to adjust to the more languid pace of the Calgary scenes. And there are moments - not many - where Gross indulges in a bit of Mel Gibson-like self-directed vanity. Then again, he is Paul Gross. Who can blame him for letting the camera linger on that face a little longer than necessary?

Of course, all of these points only occurred to me long after I walked sobbing out of the theatre, as I sat trying to think of some way to sound like a dispassionate film critic and not a total sap.

In amidst the drama and romance of Passchendaele, there was one particular moment that made me laugh out loud. Gross' love interest in the film has a neighbour across the street from her house in Calgary, and at one point he reveals himself to be a bigoted brute of a man who inevitably gets his comeuppance in the form of a forehead to the nose.

The character's name is 'Mr. Harper'.

I'll bet Paul enjoyed that scene immensely.

Vote Culture, eh?

Despite the intermittent rain and being sick as a dog, I had a helluva time at the Vote for Culture Rally today in Toronto. The star-spotting alone was worth the trip, but it was really about supporting Canadian arts and culture, and telling Stephen Harper exactly what 'ordinary Canadians' think of both his policies and his attitude.

Here are some star shots, and video of three kick-ass speeches by former Kid in the Hall Mark McKinney, Corner Gas star Eric Peterson, and our very own Denis "Hey Writer Boy" McGrath.




Deepa Mehta



Adam Vaughan



Mark McKinney



Eric Peterson



Denis McGrath



Just in case we started rioting

Here's part one of the video, featuring huge crowds, Canadian stars, some guy in a sweater vest, and Mark McKinney's speech.



And here's part two, with speeches by Eric Peterson and Denis McGrath.

Creatively Spinning the Numbers

The National Post ran an article Friday entitled "Conservatives spent more on cultural programs than Liberals". Co-authored by David Akin and Juliet O'Neill, the article refers to a CanWest News analysis of government financial documents showing that the Conservatives have actually outspent their predecessors to the tune of $660 million, shelled out to the Department of Canadian Heritage and its portfolio of departments and agencies like the CBC, the Canada Council, etc.

At first blush, the numbers are pretty impressive: $133 million more for the CBC, $30 million more for the Canada Council, and the biggest increase for the Department of Canadian Heritage itself - up $273 million since 2006. Telefilm Canada and the CRTC got screwed, but overall the Conservatives come off as exceedingly generous patrons of the arts.

Two things make all this somewhat less impressive.

One is the information at the end of the original article that was somewhat conveniently omitted from the National Post version:

But the Conservative record on cultural spending when measured as a portion of all government spending shows that Conservatives, three years later, support the arts at about the same level that the Liberals did in their last year.

During the final budgetary year of former prime minister Paul Martin’s government, $18.06 of every $1,000 spent by the government was spent on cultural programs. That jumped in Harper’s first year in government to $19.54 but by this year it has fallen back to about where the Liberals were at $18.23 of every $1,000 spent by the government.

Using that measure - spending in one area compared to overall spending in any other area - cultural spending has fared worse than any other program in the three-year Conservative term.

The Tories have seen the portion of all spending they need to make on public debt drop by more than 22 per cent. But they have used the spending room created by smaller debt charges to boost spending, as a portion of all government spending, on security and public safety (up 15 per cent); environment and resource-based programs (up 14.4 percent) and general government services (13.7 percent.)

The second is the way in which the article defines "cultural spending". The article specifically references the budget for the Department of Canadian Heritage (about 1.4 billion dollars) and the budgets for the various agencies and Crown corporations that are included within the department's 'portfolio' such as the Canada Council, the CBC, etc. (another 2.2 billion).

The trouble is, the Department of Canadian Heritage deals with a lot more than just arts and culture. It also covers things like multiculturalism, citizenship, official languages, sport, and a slew of other areas that have little or nothing to do with what you or I would consider "arts and culture".

So, just because the department as a whole will be spending more money this year than it did two years ago doesn't necessarily mean anything for the arts community. And in fact, a big chunk of the budget increases over the past two years had to do with (you guessed it) the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics.

I'll let former Heritage Minister Bev Oda explain it to you...

The 2006 – 2007 Main Estimates were tabled in April, the first for this new Conservative government.

Resources for the department total 1.4 billion dollars in 2006-2007 and maintains initiatives that were announced in previous budgets and approved by the Treasury Board. A 267 million dollar increase over the previous year, was provided for the Department.

The increases can largely be attributed to increases and new funding in several areas. For example:

* 77.7 million dollars for 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic venues;
* 69.5 million dollars for the enhancement of Canadian sport development, excellence, and participation; and
* $27.4 million for the Aboriginal Peoples' Program.

In 2006 – 2007, resources for the Department's portfolio total 2.16 billion dollars, an increase of 310 million dollars over the previous year.

Increased funding includes:

* 17.5 million dollars for the Public Service Commission, primarily for program expenditures;
* 16.2 million dollars largely for program expenditures at Library and Archives of Canada; and
* 3.6 million dollars for the Canadian Museum of Nature for operating and capital expenditures.
* $50 million over 2 years for the Canada Council, a concrete display of our new governments support for arts and culture.

So, out of a total increase of $577 million for 2006-07, at least a third had nothing at all to do with the arts. And the following year, the budget for the department itself actually decreased by $22 million.

From all this, it's difficult to tell if the basic premise of the Post article is accurate or not. I do know that Akin and O'Neill should have spent a little more time digging into the numbers - or at least fought their editors to keep all of the numbers they did find.

Conservatives Send Left-Wing Writer to Talk to Commies

This just keeps getting better and better.

Mr. Dyer told The Globe and Mail that a Foreign Affairs official at the Canadian embassy in Cuba called him and asked him to speak in Havana, promising to cover his travel expenses. He said he was given $3,000 in cash to cover his airfare, hotel and expenses in Cuba, and that he had never heard of PromArt until last week.

"It suggests to me this is the gang who can't shoot straight. My surmise ... is that they didn't have a pot of money that they could easily fit this into, so a little creative bookkeeping was done ... and you take it out of the PromArt budget," he said.

Wow. I got nothin'.

So, who do you think is getting fired over this one?

UPDATE: Here's Dyer's letter to the G&M explaining exactly what happened and why he went to Cuba.

Stephen Harper's War on Culture

The Canadian Culture Wars continue with the cancellation of the PromArt program, which provided travel funding to artists, performers and organizations to promote Canadian culture abroad. To justify their actions, a Foreign Affairs spokesperson cited the usual nonsense about "fiscal restraint", even though the program costs a mere $4.7 million a year - an amount so small that I couldn't even find anything in the 2006 budget that was that small.

It's, like, a buck from everyone in the GTA.

Then, of course, came the requisite list of deviant, left-wing, shit-painting, obscenity-spewing "artists" the program has funded in the past.

"Certainly we felt some of the groups were not necessarily ones we thought Canadians would agree were the best choices to be representing them internationally," she said.

Pressed for an example of those who failed to meet such a requirement, Howland cited a Toronto-based experimental rock band.

"I don't even want to say it (their name) on the phone," she said. "Holy F---, that was one that was flagged."

Holy F---'s second album was nominated for a Juno award and the group has been shortlisted for the $20,000 Polaris Music Prize.

Gee, sounds like the title of a certain movie, doesn't it? But 'Holy Fuck' weren't the only ones singled out, of course. A Conservative talking points memo dug up by David Akins at the National Post also lists:

... $16,500 to send Tal Bachman, a best-selling recording artist and the son of The Guess Who's Randy Bachman, to South Africa and Zimbabwe for music festivals... "I think there's a reasonable expectation by taxpayers that they won't fund the world travel of wealthy rock stars..." [ok, hands up everyone who has a Tal Bachman CD?]

... $5,000 to former CBC broadcaster Avi Lewis, who now works for al-Jazeera and who is described in a Conservative memo as "a general radical" [that would be Gemini Award-winning broadcaster Avi Lewis, son of known radical Stephen Lewis}

... Gwynne Dyer, who received $3,000 to help him travel to Cuba for a series of lectures... the Conservative talking points say Mr. Dyer is "a left-wing columnist and author who has plenty of money to travel on his own." [I'm sensing a theme here]

... The North South Institute, a nonprofit foreign policy think-tank, which received $18,000 in federal travel assistance so its representatives could attend a conference in Cuba... The North-South Institute is "a left-wing and anti-globalization think-tank," the Conservative memo said. "Why are we paying for these people to attend anti-Western conferences in Cuba?" it asked. [that would be this North-South Institute, whose Executive Committee is filled with a bunch of commie left-wing... corporate executives].

Even Stephen Taylor sounds like this sort of blatant political button-pushing has left a bad taste in his mouth.

What I find even more distressing is the list of funding recipients that the Conservatives have chosen not to mention - particularly those in the "Film and Television" category, as that one happens to affect my family financially. Because not only did PromArt pay to send Canadian film makers to sell their films at festivals like Cannes and Sundance - it paid to bring foreign buyers to our festivals. All for the bargain price of $350,000.

Here are a few that stood out:

$35,000 To allow the Banff Television Festival Foundation to invite foreign buyers to the Banff World Television Festival.

$15,000 To allow the Festival international du Film sur l'Art to host visiting foreign buyers during the 25e Festival international du Film sur l'Art in Montreal, Quebec.

$35,000 To allow the Hot Docs International Documentary Festival to invite foreign buyers to The Documentary Forum.

$10,310 To allow the Northern Visions Independant Film and Video Association to invite foreign buyers to the Images Festival 2006.

$80,000 To allow Film Circuit International to organize tours of Canadian films internationally.

$12,000 To allow the Toronto International Film Festival to invite foreign buyers to the Sprockets, Toronto International Film Festival for Children.

$53,500 To allow the Toronto International Film Festival to invite foreign buyers to the Toronto International Film Festival.

This isn't some street mime making a pilgrimage to Marcel Marceau's grave. This isn't some performance artist piercing her labia on stage in Munich.

THIS IS BUSINESS.

Yes, for the price of a few plane tickets and a VIP suite, the government can actually sell some of those partially subsidized film and television projects they keep griping about to foreign countries, thus turning a profit on those productions while simultaneously keeping a bunch of long-haired artist types like my husband employed and off the streets.

My husband is a member of IATSE, one of the two big film & television technical workers unions in Canada. Today he showed me the "In Production" list for Toronto for the month of August. It had four items on it. Only one was an actual feature film.

Meanwhile, the much anticipated Toronto FilmPort opened two months ago and is still standing empty. And now there's word that the new Michael Cera movie, "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" - which is actually set in Toronto - might be filming in New York. Because it's cheaper.

Much as I'd like to, I can't blame the Conservatives for all of this. The threat of a SAG strike, the rising Canadian dollar, and the inexplicable refusal by the McGuinty government to offer competitive tax incentives in Ontario have all inflicted mortal wounds on the film and television industry here.

However, as far as I can tell, Stephen Harper is the only one who is actively trying to kill it.

(h/t to Stephen Taylor for digging up the full list of recipients)

Sunday Sundries

BREAKING NEWS: CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN FINDS BLASPHEMY ON THE INTERNET!

A B.C. man has filed a human rights complaint alleging religious discrimination after a TV comedian flew a plane pulling a "Jesus sucks" banner over Toronto. Dean Skoreyko of the northern B.C. town of Coldstream filed the complaint against Kenneth Hotz and Showcase TV. Mr. Skoreyko, who viewed the stunt online, said in a form filed with the B.C. human rights tribunal "my Christian beliefs and upbringing were publicly ridiculed."

Mr. Hotz is half of the Kenny vs. Spenny show, which turns on two rivals' attempts to compete with one another. The offending stunt was part of a contest between Mr. Hotz and co-host Spencer Rice to see who could offend the greatest number of people. Mr. Skoreyko, who once sought the federal Conservative nomination in Okanagan-Shuswap, told the National Post he filed the complaint on behalf of the silent majority that would object to such antics. He said he wanted to make the point that the human rights system applies double standards, favouring only minority interests.

When I first read about this stunt, I suppose I expected indignation from those sensitive types who had somehow managed to read the banner from the ground while on their way to church with their binoculars. And I suppose there's a point in there somewhere about minority vs. majority rights, although it has always been my understanding that the rights of the majority are automatically protected by the fact that they are... well, the majority (i.e. would this guy have been offended if they had flown a banner saying, "White Guys Suck"?)

But to claim that you were shocked and offended by a video on the internet that you would have had to have gone out of your way to find and download? Pulease. But hey, good on him for defending the sensibilities of those who would have objected. If they had seen it. Which they didn't.

Seriously, if this is the most offensive thing this guy can find on the internet, or for that matter on Kenny vs. Spenny, then he obviously isn't trying hard enough.

(and anyone care to bet on how long it takes for Charles McVety or his pals to point out that KvS gets Canadian tax credits?)

________________________

HARPER'S "WAR ON COLLECTIVISM" FRUSTRATED BY ANNOYING FACTS

While Gerry Ritz and the entire Conservative free-market propaganda machine continue to try to convince western farmers that "marketing choice" will make them far more money for their crops, this rather inconvenient bit of news makes it into the media:

Canadians got more per bushel than U.S. farmers, wheat board says

Prairie farmers earned a record $7 billion from grain sold through the Canadian Wheat Board in 2007-08 — a 57 per cent increase over the previous year, the agency said Thursday in its annual report. [...] Western Canadian farmers got better prices than many U.S. farmers who sold their grain before prices spiked earlier this year.

Stupid facts.

(h/t to Buckdog)

Fuckers Fire Ed & Red

The evil corporate overlords at what used to be our beloved CityTV have proven once and for all that all the weasel words about "nurturing and preserving" City's "unique and special culture" were only so many small piles of doggie doo.

'Ed & Red's Night Party', the latest incarnation of Canada's longest running comedy show, has been cancelled.

Steve K is being very gracious about it:

"There's no ill will. Things change," said Steve Kerzner, Ed's voice and creator. "We just don't really fit, I guess, as presently constituted, with what they wanted to do with the channel."

Yeah. That's one way of putting it, I suppose. And happily Steve and his lovely Liana K (one of us!!) have had numerous offers from elsewhere. But word from the underground is that the mood over at Rogers-owned CityTV is decidedly grim, and the sword of Damocles is casting its shadow over more than one icon of the Temple of Television.

It's the end of an era, man. But it sure was a sweet ride while it lasted.

Confessions of a Future Copyright Criminal

As Bill C-61 (aka the Canadian DMCA) hits the floor of the House of Commons, there are plenty of smart people doing an excellent job of explaining exactly what the implications are and why this bill needs to be strangled in the cradle. McGrath has an excellent post today, and Michael Geist and Laura Murray have been all over this since C-61 was just a glimmer in Harper's eye.

Me, I'm not a big downloader. I'm a relative newcomer to high speed, I don't own an MP3 player, and I get my fill of movies working at a video store. And yet, under this bill, I would be a multiple offender just because of one project I recently completed.

My husband does props and wardrobe work in the film industry, and I wanted to put together a clip reel for him to show potential clients what he has created for movies like Skinwalkers, Resident Evil: Apocalypse and Saw II-V. So my first offence was obviously going to be transferring scenes from these movies from DVDs that we had bought and paid for onto my laptop in a form that I could edit and play with. This meant that I had to download a utility that would get past the digital lock on the DVDs and convert the files to WMV format. Definitely illegal under C-61.

Even more galling was the process of adding music to the video clips. I particularly wanted Van Morrison's 'Moondance' for the 'Skinwalkers' werewolf sequence, which is an old enough tune that I probably could have found a free copy somewhere. But I was a good girl and spent my 99 cents to purchase the song from ITunes - only to discover that I couldn't actually incorporate the music into the video without downloading yet another soon-to-be illegal utility to get through the digital lock and convert the file. For a song that I bought and paid for!

Keep in mind, this is not something we're going to be selling, nor do we intend to post it on YouTube or even on my husband's website. This is a DVD showing work that he created in the form of a video resume to promote it to people who make movies and TV shows. And yet, under C-61, I would have broken the law many times over to create it and would be charged hundreds of dollars in fines.

The final irony in all this is that my husband is one of the people that copyright laws are supposed to protect. We both recognize the impact that large scale video piracy has had on the film industry and on his livelihood, so we are horrified when we see the open sale of thousands of blatantly pirated DVDs at places like the Pacific Mall. We won't buy them, we discourage our friends from buying them, and we don't understand why the malls aren't fined for leasing space to people who sell them completely out in the open.

But sadly, this bill is NOT about industrial movie piracy, nor is it about protecting the artists and writers who create music and film and television content by making sure that they are fairly compensated for their work. It's just about protecting the profits of the studios and the corporations that produce and distribute that content.

If anyone actually gave a rat's ass about bootleg DVDs or the poor starving musicians losing money to illegal downloaders, a levy system like they have in Europe would have been the way to go. Which is what creative types like the Writers Guild of Canada were pushing for, to no avail.

Alas, money trumps art every time.

Sarah Polley is a Lousy Pinko!

Today was Celebrity Day at the Senate Finance Committee as representatives of Canada's film and television industry pleaded their case against government pre-censorship in the form of Bill C-10.

The Government's response was even worse that one would have expected. Leave it to the Conservatives to listen to the testimony of Genie winner, Oscar nominee and all around Canadian icon Sarah Polley - and then dismiss her as just another leftie with a socialist agenda.

Conservatives issued a combative response - releasing a press release attacking Polley's left-wing political ties and suggesting that artists had no business telling "hard-working Canadians" how their tax dollars should be spent.

...In the press release, the Conservatives took specific aim at Polley. She has been a vocal NDP supporter and once lost a pair of teeth when the riot squad aggressively broke up an anti-Mike Harris demonstration outside of the Ontario Legislature.

"Individuals with vested personal and political interests should be honest with Canadians on what their true intentions are," said Pierre Poilievre, an Ottawa-area MP.

"Hard-working Canadians are growing increasingly tired of special interest groups telling them what to do."

I cannot begin to guess what 'special interest group' Poilievre imagines Sarah Polley is representing other than, you know, the multi-million dollar industry that employs her and thousands of other hard-working Canadians like my husband and my sister and a whole lot of our friends.

But hey, maybe they're right. Just take a read through the comments at the bottom of the article for a glimpse into the minds of the kind of people who think C-10 is a dandy way to keep pinkos like Sarah Polley from spending their hard-earned money on more of her potty-mouthed pornographic Commie Canadian trash.



I got about halfway down before I got too nauseous to continue.

_______________________


UPDATE: H/T to Denis for finding this little 'macaca' moment. Apparently Senator David Angus, Conservative Chairman of the Banking Committee left his mic on after adjourning the meeting and was recorded saying, "The government has to bite the bullet. The minister agrees, she told me she hates the law."

'The Tin Drum' Revisited

One of my earliest memories of a cultural and political controversy where I felt compelled to pick a side was when the Ontario Censor Board (later re-named the Ontario Film Review Board) banned the critically acclaimed German film 'The Tin Drum' for a single scene implying oral sex by a minor.

The fallout from that decision resulted in a radical restriction of the powers of censorship boards across the country and a general shift in the perception of Canada, both inside and outside of the country, from that of a nation of prudes to a country where freedom of expression and creativity was actively encouraged. The result has been a flowering of unique, challenging and provocative film and television productions that have been recognized and lauded around the world. In many ways, Canada has become the 'HBO' of North America.

This is what progressives refer to as "progress".

This is what religious conservatives refer to as "Canada's rapid descent into decadence and Godlessness".

Thanks to Charles McVety of the Canada Family Action Coalition, most people are now aware of the implications of Bill C-10 and the true intentions of the related 'update' of the Heritage Ministry guidelines that would result in a return to the kind of censorship we used to have here in prudish Ontario. If you haven't been keeping up, writer Denis McGrath over at Dead Things on Sticks has done some excellent coverage and analysis.

It should be pointed out that the specific clause in Bill C-10 that has caused so much anguish among both progressive bloggers and pretty much everyone in the Canadian entertainment industry is, on its face, completely innocuous. Out of a 600+ page income tax amendment bill, all it says is this:

(3) The definition "Canadian film or video production certificate" in subsection 125.4(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

"Canadian film or video production certificate" means a certificate issued in respect of a production by the Minister of Canadian Heritage certifying that the production is a Canadian film or video production in respect of which that Minister is satisfied that

(a) except where the production is a treaty co-production (as defined by regulation), an acceptable share of revenues from the exploitation of the production in non-Canadian markets is, under the terms of any agreement, retained by

(i) a qualified corporation that owns or owned an interest in, or for civil law a right in, the production,

(ii) a prescribed taxable Canadian corporation related to the qualified corporation, or

(iii) any combination of corporations described in subparagraph (i) or (ii); and

(b) public financial support of the production would not be contrary to public policy.

Hardly surprising that it passed by the House and the Senate without anyone connecting the dots.

It's that "public policy" provision that's the real kicker, because it just so happens that the Heritage Ministry has a rather detailed and draconian set of guidelines for establishing what might be against "public policy" all drawn up and ready to go. Worse, it allows Heritage and Justice to withdraw a certificate and thus disqualify a production for tax credits even after production is well underway - meaning that investors could suddenly find their investment to be not such a good investment after they've already committed and spent the money.

The chilling effect this would have on all Canadian film and television productions - not just the naughty ones - would be utterly devastating.

Happily, the true import of this seemingly innocuous bill has finally surfaced above the fold and made the nightly news, largely due to Charles McVety's inability to conceal his glee at what he considers a vindication of his anti-smut, anti-homosexuality agenda. The Governor General's office has been inundated with calls and emails, and the bill is now back in Senate committee for another look.

If you would like to encourage them to slam this loophole shut, please contact the senators from your province. And while you're at it, toss off a note to the Heritage Minister, and maybe join the Facebook group as well.

____________________

MORE COVERAGE: Even the Globe & Mail's Margaret Wente thinks this is a bad idea. I especially enjoyed this passage:

We may just have to say goodbye to sex, violence, and Viggo Mortensen cavorting with Russian gangsters in the nude. Instead, we'll have to settle for "films that Canadians can sit down and watch with their families in living rooms across this great country," as Conservative MP Dave Batters put it. David Cronenberg will be reduced to shooting remakes of Anne of Green Gables. Juno will be recast as the heartwarming tale of a plucky girl who realizes that if she has premarital sex with her boyfriend, she'll go to Hell. As for Young People Fucking, a new movie coming soon, forget about it. It will have to be reshot as Young People Starting an Abstinence Club.

(H/T to we move to canada, where you can find more text from the editorial in case you, like me, can't get past the !@#$% G&M firewall.)

Conservative Patronage Appointment #147

I kid. I've actually lost track at this point.

Tories appoint former candidate to CRTC

OTTAWA - The Conservative government has appointed a former party candidate to the CRTC - the country's broadcast regulator - raising fresh cries of patronage and hypocrisy.

Marc Patrone was a declared candidate for the Conservatives in Nova Scotia when the federal Liberal government appeared set to fall in May 2005. But he returned to his job as a legislative journalist in the province before the government finally collapsed at the end of the year.

Heritage Minister Josee Verner announced his appointment as a full-time member of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission on Tuesday in a news release.

She did not mention Patrone's ties to the Conservative party.

Verner said Patrone's experience "will greatly benefit the CRTC."

If by "benefit" you mean "hasten the wholesale deregulation of Canadian television and radio", then yeah. I especially like the end of the article:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised before the last election to combat patronage by creating a new appointments commission that would screen federal job candidates.

He abandoned the promise when opposition parties rejected his first choice to lead the commission - Calgary oil-industry executive and Conservative party fundraiser Gwyn Morgan.

But I digress.

How apropos that this appointment comes so soon after the CRTC hearings on the Canadian Television Fund. My homeboy Denis McGrath has been following the proceedings closely on Dead Things On Sticks. He posted a particularly eloquent defence of Canadian television and culture last week, and even for a guy who makes his living putting words together, it's an astonishing piece of work.

Go. Read.

My very favourite part is this:

Other countries used to have an insatiable appetite for American shows, too. But somewhere over the last few years, from Germany to Italy to France and beyond, the populace has gotten a taste for their own cop shows, lawyer shows, medical shows. Nowhere was there a discussion or an argument as to whether it was cultural or commercial. There was a recognition that it was all culture, and that it was worthy of support. Most of these countries, to varying degrees, have the same challenges Canada faces – it’s a difficult playing field to compete against the American product. Because it’s difficult, it’s generally recognized – even as a point of national pride – that it’s to be supported. It’s good for the culture, which means good for the country.

... But here in English Canada, culture comes smacking up against industrial policy.

And make no mistake, there’ s an industrial element to this, too.

When one country sells a product into another country at a cut rate, it’s called “dumping.”

If I have more cuttlefish than I can possibly eat in my nation, and I sell you my excess cuttlefish at a really cheap price, it’s good for me because I’m getting rid of it.

Of course, often, that means the cuttlefish industry in that country never gets going. That’s why tariffs are put in place.

What we’re in the middle of here is the side effect of an ongoing skirmish that concerns the industrial dumping of U.S. shows on Canadian channels. The system in this country is set up to allow for that. Simultaneous substitution practically demands it. The networks profit handsomely from it. They argue and lobby to keep their commitment to indigenous production low, as low as possible, to preserve it.

Now, if you happen to be a true believer in Friedmanite laissez-faire economics, then extending that kind of thinking to culture is not a big stretch. It's all just 'product' after all, so why not subject it to the same 'invisible hand' of market forces, just like oil, or beer, or health care services?

If, however, you believe that television is as much a part of a nation's cultural identity as, say, painting, literature, or even film, then just maybe the free market's apparent overwhelming preference for Law & Order / C.S.I. clones and game show / talent contest variants might not be exactly what you're looking for in terms of 'culture'.

I don't know the man, but I suspect Mr. Patrone will disagree.

I Want a ZENN!

I'm not sure why, but I seem to have developed a reputation as some sort of environmentalist in this town. People invite me to join eco-friendly Facebook groups and hand me business cards for naturopaths and organic food distributors all the time. It might have been this letter I wrote to the Champion a while back, or my attendance at Turner's little 'EcoSummit' last year. Or maybe it's just my general leftist tendencies in this largely centre-right rural town.

I assure you, this green reputation is entirely unwarranted.

Ok, so I bitch a lot about urban sprawl (who doesn't?), I've scolded the produce manager at the Loblaw's for mis-labelling Mexican peppers as 'Product of Canada', and I've taken to riding my bike everywhere I can. But that's mostly for the exercise. And not in the winter. And I'm lazy.

The sad fact is, this is my ride:



(ok, not mine per se - mine isn't that clean)

Now before you start wagging your finger at me, you should know that my husband and I are both self-employed, and my husband's business (and mine up until a year ago) involves transporting large bins of saleable goods, tents, tables and display units to various trade shows, conventions and film locations. We need a van - specifically a van that can take a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood.

Unfortunately we can't afford to buy and maintain a second, smaller vehicle right now, and Milton is currently in the process of moving every grocery store, hardware store and office supply store to the outer reaches of our universe. So it's either drive our gas-guzzling behemoth on short trips around town, or get ourselves a bicycle with a motor, a roof, a heater and a REALLY big basket.

Or we could get us one of these instead:



Dear Mr. McGuinty: I really, REALLY want a ZENN. Please approve them immediately. It's electric, it's affordable, and it's Canadian. It's a no-brainer. I don't give a crap if I can't take it on the highway - we have the van for that.

Admittedly, I would be happier if their top speed was 50 kph instead of 40 kph. After all, my street is 50 kph (40 by the school), and already I get assholes honking at me and trying to pass when I insist on adhering to the speed limit. Still, I'd be willing to put up with it if I could just buy my groceries without either getting soaked in the rain on my bike or being overwhelmed with eco-guilt for killing my grandchildren.

So here is my pledge: When the ZENN becomes available in Ontario, and assuming it stays somewhere within the $12,000 price range, I WILL BUY ONE.

I'm getting conflicting reports as to whether the speed limitations of the ZENN are due to the battery technology or a quirk of the licensing regulations in the U.S., but I have the impression that a 10 kph bump is do-able at some point in the future.

In the meantime, I could just get myself a new bumper sticker.

How I Discovered Ellen Page

(Edit - I just saw Juno last night. I'll be reviewing it later, but for now let me just say that everything everyone has been saying about this film is true. Go see it immediately. Tonight!)

(Oh, and the red hoodie's back...)

I watched Ellen Page being interviewed on Letterman last night. Despite being obviously nervous and Letterman trying to paint her as a rube from some minor burg in Outer Canuckistan called 'Halifax', she nonetheless KICKED ASS! Funny as hell, and totally held her own.

They didn't spend a lot of time talking about 'Juno' (which I fully intend to see this weekend), but it was immensely entertaining to watch as she educated Dave about the collapse of the Maritime fisheries, the beauty of Newfoundland and the Halifax Explosion of 1917. And all the while her little movie has moved up to number five at the box office, with Oscar buzz galore.

I'm proud as a peacock because I, in fact, discovered Ellen Page.

No, no on X-Men. And not in 'Hard Candy' either, although I remain one of about a dozen people who actually own the DVD of that brilliant little film. No, it was three years ago on 'ReGenesis' where I first spotted our little Ellen, stealing every scene as Lilith Sandstrom. I knew right then that girl was going somewhere.

Ok, so maybe there a few die hards in the Maritimes who saw her in 'Marion Bridge', but hey - they get everything first. Even the sunrise. Still, in a few months when she steps up to accept her Oscar for Best Actress and all of Canada cheers for Our Girl from Halifax, I can confidently say, "She's mine. I found her."

(just so you know, I also discovered Robin Williams)

I mentioned 'Juno' to a customer at the video store recently, and I got what has become an annoyingly familiar response:

"Oh, that's that CANADIAN movie, isn't it? EW! I can't STAND Canadian movies!"

I'm pretty sure this is what got me into my arrangement with Murray.

I pointed out that Juno's status as a 'Canadian' movie is technically dodgy (Canadian everything but U.S. money = ?), then asked him if he had seen 'Eastern Promises'. He said he had and he liked it, but insisted that it could not possibly be a Canadian movie - presumably because he liked it. I actually got into an argument with him over which movie was more technically 'Canadian' (on paper, 'Eastern Promises' wins because it's a co-pro).

I really must stop arguing with the customers at work.

All of which leads me to ask, what the fuck is with this visceral reaction people seem to have against Canadian movies? Honestly, I don't get it. I could understand maybe 20 or 30 years ago when most Canadian movies were obviously low budget and of questionable entertainment value unless you were a horror fan or spoke French. But now? When "indie films" are the big thing and all Canadian films are about as "indie" as you can get?

If all you like are big blockbusters with explosions and gunfire and Will Smith or Matt Damon, then fine. Go for it. But if you like smaller, quirky, and (Gods forgive me) character-driven films, then Canadian movies are made for you. This year alone, 'Away From Her', 'Fido', 'Eastern Promises', and yes, 'Juno' (despite the American backing) are all movies we can be proud of, and the latter two have actually been making serious money at the box office despite pathetic promotion and distribution.

I've gotten to the point where I don't dare mention that a movie is Canadian until the customer brings it back and says that they liked it. Then I get smug.