Boot In The Pants

late

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:37:00 +0000

The myriad of reasons, excuses if you will, why scripts are so often late on many television series means little once they have to be shot. There isn't a director on the planet who'll honestly tell you that working by the seat of one's pants is the best way to make a film.

So, here I am in New York facing another shortened prep because the script didn't exist before I got here. In fact in this case, I actually got here and was told that prep was pushing a day (but we'll shoot when we were always meant to shoot) because nobody knew when the script would arrive.

So I tidied the apartment, went shopping and played some tennis on my first prep day. Now that I think of it, a pretty productive first day of prep compared to some others. And now here I am on day two after a 10:30 am pickup, reading the first network draft of the show I'll shoot...I'm told the title won't change.

I just met my AD. He gave me the straight goods on how things have been going and apparently it hasn't really been any better for any of the other directors here. Revisions will come, he says, until the final day of shooting. Even though this has become the norm these days, it doesn't make it any less annoying.

Enough about me; what about the actors? They have to read and digest and prepare anew every time there's a revision. I know actors who like to start work on just memorizing lines weeks in advance of shooting. That way, they tell me, the lines are automatic and they can actually work within a scene instead of just repeatedly opening and closing the pie-hole. Truth is every department feels deeply the effect of a late script. Not the least of which is accounting. A late script has never, ever been cheaper to shoot.

The one up-side to getting a script late is that often it's better. I for one, would trade all the extra prep days ever squandered for a better script. Who wouldn't? On those rare occasions where a script takes a step toward the pool of jumping sharks, all I can do is hold my nose, put my head down and shoot. Thankfully though, as I said, it's rare when a late script is significantly worse than what preceded it.

So who is it? Who's responsible for the script's trip on the slow boat? I'll guess and say that most of the time it's the network. Too many inexperienced toads on too many lily pads all diving into the same pond at the same time. I'm sure a few writers would agree that if the network execs actually believe what they seem to -that to a person they are geniuses in story analysis and dramaturgy- then perhaps said execs should just try writing the scripts themselves. Ah, but writing actually requires skill, acumen, research, a quick, creative mind, and a masochistically life-threatening work ethic. A bit like directing TV.

I will, at some point during this prep, release myself from the persistent notion that because I haven't had sufficient time to prepare, these people risk getting less than my best work. In spite of what I said before I have done some of my best work with truncated prep; read the word prep there, not script. A late script is a late script whether you're in the production office or not. Even if I'm not in the office looking at location photos or going to a casting session, if I've had the script and read the script in advance of starting the grunt work, I always feel like I'm doing a better job. Miles away from the production office, in another city, if the script is in my head -even if I'm working on something else- it's dancing around in there, being seduced by the muse. I'm digesting and analysing it whether I know it or not, and my mind is wrapping itself around the material in ways that are undefinable.

With a late script, ah... not so much.

Oh, better start reading.

worst

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:51:00 +0000

Well, they were never the best. Far from it. But they should have been better than the worst. An embarrassment in the rain on Saturday for Toronto FC. Is it the curse of Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment?

cmf

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:30:00 +0000

Yes, what I now like to call: Canadian Media is Fucked or, "Cumf" (say it fast five times). It seems like the war of attrition on Canadian media culture is about to reach its endgame. If you happen to ply your trade in Toronto or Montreal it may even be worse. The resurgence and indeed, the redoubling of "regionalism" that it seems Canadian Media is Fucked is about to embrace could spell the beginning of the end for those two non-regions.

I've now spoken to enough people who attended the Toronto leg of their national 'lets screw culture' tour to go in search of a new vocation.

I think I've found it...

lit

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:52:00 +0000

It's kudos time in literary circles every autumn. Giller, Booker, Governor General, etc. I end up determining much of my yearly book purchases at this time of year. It's refreshing to see the entertainment sections of major newspapers devoting just a little less of their column inches to Jon and Kate and a little more to that particular type of writer who toils alone, and not in a room full of the same species. The story so far this year has been Atwood's absence from the Giller short list and Alice Munro's decision to withdraw from the same contest in order to allow other writers a shot (she's won it twice).

But my news is a bit more personal. My good and talented friend, Bev Cooper has made the short list for a Governor General's Drama Award for her play, "Innocence Lost: A Play About Steven Truscot t." The play debuted at the Blyth Festival in 2008 and was remounted there last month for a two week run. In 1959 Steven Truscott was charged with the murder of Lynn Harper. In a now famous miscarriage of justice, his trial lasted 15 days and he spent 48 years in jail before he was exonerated. The events took place in the bucolic Ontario town of Clinton, literally 15 or so kilometres from where the Blyth Festival mounted the play.

OK. Now back to my book shopping list.

christianity

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:05:00 +0000

Some salient thoughts on Christianity...just because it's the day after Sunday:

balls

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:45:00 +0000

Earlier this year I had the delightful opportunity to get in the ground floor of the creation of the television show. It's a dream job, the one we all really want. Your vision, your stamp will join the overall form of what's to come...and it'll always be there.

I delight in the process. The process of making the thing is what keeps me sane when I'm not in on the ground floor, when I'm the gun for hire. But here was one of those fleeting opportunities to get the best of both: the high of being there to lay the foundation and the delicious taste of the process itself. Ambrosia.

Well, shit happened. I wrote about it before, in part to try to be true to whatever is I'm doing here, and in part to blow off some steam I guess.

The negative by-product of that experience has stayed with me, like a continuous, faint knock on the door to which you respond, but there's never anyone there. It tickles that fine line between self-doubt and affirmation; a question, persistent as the metronome on top of our piano here. It keeps asking who was right.

The fallout from the experience wasn't immediate. It took a few weeks for the dust to settle before a bomb went off. Somebody didn't like me, my style or the way they'd been treated. I had done the job the best way I knew how, but that way -the way that has worked for me so far- didn't much appeal to them. Fair enough. They didn't say much at the time, but later... OY! What followed was a formal, direct and claimed to be erroneous ("I clicked 'send email' by accident") communication of loathing I couldn't help but take to heart.

This was the first time in my life I had ever experienced anything like it. It seemed passive/aggressive. It seemed petty. It seemed something borne of acute insecurity.

But it's stayed with me.

And I think that's good. I think any time someone gives you an opportunity -no matter how hateful- to examine your methods, including the ones which have "worked so far" it's good to go ahead and examine.

It's like the guy with the brass bovine balls hanging from the trailer hitch of his F-150. The balls swing to and fro as he merrily motors about his burgh. Then he meets a woman. She doesn't mind the balls, thinks they're kind of silly. They fall in love, get married, he knocks her up, and when their beautiful daughter is born (he kept the balls but did buy a new truck) his perspective changes. Somehow the brass bull nuts just don't look as cool when he's holding his daughter in his arms.

Everybody's got to change and grow, right?

So, the failure on my part was in not recognizing the extent to which I had inflicted pain upon these people. What can I learn from that?

The film and TV bizz is fraught with hubris and insecurity in pretty much equal measure, because you generally don't get one without the other. Best idea wins...? Fuck that, loudest idea wins most of the time. It's those rare times and places where the best idea does indeed win that are the real nirvanas (and the spell-check tells me I can't make nirvana plural...hmmm). I was recently in a bit of a nirvana on Cra$h & Burn, working with people I respect and trust and the experience, although often difficult was ultimately deeply satisfying.

That makes me wonder if the strife in the show I referred to earlier really was just a question of chemistry. Should I throw it onto the compost heap of negative human experience and continue on my merry way. Don't think so...gotta change and grow, right?

Other than attempting to program my dream-state before bed to try to access any subconscious demons which may have turned me into Satan in those people's eyes, I've mostly just let that knock on the door persist. But now it's time to get out in front of it and see if there's any further message other than 'bad chemistry.'

Okay, by now you're thinking I'm a bit obsessive/compulsive about this. That may be true...and I'll probably examine it later, because thinking about what you're thinking has got me thinking. For now let's get back to the hate mail. If, as I've said, I delight in the "process" I should be able to take the good with the bad. This was bad. So, what do I take from it? Hopefully something that will improve the process in the future. Hopefully something that will avoid another bilious experience like that one. And beyond that I would hope that whatever I end up learning will happen on a pilot that gets picked up.

Ah, maybe I'm nuts.

news

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:26:00 +0000

Tsunami in South Pacific

Typhoons clobber Southeast Asia

Earthquake in Indonesia

Rwandan genocide suspect arrested

And now the news...

Other than his wife and son I wonder who'll end up being the victim here -there's always a "victim." Meantime he's still funny and our collective news appetite remains, if nothing else, predictable.

skin

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:06:00 +0000

If there's one prerequisite to working in film and television it's probably related to the thickness of one's skin. I suppose that's why there are so many in this business who are perceived as being arrogant or self-involved or simply egotistical. The construct one is often forced to live is one whereby an individual is constantly put in a position of having to defend what they do.

Funny then that there are so many people (myself included) who struggle with insecurity. In this business directors (and writers and actors) are judged -constantly- by not only the quality but the very character of their work. Nobody would say to a steel worker that there's more cachet in galvanizing iron than there is to polishing stainless steel. But the very choices we make as filmmakers can often define and sometimes pidgeon-hole us into unfair traps.

So even though a director may do his or her best work on an episode of The Friendly Giant, it's the shit job the director did on The Shield that gets noticed.

And (excusing the bad analogy above) these aren't the only choices by which a director is judged. When it comes to TV each show has its own aesthetic, and sometimes that aesthetic can become religion around the monitor cart. Directors pushing it can sometimes get a nasty shove in return. The aesthetic becomes the limit and the trap.

Then it trickles down resulting in the "that's not really in our wheelhouse" look you get from an on-set producer, and albeit infrequently, the crew. Choose your poison: check and balance, or creative Third Reich, for a director it's intellectual e-coli.

When I get the jaded look from a cinematographer or operator on a set after I've set something up , I can instantly turn into a prick. I'm arrogant enough to want what I want and petulant enough to go full douche bag to get it. I go douche bag; I get what I want; all is right with the world...although for effect I can be seen trudging the set for the next hour with my head down grumbling unintelligibly to myself. The confidence of knowing what will and what will not fit the template, and being able to push to the edge of that template is one of the reasons shows hire different directors. In other words they want us to make the show better, but still make the show. The confidence to do that comes with time and experience mostly. And on rare occasions a young whipper-snapper will come along with no experience and just be able to pull it off...what's that? Genius? Maybe.

Well, I'm no genius so I've opted to take the time route. Many of the areas of production which terrified me don't anymore. These days actors with big "personalities" generally don't throw me off, simply because I've worked with enough of them. I once said this to a specimen of this species outside a studio at Chelsea Piers, "You can't touch me."

"What?" he asked.

"Can't touch me. I'm bullet proof." I said. He sucked on his fag and eyed me an interrogative WTF?

"I've got armour. He's about this tall and twelve years old."

The big "personality" smiled and nodded his understanding.

Suffice it to say that if you're alive long enough and can keep the fuck-ups to a reasonable infrequency, you'll end up doing enough work so that you'll actually begin to feel a pang that you just might know something about what you're doing...whether you actually do or not is essentially moot to what I'm on about here.

Buuuuuut....

There's still this one area that gets to me.

Post.

You prep. You share. You exchange thoughts. You begin to understand the aforementioned aesthetic. You go to the floor secure in the knowledge that you'll push the limits but stay on message. Good.

Then you turn in your cut.

See, these days it's a 50/50 split as to whether or not any of the non-acting above-the-liners are looking at dailies. Some do, some don't. It's the "don't" category I'm concerned with here. You never really know how they'll react to your cut. Sometimes I can't help wondering if their "show" aesthetic has changed. Could happen. They're on the phone to the network every day. And networks, the self-proclaimed gatekeepers of public taste and signers of cheques, carry great sway. They annoy, they vacillate, they mumble unintelligibly, and then they say something we all forgot or neglected to notice. Sheee-it! That one "right" erases all the network wrongs. That can change a producer's (and a director's) aesthetic in a second.

Sometimes it's not that at all, but a small shift in tone or focus, say three edits in an opening scene. That can ripple through the piece and cast it completely in a different tonal direction. Whatever the case the magic thing the happens in the cutting room is really just...magic. So, that's the place where -when I have other masters to serve- I'm always just a bit more nervous and touchy and self-conscious and panicky and a little depressed and obsessive and schizophrenic and acid-refluxy and achy and compulsive about snacks and I pee a lot and my knees hurt sometimes and I just want to die.

Because what you cut is what you shot and represents what you want everyone to see and it's personal and it's kind of icky when somebody doesn't like it because maybe they don't like you any more.

Then those three edits get changed and hey, they like me, they really like me.

What a silly way to make a living.

pro

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:58:00 +0000

Pro, as in: pro-crastination. Just as I was about to click send on an email which would have confirmed my latest "no-fixed-address" in NYC my slimline, notworthashit telephone bleated. Ah, the agent. He had "news." First words out of his mouth: "Don't worry, you'll get paid." Seems they're about to shit-can the Ashton Kutcher masterpiece in New York. So, I'm off the hook for my latest attempt at a toe-hold in CW-land. Well, officially it's still on but I'm told that by tomorrow this fictional television foray into the deep metaphysics of zeitgeist fashion is dead meat.

Sooooo...I've got more time. And it couldn't come at a better time; or so everyone I've been belly-aching to might think on my behalf. See, I've been complaining for about ten years or so that directing TV has been getting in the way of what I really need to do, and that's writing. Yup, gotta finish that script...and, oh yeah, gotta polish up that other turd for coffee-lineup broadcast. Now I get to do what I've been talking about -the real work- or so I profess at every fucking opportunity.

But

Instead here I return to the blog slog in order that I may avoid said real work and instead PROCRASTINATE.

Funny, it's always so hard to start the juggle again, you know, get all those thematic and character balls flying up over my shaved onion so that I can sit back in wonderment as the thing pretty much writes itself. Bah humbug! Why is it always so much easier to sew the seeds of procrastination? Why does that wad of goo in the sink basket need to get jettisoned NOW? Why is the pile of junk that's been on my desk for eleven months suddenly in the way TODAY? Why does a quick guitar practice take precedence over a character analysis? Why does a satisfying dump come at just the right time to thwart any forward progress? Oh, check that last one; a satisfying dump trumps pretty much anything.

Okay.

Stop.

Enough with this bullshit. I'm at it now. I shall now turn my keyboard to good and away from evil...well not evil, really just you. Out, damn spot! For now I write...

Jesus, look at the pile of paper in my recycle box. Thing's going to explode. Just let me dump that first.

DMc

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:57:00 +0000

Hey, never once have I claimed to be "bright." This one's for you Denis:

Hey, I may be stupid, but I sure am slow.

liberal

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:21:00 +0000

Ted Kennedy made me...in a way. As a child of the 50's and 60's I couldn't help but be politicized in some way. And as a Canadian I couldn't help but be influenced by what ebbed and flowed south of the parallel. I remember watching Walter Cronkite's narration of JFK's assassination in Dallas in grade school. Our home room teacher wheeled a TV into our class and suspended lessons for the day so we could witness that defining moment. By the time Sirhan Sirhan pulled the trigger my politics had evolved enough for me to know that Trudeau was my man. PET had been elected in May and RFK's struggle against the bullets ended in June of that same year, 1968.

I was 13 years old.

I didn't really understand The New Deal until it had been fully formed and interpreted later by a man named Edward Kennedy. I didn't fully understand Keynesian political theory until I read "The Shock Doctrine" a year or two ago. But what I did know at that time, was that nobody should be left to fall through the cracks. If my (later rejected) Catholic upbringing gave me one thing, it was that the golden rule transcended religion, it transcended politics...it just made moral sense.

Ted made me because he was the glimmer of hope in that experiment called the USA. He fucked things up big time too. Why in the world did he run against an incumbent, Jimmy Carter during the 1980 Democratic primaries? All that did was seal the deal for Ronald Reagan and his neo-conservative mantra: "government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the problem."

It has taken from then to now for liberalism in the post-Reagan world to regain relevance. And this relevance remains tenuous. The free-market dogma of our Calgary School, Friedman devotee Prime Minister still reigns here...and it still scares me. But, as usual, as progressive as we think we are in Canada, we inevitably follow the leader. And right now his name is Barack Obama. As annoying and cringe inducing as it is to watch that imperialist power flex its pecs, I hold out hope that once again America will do the righ thing. I watch the health care fight down there as any dyed in the wool liberal would, and I hope that the socialism we so tenuously grasp here will creep through with the sea change in progress in the US of A. Then and only then will we Canadians be who we can be: open, tolerant, welcoming and warm.

Until then thanks, Ted...Chappaquiddick notwithstanding.

crash

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:08:00 +0000

Here's what happens when a wild turkey (of the upstate New York variety) hits the windscreen of one's car on Interstate 81:

Didn't happen to me. It happened to my wife. The only injury was to the glass...and the bird of course. Thank whatever it is that controls things that she's fine...GAWD!

joder

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 03:52:00 +0000

Big deal. A friendly. Toronto FC. Real Madrid. Los Galacticos are still in pre-season, not even close to match fit. But, yes, it was a big deal indeed. Raul, Xabi Alonso, Kaka, Albiol, Benzema and of course, Christiano Ronaldo: arguably the best player in football. After tonight, no argument here.

Half a billion dollars buys you the best team in football. And right now that's what Real Madrid CF most assuredly is: the best. Whether they can turn all that money into trophies is another story. Everybody will be gunning for them. Arch rival Barca and the rest of La Liga won't be impressed by the astronomical payroll. They'll step up their game whenever Real's in town. Every other team in the Champion's League will have its sights clearly trained on this ridiculous collection of outrageous talent.

They beat the piss out of Toronto FC tonight, 5-1. My heart sunk a little for my Reds with every goal. But my God some of them were beautiful. And not just because of the spectacle of this team in this town. I have to say two of the goals were truly gorgeous to watch.

But tonight was Toronto's night...or embarassment, depending on your point of view.

Perspective check: the salary cap in Major League Soccer is currently around $2.3 or $2.4 million per team. This year alone the front office at Estadio Santiago Bernabeu spent more than $368 million in salaries and transfer fees (Ronaldo's price tag in the move from Manchester United to Real Madrid?...something on the order of $135 million). Total payroll: approaching $500 million. Fu-uck. And we piss and moan about Steinbrenner.

Ah, but what a joy to watch a classic Raul finish, the laser passing of Kaka, and the "So You Think You Can Dance" of Ronaldo.

I couldn't bring myself to pay $15 to attend the one hour practice on Thursday, but I spent a lot more to watch a game that meant absolutely nothing to either team involved...and yet somehow it all did mean something.

Spain's kind of my other country, and I'm a political paradox because I'm a dyed in the wool leftist who loves Real, the Generalisimo's former team. I follow La Liga. I follow the ups and downs of Real Madrid. I need them to win this year...and yet I hate the Yankees; too much money, too much hype, just too much. Shhhh! I'm living a lie, but the little boys with big wallets sure were fun to watch tonight.

OK, it's all hyped up and it's set to music, but watch the 2009 Best Player in the World:

wake

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:29:00 +0000

New York City is a place where interesting things happen. Went to dinner at a place in Tribeca tonight. I sat at the bar, alone until the bass player for this band sat next to me.

Dave Matthews Band with Stefan Lessard on bass.

cable

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:01:00 +0000

Let's make cable. Canada-cable. Let's be to the US what HBO and FX are to CBS and NBC. Let's listen to Paul Gross. Screw the big US web co-pros. Let's do our thing our way and avoid the all things to all people trap. Let's be strange, right out of left field, outside the box, downright bizarre. In other words let's be ourselves. Let them do what they do. We'll do what we do.

We're not primates, so let's stop trying to ape something that just ain't us.

We need fewer network co-pros and more "Durham County." We need to avoid the definition of so-called legitimacy held out by the big four and just shoot shows with more "Intelligence."

Gross is right:

Gayle MacDonald

From Saturday's Globe and Mail Last updated on Saturday, Jul. 25, 2009 04:15AM EDT

In early June, while attending the Banff World Television Festival, actor Paul Gross sat down with a reporter to give his opinion on the current rush of Canadian TV producers, distributors and broadcasters vying to team up with American networks. Never one to hold his tongue, Gross – whose show Due South was the first Canadian-made show to win a prime-time slot on a major U.S. network – said things that very few in the gung-ho-to-sell crowd wanted to hear.

First, he warned that the Canadian industry should not rely too heavily on the U.S.-Canada co-production model, saying there is a danger of becoming “an assembly branch plant” for the American networks. “You might be putting in the lion's share of the money, but you do not control the fate of the production,” Gross said. “Sure, it's extraordinarily attractive. You get big exposure in a way you can't generate out of Canada alone. And it certainly helps with foreign sales to have ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox behind it. But it does bring some handcuffs that aren't all that attractive, creatively and for broadcasters.”

Jump ahead one month, and Gross's words seem oddly prescient. A little over a week ago, broadcasting giant NBC, which had teamed up with CTV to simulcast this summer's The Listener , announced it had decided to pull the plug on the Canadian-made drama halfway through its inaugural season.

Ironically, The Listener was getting good ratings on this side of the border, averaging a season-to-date audience of 942,000 on CTV. But the drama, about a telepathic paramedic, was not meeting NBC's expectations, averaging 4.2-million viewers – a figure far below the CTV sister drama Flashpoint , which averaged 9.73-million on CBS last summer. ( Flashpoint had garnered a 1.24-million average viewership on CTV from July to mid-September in 2008).

The pullout of NBC now leaves CTV to decide if it will fly solo and order a second season of The Listener , sans the U.S. broadcast-licence fee, which ranges from $300,000 to $500,000 an episode (with the remainder of the per-show cost funded by CTV, the Canadian Television Fund and tax credits). So far, Canada's largest conventional broadcaster has remained mum on the subject. Any renewal decision, says CTV, is “way far in the distance,” though the network notes the show has consistently won its time slot in Canada, and CTV is continuing to air all 13 episodes of season one.

Reached a week ago in Los Angeles, where he's currently filming the new ABC series Eastwick , Gross expanded on the views he had aired in June. “Given the current economy, the financial structure is what everything and everyone is focused on. Everyone wants to sell into the U.S. market because it's so enormous and you get great exposure,” he said, referring to a groundswell in the past 18 months of Canadian-made, American-network-simulcast tie-ins: shows such as Flashpoint ; the upcoming The Bridge (CTV and CBS); Defying Gravity (CTV and ABC); and Copper (CanWest Global and ABC).

“Canadians just need to be wary of certain pitfalls,” he adds. “While it's nice to have a U.S. partner, they can take a disproportionate amount of creative control over the show,” and without the U.S. licence fee, the production quality could decline. “On Due South , CBS had a huge amount of input,” Gross says, of the Mountie drama that ran on CBS – simulcast by CTV – for two seasons before the American network cancelled it. (Produced by Alliance Communications, Due South survived for four seasons in all thanks to CTV, the BBC and France's TF1.)

“It's an interesting thing,” adds Gross. “We'd all like [this model] to work seamlessly. But what people forget is that the American failure rate is unbelievably high: 85 to 90 per cent of new shows don't succeed. The Canadian market is slightly more forgiving.”

Another Toronto producer, who asked not to be identified, worries that Canadian broadcasters will begin to rely too heavily on the bilateral model – and only order series based on Canadian-made pilots if there is an American broadcaster attached. “Some writers are reacting strongly against the unfairness of American networks putting in a minute amount of money and having so much creative control over casting and scripts,” he says. “And they worry that Canadian stories could suffer because the thinking seems to be: Unless you sell into the States, your show isn't worthy. That's the risk of playing in these leagues.”

Flashpoint , about an elite police squad, set the bar. TV's most-watched original new drama last summer, it continued to hum through the first nine episodes of its 2009 midseason run (January through May), averaging 9.32-million viewers on CBS and 1.39-million on CTV. Producers Bill Mustos and Anne Marie La Traverse are now filming the final nine episodes of season two in Toronto, and are awaiting word on when those will air.

And they don't know yet if the networks will collaborate again by simulcasting. CBS had originally planned to start broadcasting those episodes on July 17, but pushed things back to a mid-season release (mirroring CTV's game plan). “I was intrigued by CTV's decision to go their own way,” said Mustos recently. “And I applauded their boldness to go with what felt right for their own schedule. That said, I was also getting nervous [when it looked like CBS would air in the summer, and CTV in the fall]. … But I was always confident CTV was trying to do the right thing by the show.” CTV has ordered 13 new episodes for season three. (CBS, following its contract, doesn't need to announce a decision for another two months.)

One obvious advantage of a Canadian-American partnership is that a show gets out into a broader universe. And while a licence fee from a U.S. network is never massive, it does allow Canadians to put more razzle-dazzle onto the screen. Further, a CBS/NBC/ABC/Fox stamp of approval is significant in the international television market. “If you're a buyer in France, Australia or Brazil, a stamp from one of these guys goes a long way,” says Mustos. “It brings a certain comfort level.”

Toronto's Laszlo Barna, co-producer of the upcoming police drama The Bridge , is a huge fan of the American-Canadian buddy system precisely because it opens international doors. “This is not just about the U.S. and Canada,” insists Barna, whose 13-part police drama is also slated to air mid-season. “It's about broadcasters in all territories facing the same budgetary crisis.

“The best producers in the country are only receiving about 70 per cent of their financing – and they used to receive 100 per cent. The shortfalls in revenues have caused all broadcasters – not just in the U.S. – to democratize their trade practices, which allows the best programming, from whatever market, to come to the top. This is not a glitch in Canada. It's a worldwide trend.

“There is simply not enough money in Canada, with the subsidy system and the recession, for that extra piece to put us into the comfort zone and be competitive.” Both The Bridge and Flashpoint have ballpark budgets of over $1.8-million an episode.

After The Listener was cancelled by NBC, producer Christina Jennings of Shaftesbury Films lamented a lack of promotion stateside. “For whatever reason, they didn't have the money to do it,” she says. But she insists a second season of the show could get made without American money. And she notes that Fox Searchlight has sold it strongly internationally.

Currently, its fate rests in the hands of CTV chief Ivan Fecan. “The difficulty with this model is that it changes everything,” says Gross. “And it can be problematic for the Canadian broadcaster, whose schedule is already largely determined by the American schedule. There are very few holes for Canadian shows already in the schedule – and often their placement is determined by where the Americans want to put them.”

At CTV headquarters, Fecan has often been heard to assert that his schedule will not be dictated by American networks. Still, he'll have to crunch The Listener numbers carefully before proceeding, given the precipitous decline in advertising revenues due to the recession, and a ratings trend that has seen The Listener come out of the block at 1.1-million viewers in early June and attract 877,000 viewers on July 16. (At press time, figures were not yet available for this past Thursday.)

In the end, it's anyone's guess how the shoe will drop. But as usual, Gross has a provocative zinger to throw into the debate. “This is not exactly a new pursuit. In the last 10 to 15 years, we've produced two Canadian shows – Flashpoint and Due South – that have done well on U.S. prime time. All I'm saying to people who hold this model up as the be-all and end-all … they may be a bit optimistic. If it works, that's great. But it's not easy to do.”

boat

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 01:30:00 +0000

I've been shooting a TV show on this boat in Long Island Sound. Boats are really fun. I can attest to that; I own one. They are really delightful things...until you have to make a TV show on them. Then, I can assure you, they are a pain in the ass.

noise

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:35:00 +0000

New Yorkers are often accused of being brash, loud and overbearing. The brash and the loud I completely understand. But overbearing? Most assuredly not.

Being brash and loud is an absolute necessity in New York. New York is loud. Deafeningly loud. Nobody here shouts because they want to, they shout because they have to. You want personal space, go to Minnesota. New York is about people, lots of them...and trucks, lots of them too...and construction. And then there's the ever-present honking taxi.

I get accused of being loud, mostly by my wife, and I suppose that character trait, if one could call it that is what's made New York such a comfortable fit for me. Generally when I work here I'm probably one of the quieter melons in the garden, but my somewhat brash nature doesn't ruffle feathers here the way it tends to in Canada.

In much of the rest of the US people are intimidated by New York. They think it's too loud and brash and overbearing. They also think New Yorkers are cold. They're not. Most New Yorkers avoid eye-contact on the street or in the subway because it's their way of claiming a modicum of personal space...in fact, avoiding eye-contact may be the only way to do it. But ask a New Yorker for directions and you may end up with a friend for life.

Many Canadians think Toronto is intimidating. That intimidation generally manifests in a profound (and unfounded) hatred for the city. They say Torontonians are brash and loud, but that mostly they're overbearing. Toronto gets pegged as being cold, and I don't mean the weather. People from Montreal and Winnipeg say Toronto is cold, so it can't be about the weather. They're talking about Torontonians. Well, to a degree we in Toronto have to fight for personal space too. We erect that little invisible screen around ourselves and move through the day. But ask somebody directions to Little Italy and you may just make a friend for life. Torontonians, like New Yorkers are open and giving and citizens of both burgs get a bum rap in the personal intercourse department.

I love New York. I love Toronto. It's good to work. But every time I return to New York to work I forget how noisy it is, and remember why I like it so much.

confused

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:31:00 +0000

I'm not sure if any of this means anything. A year or so ago we'd have been cheering the regulator for something like this, but now...? Okay, I guess a cheer is in order for this new CRTC edict to Rogers, which essentially says, "Don't do anything." But the fee for carriage thingie? And all that local programming stuff? I'm confused...and I just don't trust any of 'em.

Gayle MacDonald

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail Last updated on Tuesday, Jul. 07, 2009 05:23PM EDT

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has slapped down a request from Rogers Broadcasting that its CITY-TV stations in Toronto and Vancouver no longer be mandated to air 100 hours of Canadian films a year in prime time.

The decision was greeted enthusiastically yesterday by the country's distributors, who were spitting mad over Rogers's appeal to the federal regulator this spring. They argued the controversial change of licence would snuff out the sale of English-Canadian features to television stations.

“We're thrilled the CRTC has rejected Rogers' request to have the condition of licence to support Canadian films dropped,” said Ted East, president of the Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters. “CITY has been a critical partner in financing Canadian films and reaching audiences, and the loss of this support is having a devastating effect on Canadian film.”

East added that sales of Canadian features have ground to a halt since Rogers purchased a total of five CITY-TV stations from CTVglobemedia two years ago. (Sales to television stations represent roughly 40 per cent of the overall TV market for Canadian feature films.)

Susan Wheeler, Rogers Media's vice-president regulatory affairs, said yesterday the company was not surprised that the CRTC insisted on maintaining the status quo, adding, “It's not necessarily decisions that affect only the movie condition licence, [the CRTC] has indicated they have no appetite to change any licence rules for the one year before they will extensively review all specialty and conventional licences in April, 2010.”

The news was overshadowed by another CRTC decision on Monday that gave conventional broadcasters such as Global and CTV a foot in the door in their quest to get cable companies to pay for their signals.

The federal regulator also launched a public proceeding – which will start Sept. 29 in Gatineau, Que. – to develop a new regulatory framework that will give broadcasters greater flexibility to cope with the rapid evolution of the communications industry.

In exchange for that “greater flexibility,” however, East pointed out that the CRTC made clear that it will not be letting the conventional broadcasters ease up on their commitment to making, acquiring and broadcasting high-quality Canadian programming.

“The CRTC told broadcasters it will expect them to make ‘meaningful commitments' to Canadian content,” said East, “and going into the September meetings we are encouraged by that.”

careful

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:08:00 +0000

I got a text message from a friend the other day which gave me pause. The previous post in this space (although old news now) had been misinterpreted by more recent business acquaintances as applying to them. That means somebody at the show I just worked on thought my "chemicals" post was in reaction to something that happened there. Nah. Not the case. "Chemicals" applied to something I was engaged in early this spring. The blogosphere has its pitfalls. Misinterpretations like that one not the least among them.

Oh, and sorry I've been inactive here. I carved almost two weeks of semi down-time. I thought I'd be sailing a bit more but the weather got in the way. That's actually a bit of a good thing because I needed to scribble a little director's primer for a friend a colleague (which was harder and more time consuming than I thought). Off to New York on Wednesday, then back in late July to hop into Cra$sh & Burn (formerly: Lawyers, Guns & Money) which I'm thinking might just be the highlight of my year.

Ramping up to rant more in this space too. Stay tuned.

chemicals

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:59:00 +0000

Some chemicals mix, others don't.

I've never been in quite this position. The position of having survived a gig, a difficult one for all involved, with so little residual understanding or empathy among the interested parties.

So the chemical reaction was...less than perfect. Once the water makes its way under the bridge shouldn't most people be able to stand up, dust off and get on with it? Apparently not. It's amazing what one email, a somewhat playful airing of views can provoke. Sure, my little tome pushed a few buttons (you'll never see it here) but what I got in return was a dark, tropical storm (you'll never see that here either).

I have been accused of being arrogant three times in my professional life...that I know about. I honestly believe that the arrogance of a director, any director is no arrogance at all. It is a misinterpretation of the necessity to get the fuck on with the job.

I love actors, and for the most part it gets requited. I protect my on-set relationship with them as I would the population of an abandoned orphanage in Tehran. Once I've settled on an approach, disseminated that approach to those holding stakes, I get to the work. In TV I defer to the showrunner. It's their meat I'm cooking, and I'll give it to them anywhere from raw to well done. That's what I believe I'm there for.

Where I go off the rails and start pissing on my territory is when the committee shows up. When the committee diverges from the showrunner I sometimes end up having to pick a side. I never want to, but often it's the only way the thing will get shot.

Nobody wants to give somebody enough rope with which they might be able to hang themselves, and those around them who've sunk in the dough. But neither can the leash be so short as to prevent departure from the dog house.

Because a committee with a hand on too short a leash is only going to piss off the dog.

So, back to the opening lame analogy: chemicals. I don't know if I was the hydrogen peroxide or the sulfuric acid...but this shit blew up real good.

guy

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:50:00 +0000

Guy preps pilot.

Guy shoots pilot.

Guy submits director's cut of pilot.

Guy moves on to other gainful employment.

Guy anxiously awaits screening of producer's cut.

Guy gives up on being invited to see producer's cut.

Guy doesn't get called when pilot is mixed.

Guy communicates with genius showrunner who supported him through the ordeal to ask, is it still bad?

Guy waits to see mixed and sweetened version of pilot...the one guy shot.

Guy finally emails producers and reasonably asks for copy of finished pilot.

Guy tries to lift jaw off floor when he's told that he can't see finished pilot because it's being sold in LA and is completely top secret.

Guy finds out five minutes later that said pilot was screened the previous night at WGC.

What the fuck is a guy to do?

snob

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 02:33:00 +0000

Yeah. I'm a goddamn snob.

I want my HBO. I want my TMN.

But I gotta move these refridgerators.

Gotta move these colour TV's.

Doyle and McGrath, provoked by a quote from a Canadian Exec Producer in this past Sunday New York Times, have been duking it out. The "snob" card was played. Flashpoint Executive Producer, Anne Marie La Traverse was quoted in said NYT as follows:

“There’s a snobbery about commercial shows here, among writers particularly,” Ms. La Traverse said. “Everyone dreams of doing a dark HBO series. There’s a resistance.”
“It took us a while to find writers who embraced this shape,” she added, “and wanted to be accessible, relatable, heroic, emotional, all the choices we really wanted to make.”

Umbrage was taken by Mr. McGrath at his DTOS blog follows:

This is frankly, bullshit. And because the rest of the article is so on, a perspective like that can be particularly damaging.

Oooooh...kaaaaay.

Today comes Doyle in the Globe and Mail:

Thing is, La Traverse is correct, as I see it. Yes, many members of the tribe of Canadian TV writers take themselves very, very seriously indeed. They complain constantly. They complain about network executives and producers. They complain that their work is being diluted and diminished by people who are not, you know, artists. They complain about press coverage of their work. They complain about the lack of promotion for their work, often without reason. Most are decent, interesting people, devoted to creating really good television. But some of them make up the biggest chip-on-the-shoulder bunch in the entire arts and entertainment world. There are a few who sneer outright at those Canadian shows that are a commercial success. There are some who are, as La Traverse says, outright snobs.

So, who's right?

Like I said, I'm a snob, so the perception would be that I'd side with McGrath (he did qualify his comments in this posting today). But the reality is I make my living on those network chestnuts. The all things to all people variety. The tres commercial, filled-with-commercials filler between commercials. Hell, I'm a veteran of the Law & Order franchise.

At the same time I get a case of the standing dander whenever I hear about another push for commercial viability at the CBC. The CBC shouldn't be "commercial." It should be THE C-B fucking C. And that means it should be different. It should be ferociously Canadian, ferociously individual and ferociously independent.

See, I've shot Rescue Me too. And that's generally seen as one of those quirky, dark, funny cable shows that all the snobs want a piece of. It ain't Six Feet Under, but Six Feet Under ain't Rescue Me either. I shot a pilot this spring for a Canadian cable channel. A quirky, dark, funny cable pilot. It was fun. I loved it. Know why? It was quirky, dark and funny. Ooooooh, mmmmmm.

But wait; the show now has to satisfy that conglom's free commercial prime time demands now too. Apperently if it doesn't that net will surely go bankrupt. I mean how can a Canadian network on the verge of ruin afford to produce exclusive shows for its different outlets...when it complains to the CRTC that it can't afford to shoot anything Canadian at all? But I digress.

So, I'm a snob and a journeyman. I'm a craftsman and a creative type. I'm a brick and a balloon.

You know what that makes me? It makes me Canadian. I do it because I want to. I also do it because I have to. I find a way to commit, wholeheartedly to whatever I'm doing. And then I try to do my best. This is my love and my living. Wait until somebody calls wrap, then I can make a value judgment on the quality of the material I'm doing. But not before.

I like commercial. And sometimes commercial can be deliciously artsy. I love artsy. But sometimes artsy can be overwhelmingly boring. I do 'em both because I gotta eat.

So in my opinion (a clearly Canadian one at that), nobody's right...and everybody's right. Simple answer is: when you're thinking about it, you commit to what you have and aspire to what you want. And while you're doing it you delight in what you have and aspire to make it better.

Oh, and that show LaTraverse was talking about? I'm in the middle of shooting it now.

And I'm having fun.

heaven-ly

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:22:00 +0000

And so the "new" script arrives and...

(insert deep sigh of relief)

...it's such a vast improvement over what preceded it that director has to contain his joy, so as not to appear like a twelve-year-old school girl.

Today

is a good day.

hell-ish

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 19:19:00 +0000

Script purgatory. It's where a director is shackled to a dripping stone wall alongside the skeletons of his peers, unable to move or sometimes even breathe. Director doesn't struggle. Director waits, silently hoping that the powers swirling above him feel the same way he does about the script they've assigned to him. The director hopes that a miracle will occur in the writer's room and out will come a shiny, new script upon which the director can hang his creative hat. Such is director's lot; most of the time the quality of director's work can be chalked up to director's luck with the script rotation.

Script purgatory is fickle, fickle in an impersonal way. SP doesn't choose its victims. It just is. It's like crossing the street; sometimes getting strained through the grille of a Mack truck just happens. Sometimes the rung on a ladder just breaks. Question is, why, on those infrequent occasions when the rung does break, does it always have to be one near the top? Falling toast. Murphy's Law. Bad luck. Nothing personal from script purgatory. Just...purgatory.

Often the swirling powers above have as much say in improving said script as said director does: essentially no say whatsoever. The real devil here is big, bad network. Network wants simplicity...on occasion downright stupidity. And since network (and studio) has signing authority on the cheques, network word can often be seen as gospel.

Purgatory. I'm there. Wish me luck.

um

bootinthepants@gmail.com (Ken) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:21:00 +0000

I'm not dead...yet. I've been working...
And sailing.

Back soon.

It's been around a while but stick with this one, it's quite remarkable. Kind of reminds me of the movie bizz.