Everything about Featured, eh?

Taken: Cherisse Houle

This week’s episode of Taken focused on the specialized investigation unit known as Project Devote. Officers from the Winnipeg Police and the RCMP deal specifically with cases categorized under “murdered and missing  exploited persons.” The active case of Cherisse Houle, a smart and playful youngster, who loved being active, exemplifies the class of casework this unit was established for. Officers believe any seemingly insignificant detail could prove the key to solving Cherisse’s murder and people are strongly urged to call 1 888 673-3316 to share any information about Cherisse.

Cherisse’s older sister, Jessica, was her best friend; they were inseparable. Bowling, movies and rollerskating were some of their favoured activities as young children, and as a child Cherisse was eager to meet the challenge of school. However, during grade school this all changed and her life turned to a pinball of group homes and foster care. It is Jessica’s belief that had the two sisters never been placed with CFS, Cherisse would still be alive. It was here that they were first exposed to illegal drugs and sex work.

A 17-year-old  mother of an 18-month-old boy, Cherisse was a vulnerable teen who had fallen victim to the sex trade and whose life was plagued with drug use. By all accounts, though she had been making efforts to turn her life around. Cherisse had been reaching out to family members for assistance and had made efforts to get treatment. These requests proved futile. Sadly, due to lack of space, she was turned away from several treatment facilities in the region. Days later, Cherisse vanished.

Last seen on June 26, 2009 in Winnipeg, her body was found on July 1, 2009 by a construction worker near Rosser, Manitoba, adjacent to Sturgeon Creek.

If you have any information about this case or any other active cases you are asked to contact Taken.

Taken airs a new episode Fridays at 7:30 p.m. ET on APTN.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail

TV Eh B Cs podcast 51 — The Murdoch Mysteries writers

On Saturday, Oct. 1, Greg David of TV, Eh? moderated a series of panels during Unlock the Mysteries of Murdoch: The Ultimate Insider Conference, held in CBC’s headquarters in downtown Toronto.

This is the first of three sessions we recorded, with some of the writing staff of Murdoch Mysteries, including Paul Aitken, Michelle Ricci, Jordan Christianson, Simon McNabb, Mary Pederson and head writer and showrunner Peter Mitchell.

Listen or download below, or subscribe via iTunes or any other podcast catcher with the TV, eh? podcast feed.

Want to support TV, eh?’s work? Become a Patreon!

SUPPORT

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail

This Life writer Alison Lea Bingeman breaks down “Perfect Day”

Spoiler warning: Do not read this article until you have seen This Life Episode 202, “Perfect Day.”   

Would you live your life differently if you knew you were running out of time? That’s one of the overarching themes of CBC family drama This Life, and it was a major focus of this week’s episode, “Perfect Day,” written by Alison Lea Bingeman.

“For me, what was so fun about writing the episode was asking, ‘How do we have fun when we allow ourselves to go out and kind of unwind a little bit?'” says Bingeman.

“Perfect Day” follows Natalie as she embarks on a day-long adventure with her friend Tia, who is also battling cancer. It also features big twists for Maggie, who shocks her family by announcing her marriage to Raza, and Matthew, who has a confrontation with David that forces him to face some uncomfortable truths about himself.

As part of our continuing series of interviews with This Life writers, Bingeman—whose other TV credits include Bomb Girls and 19-2—joins us via phone from Los Angeles to tell us more about the episode.

What themes did you want to explore when writing “Perfect Day”?
Alison Lea Bingeman: I think that what is really, for me, the foundation of the show is ‘What do you do with your life when you know your time could be limited?’ I think the theme of the first part of the season in particular is ‘How do we live with hope and live life to its fullest?’ and the idea of don’t put off to tomorrow what you should do today.  I think that’s really what Natalie is about. And certainly that’s the theme of Episode 2.

We’re all so concerned about getting stuff done and doing the right things and being the right person, but what about just going out and kind of unleashing a little bit? That’s what I really, really enjoyed about writing this episode, was [Natalie and Tia] being out there on those paddle boards on the water.

Was the biker’s funeral as much fun to write as it was to watch? 
I had so much fun. I actually pitched it, and everybody was like, ‘Yeah!’ We had a total gas with it.

A big moment in the episode was Maggie’s announcement that she and Raza got married. How did the writers decide that move made the most sense for her? 
That answer is twofold. One is that Maggie is a very spontaneous woman and she kind of dives in head first. She saw a situation where she lost the rent from her brother, and she had to give up her apartment, and then the situation with Raza came up and she was like ‘Why don’t we kill two birds with one stone?’ That’s the outward reason, but the reason beneath that—that maybe she’s not even aware of when she does it—is she has a longing for a certain love and affection. She kind of wants to have a husband and have a family, and this is sort of her version of being conventional . . . So it’s really sort of a deep need and deep impulse that she’s acting out on in a backhanded way.

This Life 202

What will Maggie’s decision to marry Raza mean for her the rest of the season?
I think the flip decision she made is going to come back and she’s going to have to face it on some level. There will be unintended consequences for her, let’s put it that way. Not that she’s going to get punished for this, but she will eventually come to see, ‘Oh, OK. That’s what I did, that’s what this means. I had no idea.’

Matthew and David had some very revealing scenes in this episode. Tell me about their confrontation. 
I think that Matthew is angry because he’s getting rejected, and he’s living with the consequences of his actions, with his affair. And really in the simplest terms, when he comes to give David a piece of his mind, in a way he’s giving it to himself. But it flips on him because David isn’t going to just stand up to him and be the bad guy. He’s like ‘Come on in, have a drink. This must be hard.’ And David turns out to be a real human being. But Matthew can’t sustain that with him, he’s locked down. That’s why the dustup happens at the end of that scene.

What we were looking for in that exchange was that Matthew goes back to a place of unacceptance of David and, therefore, of himself. He’s really tied up with self-judgment, but he can’t do it himself, he can only do it through David. That’s why that scene was so important, and that’s why it was so lovely to write.

After seeing David, Matthew told Nicole he wants to fight for their marriage. Is this a turning point for him? 
He’s in lockdown, but in a way he’s able to see by looking at his sister’s relationship—and what David was in that relationship—he doesn’t want to be that guy. That makes him go on his knees with Nicole, and it makes him realize how much he wants this marriage. And he wants to be forgiven—even though he can’t forgive himself.

But can Nicole forgive him? 
I think he’s going to have to go through a few more hoops.

Romy wants to live with Oliver when her mother dies, and Oliver was considering it until Maggie—of all people—told him he may not be up to such a big responsibility. Is that the end of the matter? 
All of our characters kind of come to realizations, and then they sort of fade back again from it, because it is may be a difficult realization. With Oliver, he wants to see himself as heroic, like the great uncle for Romy, and that sense that he can’t be that for her is going to be difficult. But it’s not over, that’s all I can tell you. It’s not over.

The last scene of Natalie watching family videos of David and the kids was very poignant. What do you think was going through her head at that moment? 
I think when we end relationships, to get through them, we make the other guy the bad guy. She saw at that moment that there was real affection, there was real love. And it’s a real bittersweet moment for her.

Do you have a particular character you feel you write or understand better than the others?
I love Natalie. I’m a mom and I’ve raised two boys who are similar in age to Caleb, so I really relate to her. But I would also say that I relate a lot to Maggie, because I was a rebellious young woman, so I totally get who she is and where she comes from and why she does the things that she does. And I love David. I actually love them all.

This Life airs Sundays at 9 p.m. ET on CBC.

Images courtesy of CBC.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail

The stars of Kim’s Convenience sound off on the groundbreaking series

After being bumped a week because of the Toronto Blue Jays wild card game, Kim’s Convenience is back on track. Debuting Tuesday at 9 p.m. with back-to-back episodes on CBC, the series is the brainchild of Ins Choi, who penned the original, award-winning play.

Starring Paul Sun-Hyung Lee as Appa, Jean Yoon as Umma, Simu Liu as Jung, Andrea Bang as Janet and Andrew Phung as Kimchee, Kim’s Convenience tells the story of Appa and Umma Kim, a Korean couple who immigrated to Canada and opened a convenience store in Toronto’s Regent Park. The headstrong Appa has big plans for son Jung and daughter Janet, and those expectations cause friction in the family.

We spoke to the cast and creator about bringing Kim’s Convenience from the stage to TV, what viewers can expect and how the Kim’s story is universal.

Ins Choi, co-creator and co-executive producer
What’s been the biggest learning curve for you, adapting your play into a television show?
I’ve just been on a big learning curve throughout and ever since I started collaborating with [series co-creator] Kevin White. He’s been teaching me a lot as we adapted it. I guess writing with someone else was the biggest thing initially. We wrote two scripts together initially and then we were in the writers’ room. You have to keep your ego in check and have faith that everyone has the show in mind rather than their own ideas. The best idea will stick and the best thing for the show is what we choose.

It’s not always your idea that’s the best, is it?
No! It’s rarely mine! [Laughs.]

Who did you have in the writers’ room?
We had Kevin and myself, Garry Campbell, Anita Kapila, Rebecca Kohler and Sonja Bennett.

Is Kim’s Convenience a prequel to the events in the play?
It’s kind of an adjustment and a prequel. We find everyone in the cast anywhere between six and 12 years before the time of the play. We’ve adjusted some ages to better suit our needs. Janet was 30 years old in the play and now she’s 20. She and Jung were two years apart in the play and now they’re two. We find Janet at OCAD, studying photography. We fudged things a bit, but we liked that world of students and assignments, teachers … we thought that would be good, fertile ground for story. And Jung is 24 and is working at a car rental company. So, we have the school, the car rental agency with a bunch of other characters and like the play we have the store, the apartment above the store and the church.

You’re learning the back stories of the characters you created for the play. That must be fun.
You live with the play for so long … and I had all these other ideas for the play. Scenes, different ideas. As hard as it was, I had to edit all of that out. Here, we get to dive into those extras. I reach back and go, ‘Oh yeah, there was a scene I had a long, long time ago…’, so that’s been exciting. But also creating it with new eyes with these writers and the actors. Sometimes, we come up with a character and hire the actor, and that actor brings more to the character than we had thought. Or they come up with stuff and we go, ‘Oh, that’s better than what we had, let’s write to that strength.’


kims_paulPaul Sun-Hyung Lee, Appa
How long have you been involved in Kim’s Convenience?
Ins Choi wrote the play in 2005 and shortly after that I became involved in workshops for it. He was developing the play and would call me in to read scenes, give feedback and do workshops and work out the kinks. So, off and on before we’ve even been in production, I’ve been involved in it. I remember, in the very beginning, reading two scenes and just being enraptured by it and blown away by how authentic and truthful it sounds. I immediately knew I needed to be involved.

This play could have disappeared and just been lost in the shuffle. So many things went right for it to happen, and it was like catching lightning in a bottle.

What does it mean to you to be learning Appa’s back story after playing him for so many years?
It’s an incredible advantage for an actor to step onto a stage and know the history of the character. With Appa, we’ve aged down the family by a number of years. For me, I’m not so much learning about his backstory because he was always a full-realized character to me. He’s a force of nature. He’s there to create disruption around him. We keep saying this: the play is one world and the series is another world. There are parallels and similarities, but the paths don’t really cross.

Watching Appa judging Janet during the scene I saw you run through … I think people sometimes forget that you can say a lot with facial expressions without saying a word at all.
Being able to act with subtext is a bit of a lost art now. I feel like younger actors now are uncomfortable with the silences and need to fill it with ums and ahs or come up with dialogue they hope you’re going to cut off. You just have to be in the moment and trust that this silence is far more effective than if you stammer through a scene.

Did you have any questions for Ins or concerns when it was announced this would be a TV show?
The only real concern I had was the tone of the show. It’s so easy to play broad, to go sitcom-y with a laugh track. We really didn’t want that to happen. One of the real strengths of the show is being able to connect the audience with these characters as human beings and not stereotypes. There is a real danger, especially when you’re portraying non-white characters. I wanted to keep these people as real and believable as possible, and that’s what we did with the play. Yes, at the end of the day we’re entertainment and we push the envelope as we entertain. We do find ourselves in situations that are manufactured, but our way out is to play it straight.

kims_jean

Jean Yoon, Umma
What’s it been like seeing the evolution of Umma from the play to the TV series?
It’s a lot of fun because I’ll read a script and say, ‘Oh, Umma had an old boyfriend!’ or ‘Umma likes to sing!’ or ‘Umma has a friend at church,’ we see moments of tenderness and squabbling. That whole range is there. In the play, Paul and I are just sort of passing each other in the night. It’s very intense, but we get to do so much more here.

There is already a buzz about the show. Are you feeling that?
Yeah, my neighbours are all really excited. One of my neighbours stopped me in the grocery story and told me she’d seen one of the commercials. And, even the people who saw the play saw it more than once, so we already have a built-in audience.

Can you talk about the Korean immigrant experience as it relates to Kim’s Convenience?
In 1965, my family came. I think, in the Trudeau years, they changed the immigration policy. Prior to that, Canadian policy was more geared to people who would blend in, so European immigrants were favoured over Asian immigrants. Then they changed to the point system, and if you had a college degree or a trade, would bump you up. My father was a professor at the University of Toronto. But when I first came, everyone was very isolated. The Korean community really started from 1970 onwards and for them, the experience has been families working really hard to raise their kids, and their kids—especially the girls—end up growing into a culture where their ways don’t really match that of their parents.

The church is a huge cultural centre for Koreans and actually have more churches per capita than any other ethnic group. That’s where everybody meets, even if you don’t believe. Our parents work hard, sacrifice and have dreams for us, and then when the kids go off in a different direction and become photographers like Janet … or like my mother. I got a callback for an audition once and my mother answered the phone and said, ‘Jeanie doesn’t do that anymore!’ and hung up.

What were you supposed to be? 
She wanted me to be a doctor or a lawyer or something like that. But I wanted to be a writer or an actor.

kims_simu

Simu Liu, Jung
Kim’s Convenience seems like a natural play to be developed into a TV show.
Yes, and frankly I think it’s one that doesn’t get told enough. I’m speaking from the standpoint of coming from another show with an all-Asian cast [Blood & Water] and I think that’s a huge anomaly. I find the themes in Kim’s Convenience to be universal to the Canadian identity. It’s so much a part of the Canadian identity to be an immigrant because we’re a cultural mosaic. The show is about a Korean family, but I’ve heard Polish people come up to me and tell me how much the play resonated with them. It doesn’t matter where you come from; you come to Canada in the hopes to build a better life for future generations.

So, were you supposed to be a doctor or a lawyer, or was your family going to support you not matter what you did?
My parents were both electrical engineers and work in aerospace. I went to a school for gifted kids and enrolled in a private school. They did everything they could to nudge me along that path and I just couldn’t do it.

When we meet up with Jung in the first episode, he’s detailing cars at a rental place. He’s estranged from his father. Is he trying to rebuild that relationship with Appa this season?
Yes, you’ll see that. It’s Jung and his best friend, Kimchee, dealing with life. But then there is always something peppered in about the past between Appa and Jung. Whether they get to that reconciliation, I can’t say for sure, but there is definitely movement on that front.

kims_andrea

Andrea Bang, Janet
How did you end up getting the role of Janet?
I had heard about the show and talked to my agent. I submitted a self-tape and then heard back to come and do a test in Toronto. That whole process was about two and a half months.

Everyone on the cast has told me how this story has resonated with them personally. What about you?
Oh, totally. A lot of the things Umma or Appa would think, or their viewpoints on life, are super-similar to either my own parents or people that I know of. A lot of the people I hang out with are also Asian-Canadians. Even when I read the audition I was like, ‘Oh my God, this is so me.’

Talk about the relationship between Janet and Appa. It seems pretty contentious from the scenes I saw you film with Paul.
I sometimes call Janet ‘Mini-Appa,’ because they are very similar in a lot of ways, especially the stubbornness. For me, those were some of the most fun scenes to do with Paul because we’re always trying to one-up each other and gets so ridiculous. Appa is so stubborn and Janet has become progressively more stubborn as a result. But Janet also brings out a side of Appa that no one else does because they are so similar.

Kim’s Convenience airs Tuesday at 9 and 9:30 p.m. on CBC on Oct. 11. After that, episodes air Tuesdays at 9 p.m. on CBC.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail

Heartland welcomes Theo, Boone and Bubbles

I don’t like to see Amy stressed out, but that’s the way life’s been for her in these first two episodes of Heartland in Season 10. Last week, things were looking grim for Minnie when she delivered two foals, putting her health in danger. This week, she suffered from colic, necessitating emergency surgery and all hands on deck at Heartland to feed the foals, named Theo and Boone, until Minnie was well enough to return.

In fact, Heartland‘s animal co-stars almost outshone the human ones, as the horses and Bubbles the Goldfish 1 and 2 commanded plenty of screen time during “You Just Know,” written by Mark Haroun. There was an ever-so-brief moment when Ty and Amy were considering baby names until Jack called to say Minnie wasn’t doing so well. Her health, and those of the foals, hung over Amy all episode until the three horses were reunited. I can’t help but think Amy is seeing herself when she looks at Minnie, and that’s causing her angst.

heartland_2

Katie, Tim and Jack all learned a valuable lesson about life and death on the ranch thanks to two goldfish named Bubbles. Tim bought the shiny dude for Katie, and quickly incurred criticism from Jack.

“What kind of world do we live in where a man can’t buy a goldfish for his granddaughter?” Tim wondered. He found out just what kind of world when Bubbles expired. Katie may have said her new pet was sleeping, but we all knew better. The storyline led to some very funny moments between Tim and Jack, first when the former tried to avoid letting the latter discover he’d replaced the dead fish with another one, and then both stammering while telling Katie the original Bubbles was deceased. Their worry was for nought; Katie wanted to flush Bubbles 1.0 like she did the dead ones at school.

heartland_3

The hot and cold between Lou and Mitch reached a fever temperature out on the trail when they shared a passionate kiss … and then went stone cold when she announced she was headed to New York City for Maggie meetings, effectively putting anything they might have together on ice.

Meanwhile, Georgie may have made a new enemy in Sam. It’s one thing for Georgie to want Olivia put in her place, but there was no way she’d stand for Sam’s plot to unseat Olivia via injury. It was a classy move to stand up to Sam, but I worry that decision is going to haunt her later this season. As for her “Most Memorable Moment” essay topic? I give it an A+.

Heartland airs Sundays at 7 p.m. on CBC.

Images courtesy of CBC.

Facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail