Link: A ‘Breaking Bad’ writer and producer is behind a new Anne of Green Gables
“Anne is timeless, but she’s timely right now. I’m not influenced by what’s come before. I feel like Anne’s issues are incredibly relevant and topical right now. There’s so much conversation in the world about gender parity and feminism and prejudice and those who come from away. People who are other. All of these conversations are within L.M. Montgomery’s writing. It’s the perfect time to talk about it again.” Continue reading.Â
This year’s WGC Writing Room Intensive at the Toronto Screenwriting Conference is notable for a couple of reasons. For one, it’s the first time the TSC’s Intensive is focusing on comedy writing. And secondly, the Intensive is being run by Kevin White and Ins Choi, the co-creators of CBC’s hit comedy Kim’s Convenience, giving the participants the opportunity to write a mock episode of the series which is, coincidentally, prepping for Season 2 on CBC.
On Thursday, Amy Cole, Derek Robertson, Elize Morgan, Gillian Muller, Jennifer Siddle, Lisa Rose Snow, Marcia Johnson and Richard Clark will join White, Choi and myself for six-hour session (there will be snacks, just like a real writer’s room). What can these lucky eight expect from the session? We got Kevin White to tease what’s in store. And check back on Friday to read my recap of the session; I’ll be moderating a panel discussing the group’s experiences on Saturday, April 22, at the Toronto Screenwriting Conference.
First off, what interested you about participating in the Writing Room Intensive this year?
Kevin White: It’s hard to get experience making stuff and doing stuff. I feel like anytime you can share that with people, with the hopes that people can learn and get better at the craft [is good]. And, hopefully, we learn something too and get a chance to meet emerging or young writers. That’s what was in it for us. If anyone can take anything away from the way we write the show, all the better.
What are you hoping they walk away with?
I don’t really know how other writer’s room are run. I’ve been in other people’s rooms as a writer for hire, so I have some sense of that. I’ve adapted a lot of things over the years as to how we approach breaking story and writing scripts collectively, so I hope some of that might be informative and helpful to people who have had less time in rooms. From a selfish point of view, it’s always nice to meet writers you haven’t worked with before and have a chance to see what their ideas are about, how they think and their point of view. I think it will be exciting for us to have eight fresh eyes on the material and really hear what it’s like for someone who hasn’t had any previous experience or exposure to the behind-the-scenes of our show freshen our outlook as well.
Will you be setting up the Intensive like you do it on Kim’s Convenience?
We’re going to try. Obviously, we have part of the morning finding out who everyone is. Then we’ll share ideas.
What can you say about the breakout sessions you have planned?
We have seven writers in the room on Kim’s Convenience now. With a number like that, we often work in different side group configurations. I hope we’ll have time to break up how we do it a little bit. Ins will have half the room, I will have half the room and we’ll be able to work in two smaller groups and report back to the bigger group. We want to be able to work with as many people as possible and meet with as many people as possible.
People will, presumably, be coming to the table with ideas. We need to hear those ideas and ruminate on them on them in the smaller groups. We’ll boil down to the ones that seem to have the most promise and then get back together and have feedback as the groups present their strongest ideas. They may be big stories and they may be small stories. Then, once we land on the stories we like the most and can sort of fit together, then we can figure out what will be the main story and what will be the other story. There might even be a third story. Then we’ll probably break off again into groups and beat those out.
Are you expecting to have an episode outline completed by the end of the day?
[Laughs.] I don’t know! I’m sure we can cobble together something. You can always make something because of time constraints because day’s end is coming. But, yes, I think we’ll be able to cobble together the bones of an episode and try to come up with what those 18 or 20 scenes could be for this typical Kim’s Convenience episode.
The Toronto Screenwriting Conference runs April 22-23, 2017. Get the latest information—including events and how to register—on the official website.
CBC and Rabbit Square Productions today announced casting for new unconventional family comedy series CRAWFORD. Created by Mike Clattenburg (Trailer Park Boys, Black Jesus), and co-created by recording artist Mike O’Neill (Moving Day, Trailer Park Boys: Don’t Legalize It), the half-hour comedy features an ensemble cast led by Jill Hennessy (Shots Fired, Crossing Jordan), Kyle Mac (Miss Sloane, 21 Thunder), Daniel Davis Yang (Riverdale), Alice Moran (Sunnyside, Man Seeking Woman) and John Carroll Lynch (The Founder, American Horror Story). Production starts this week in Toronto and will continue until June for a winter 2018 launch on CBC.
The world of CRAWFORD is a familiar yet unusual one. When raccoons invade the world’s most functioning dysfunctional family’s home, they help breathe life and new meaning into the odd behaviours of the family. Jill Hennessy plays Cynthia (aka Mom), an award-winning cereal executive struggling to deal with the stress of juggling work with the needs of her husband, Owen, and her lover. John Carroll Lynch is cast as Owen, family patriarch and former police chief, who is unable to use his voice due to a medical condition and communicates via his smartphone. Kyle Mac is Don, “temporarily†crashing at his parents’ after being dropped by his music label. Much to his surprise, he soon finds his calling as a raccoon whisperer. Older sister Wendy, played by Alice Moran, and younger brother Brian, played by Daniel Davis Yang, aren’t too surprised by Don’s return and welcome him back—sort of—they have issues of their own. It’s weird, but in CRAWFORD weird is the new normal.
Produced by Rabbit Square Productions for CBC in Canada and Comedy Central in the U.S., CRAWFORD is executive produced by Laura Michalchyshyn and Mike Clattenburg. The series is written by Mike Clattenburg, Mike O’Neill, Zoe Whittall (Baroness von Sketch Show, The Best Kind of People), Kathleen Phillips-Locke (Sunnyside, The Ron James Show), Monica Heisey (Baroness Von Sketch Show, I Can’t Believe It’s Not Better) and Timm Hannebohm (Trailer Park Boys: Countdown to Liquor Day, Say Goodnight to the Bad Guys).
Janice Dawe and Kathy Avrich-Johnson are co-executive producers for Bizable Media (Saving Hope, A Better Man). Line producer is Suzanne Colvin-Goulding (The Girlfriend Experience, The Virgin Suicides). Series cinematography by David Makin (Reign, Beauty and the Beast), production design by Rupert Lazarus (Eyewitness, Shoot the Messenger) and costume design by Aline Gilmore (Indian Horse, Game On). Content Media handles international distribution for the series. CRAWFORD is produced with the participation of the Canada Media Fund.
This week’s episode of Canada: The Story of Us features some remarkable technological advances that were critical in joining Canada from sea to sea to sea: the Welland Canal, the Victoria Bridge and the first underwater telegraph cable. However, with a time span of 65 years, once again many things were left out. And I know, with a history as diverse and a show seeking to cover as much as possible in 44 minutes, I get it, things will be left out. But this week, David Plain and I were both overcome by the elephant in the room.
I should point out that David and I each watch the episodes and then share our thoughts, either talking about the show or simply writing down quick blurbs and sharing that; we do not collaborate so as to ensure we present our own opinions about each episode.
As I watched Sunday’s episode “Connected,” I was trying to see the big picture, where this portion of the story fits amid what we have already seen. Historically, at this juncture the territory that will become Canada had been ruled by Generals; jurisprudence has more or less fallen to the military, including the First Nations people who were considered military allies and instrumental in the defeat of the Americans. Following the War of 1812, control shifts from the military to civilian, and the utility of Indigenous people fades from importance.
That disappearance is also reflected in Canada:Â The Story of Us. Up until now, First Nations people have been present and a part of the story that CBC is telling, primarily one of mere survival of the elements and war. The role the first people played was vital to Canada before Canada even became Canada. Now that war is no longer an ongoing threat, ideologies change, warriors who are familiar with the topography are no longer a commodity required by the generals of the military and now the thrust becomes uniting Canada. But to what purpose, and at what expense?
Very early on we hear from Jim Balsillie, Chairman of Council of Canadian Innovators, “Canada was a vast open land and we needed transportation infrastructure to be able to harness the untapped potential of this country,” he says. But who and what would be the most significant objector to the commodification of the land and its resources? First Nations. How best to deal with this issue? Make them disappear. Canada:Â The Story of Us, made them disappear too.
A quick history lesson omitted by the show reveals that, in 1928, the Darling Report set the foundation for the process of colonization, outlining the Indian “civilization†program, that would include settling First Nations in communities where they could be educated, Christianized and made over into farmers. Then, later in 1844, the Bagot Commission recommended the assimilation of First Nations people by means of both residential schools and centralization of policy. In essence, these studies set the groundwork for The Indian Lands Act of 1960, and the Indian Act of 1876.
As I watched the segment on the Victoria Bridge, I wondered, “Where are the ironworkers from Kahnawa:ke?” Last fall, I covered Mohawk Ironworkers on APTN, so I have some familiarity with that portion of Indigenous history in Canada. A quick bit of research revealed that yes, the ironworkers from Kahnawa:ke were not only instrumental in the building of this bridge and many others, they were also hard at work in the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway. But the CBC chose not to give them any credit. Just like the policy of the era, the CBC—at least in this episode—appears to be whitewashing history; perpetuating the idea that First Nations people are either just “gone” or did not contribute to the building of our country.
Yes the moments covered this week were vital to the story of what Canada is today, and yes it is important that we see how these innovations came to be, and no we cannot change history. However, in this era of reconciliation, I feel, particularly as a non-Indigenous person, that we as Canadians need to learn what we have missed, including the contributions of First Nations people throughout Canada’s history.
The remnants of my latte and David’s mint tea!
Once again I sat down with Elder David Plain of Aamjiwnaang and the following are his thoughts on this latest episode:
This episode was particularly hard to watch. So it’s very difficult to push past the old adage my mother instilled in me as a boy, ‘If you don’t have anything nice to say, then don’t say anything at all.’ But, I’ll try.
The theme of this episode is found in the title, “Connected.†But the producers seem to have forgotten to connect with the partners in this enterprise called Canada. As I watched the first 10 minutes—the building of the Welland Canal—I found myself wondering if others watching questioned where and how did they [builders] get this all this land to do all these great things in. The date is 1828, a year after we [Aanishnabeg] ceded the Huron Tract to Upper Canada. For a quarter century before that, we had ceded huge tracts of land for what would become Southern Ontario, our contribution towards the building of Canada. But not a mention of it. Do the producers subscribe to the debunked doctrine of ‘terra nullius’?
As I watched through each vignette, the building of the railroad in the east, the telegraph lines, the Montreal bridge, I wondered, ‘Where the hell are the Indians?’ Did the First Nations contribute nothing? About halfway through, a comment made by Marianne McKenna, founding partner, KPMB Architects, caught my attention. ‘…we as Canadians tend to act together.’ I thought, doesn’t she mean ‘we as settlers?’
Now I know that this is supposed to be a celebratory production in honour of Canada’s 150th sesquicentennial, but I really would have liked to see some balance. Some great accomplishments have been achieved in the last 150 years, but some not so great things were done as well, like the Indian Act of 1876 and residential schools. Of course, I don’t really expect pronounced negativity to show up, but a little realism would have been nice though.
And did the commentary have to be so syrupy? It made me feel ill. You could easily convince me it was produced in the United States. Anyway, the Indians finally show up for seven seconds at the very end, as the settlers are trying to build their railroad to the West Coast, troublemakers standing in the way of progress. If this keeps up, I am going to have to change the channel.
Chi miigwetch to David Plain for sharing his thoughts!
Canada: The Story of Us airs Sundays at 9 p.m. on CBC.
David Plain B.R.S., M.T.S., is the author of five books with a sixth, The Exmouth Chronicles: A Memoir due out later this month April 2017 by Trafford Publications. You can reach David on Facebookor Twitter.
Link: Never mind peak TV, we’re living through peak Atwood
Margaret Atwood is notoriously late for interviews. She’s also renowned for not necessarily answering the questions you’ve posed, but for giving answers to her own unasked queries instead, in turn quizzing the interviewer. Continue reading.