Some quick commentary on CBC's John A: The Birth of a Country.Pros: A pretty damn decent CBC costume drama with a lot packed into two hours. Excellent casting of Macdonald (Shawn Doyle), Brown (Peter Outerbridge) and Brown's wife Anne, but where did George-Étienne Cartier (Quebec téléroman actor David La Haye) get that beard, and why give him such greasy characterization? Director Jerry Ciccoritti moves the action very well. I'd give it a B+, sometimes even an A-.
Cons: A half baked history lesson packed into two hours. Definitely a C-
The plot is good, if a tad formulaic, but it gallops along. However, the history really disappoints. Let's get real. Cartier was the leader of the Liberal Conservatives in that period and it was his majorities that forced deadlock, that forced Brown to come to terms, not the humanizing ministrations of George Brown's wife Anne.
Why do these writers keep trotting out the same old clichés? Cartier chose Ottawa as the Capital. Period.
I can just visualize the story meetings. Hey, Shakespeare took liberties with history, why can't we? History is boring, let's tart it up. Who wants to learn all those dates anyway?
Producer Bernie Zukerman calls John A. "a political thriller, the story of personal hatred, public passion and a political poison pill. Only the fire of the conflicting energies of Macdonald and Brown could have created a new country – our country.” Sorry Bernie, you're only two thirds right.
Oh, well, the Americans have been doing booster history for years. I know you have to do this stuff to line up advertisers.
Let's hope the network doesn't dumb down the War of 1812. At least the CBC have given it to their documentary unit.
Question: I hate to be a grinch, but wasn't writer Bruce Smith the same person who messed up the Tommy Douglas story with his fantasy characterization of Jimmy Gardiner as a Hitler character? He got a bit of a fire on his tail on that one, and does a better job this time. Of course, Richard Gwyn is a great source.
Posts
1 comment:
Well, in the first two minutes Macdonald’s name was misspelt, the Union flag may have been hanging upside down — it was hard to tell — and the show’s writers showed a predilection for ‘railroad’ as opposed to ‘railway’ — but I may be nitpicking.
(I re-read P.G. Cornell’s The Great Coalition to refresh my memory of the events of 1864.)
I would agree that the cinematics were quite watchable but the historical content (such as where my competence lies) left one dissatisfied. Macdonald showed none of the characteristics that made men — even political adversaries — love him, and his on-off Scottish (Glaswegian?) accent was annoying.
Perhaps the most amazing feature about the production was that it made Brown look far more sympathetic and human than Macdonald. Wow!
Post a Comment