• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Why does Canada suck at telling its own stories

Maybe the RCAF as defenders in The Battle of Britain.

Less likely as attackers .
 
It's a bit of apples and kumquats. The CBC doesn't create full-length theatrical productions (have they ever?). These are made by private companies with various formulas of private and public funding. Private companies tend to want to earn profits.

Do we want to tell our stories to ourselves or the world? I don't know what the CBC's production budget is but I suspect that to try and create something that would tell a Canadian story to the world in a way that actually makes money would likely eat up that entire budget. Giving money to the CBC is not without controversy, and it seems that private money has its limits.
It's kind of strange actually because production budgets do not equate to good entertainment. I appreciate the point that the examples make but I'm starting to look at my own viewing habits. I tend to look at my own ones these days and find that I get much better programming through streaming services than broadcast/cable these days.

Take Britbox for example. The UK has produced dozens of crime/detective series which are high quality entertainment, IMHO. So much so that my usual American fare of NCIS, FBI, Marshalls etc etc in all their derivative forms has just become formalistic, unrealistic, over-the-top dreck that I've stopped watching. Yes, the BBC gets more money but many of these shows are non-BBC produced. Their budgets are lower, but their writing is better and, in many cases, the acting is better - heck, even "Murder in Paradise" which has dreadful acting has more entertainment value than the average US show.

My gauge of a good film or series is "am I invested enough in this character, that I care about what happens to him or her?" That's not just will the character die, but even leave the series, or will the series carry on so that I can get more of the story. The Brits do that better than others. Most American series I've given up on. Canada? Well, I give a new series two episodes for me to decide whether I'll watch it continuously. Few Canadian ones pass that test. "Saint Pierre," "Son of Critch," "Amazing Race Canada," and (Lord help me) "The Great Canadian Baking Show" have, but that's about it.

:cool:
 
It's kind of strange actually because production budgets do not equate to good entertainment. I appreciate the point that the examples make but I'm starting to look at my own viewing habits. I tend to look at my own ones these days and find that I get much better programming through streaming services than broadcast/cable these days.

Take Britbox for example. The UK has produced dozens of crime/detective series which are high quality entertainment, IMHO. So much so that my usual American fare of NCIS, FBI, Marshalls etc etc in all their derivative forms has just become formalistic, unrealistic, over-the-top dreck that I've stopped watching. Yes, the BBC gets more money but many of these shows are non-BBC produced. Their budgets are lower, but their writing is better and, in many cases, the acting is better - heck, even "Murder in Paradise" which has dreadful acting has more entertainment value than the average US show.

My gauge of a good film or series is "am I invested enough in this character, that I care about what happens to him or her?" That's not just will the character die, but even leave the series, or will the series carry on so that I can get more of the story. The Brits do that better than others. Most American series I've given up on. Canada? Well, I give a new series two episodes for me to decide whether I'll watch it continuously. Few Canadian ones pass that test. "Saint Pierre," "Son of Critch," "Amazing Race Canada," and (Lord help me) "The Great Canadian Baking Show" have, but that's about it.

:cool:

An astounding admission from a German, I would say ;)
 
Chicken-versus-egg question: why doesn't the public seem to want quality military history content of any kind if there's not enough momentum to make it commercially profitable? I'm not a big "let the market alone decide" kind of guy, but if there was enough demand, there would likely be more supply.

My WAG on this front, in no particular order:
  • How many Canadians has war directly affected these days?
  • How many Canadians even know military pers, full- or part time?
  • How shitty a job does the info-machine do of sharing the stories - before/during/after operations?
  • How much demand is there given that only a on-one-hand number of MSM outlets have military reporters?
  • As others have suggested, how many Canadians have been exposed to interesting, appealing & engaging history curriculum on the military in school?
Lotsa stuff that needs to change to create an audience hungry for good military stories, and for a market to respond to said hunger.

CBC could do stuff like this, but part of the problem may be an ideological "war's not our first priority" bent, as well as how hard it is for big, bulky bureaucratic machines to change course or get ideas through.
 
It's kind of strange actually because production budgets do not equate to good entertainment. I appreciate the point that the examples make but I'm starting to look at my own viewing habits. I tend to look at my own ones these days and find that I get much better programming through streaming services than broadcast/cable these days.

Take Britbox for example. The UK has produced dozens of crime/detective series which are high quality entertainment, IMHO. So much so that my usual American fare of NCIS, FBI, Marshalls etc etc in all their derivative forms has just become formalistic, unrealistic, over-the-top dreck that I've stopped watching. Yes, the BBC gets more money but many of these shows are non-BBC produced. Their budgets are lower, but their writing is better and, in many cases, the acting is better - heck, even "Murder in Paradise" which has dreadful acting has more entertainment value than the average US show.

My gauge of a good film or series is "am I invested enough in this character, that I care about what happens to him or her?" That's not just will the character die, but even leave the series, or will the series carry on so that I can get more of the story. The Brits do that better than others. Most American series I've given up on. Canada? Well, I give a new series two episodes for me to decide whether I'll watch it continuously. Few Canadian ones pass that test. "Saint Pierre," "Son of Critch," "Amazing Race Canada," and (Lord help me) "The Great Canadian Baking Show" have, but that's about it.

:cool:

Three of the Brits best shows are derived from Dutch or Belgian shows:

Van der Walk, Professor T, and Patience. Although Professor T was better with the original Belgian cast.

Other countries can and do produce good popular shows that tell stories.

The problem may start with people wanting to preach rather than entertain.

Private enterprise only gets paid if they entertain.

Government pays people to preach.

....

Have you noticed that popular movies don't get Oscars and that critics' choices are often not popular.

Canadian movies: financed by government and validated by critics, not audiences.
 
Chicken-versus-egg question: why doesn't the public seem to want quality military history content of any kind if there's not enough momentum to make it commercially profitable? I'm not a big "let the market alone decide" kind of guy, but if there was enough demand, there would likely be more supply.

Or is it a "Field of Dreams" scenario? If you build it, they will come.

CBC could do stuff like this, but part of the problem may be an ideological "war's not our first priority" bent, as well as how hard it is for big, bulky bureaucratic machines to change course or get ideas through.

Why not the CAF directly in the same vein as the US Army did with "The Big Picture"?

The Big Picture is an American documentary television program which aired from 1951 to 1964. The series consisted of documentary films produced by the United States Army Signal Corps, Army Pictorial Service.
. . .
As an official work of the United States government, The Big Picture was never eligible for copyright and has always been in the public domain, thus allowing it to be distributed far and wide without restriction. . . .
 
Or is it a "Field of Dreams" scenario? If you build it, they will come.
Ideally, a GREAT piece would attract eyes, but in the current environment, with so much other entertainment out there, and so much social media distraction luring eyes, I think it would be a big gamble to spend to tell a Canadian military story really, really well in an entertaining and engaging way.

Would it make money and/or would it get clicks? I wish it didn't come down to this, but realistically, it seems to now.

I guess I don't have as much faith that so many people would come even if it's a solid production, given all the other competition for eyes.
Why not the CAF directly in the same vein as the US Army did with "The Big Picture"?
Never heard of "The Big Picture" before - thanks for the reference! Even had a Canadian Army episode:

I'm going to do more digging, but if it aired between 1951 and 1964, I suspect American audience appetites were quite different during the Korean war and during the Cold War than they would be now. Another factor: 1964 is an interesting cut off, given the whole U.S. Vietnam dynamic. I also notice the U.S. military doesn't seem to be doing anything similar now, but I stand to be corrected. And if they do, how many stations are picking it up/running it now?

Also, to be hugely cynical, if the CAF did such a piece on, say, the Medak Pocket, based on past CAF/Government of Canada story-telling experiences, would it be the watered-down version without any shooting or confrontation that might offend people? If so, is that really what it should be getting across to Canadians about the huge job troops did in that shitty situation?

That's why to me, the issue isn't whether good stories can be written/produced, it's about how many Canadians want to read/see them?
 
To be clear, I'm not talking just about military stories, but the entire Canadian cultural milieu. We're fairly decent at comedy but that seems to be it.

I have other thoughts about our obsession with being accepted in the United States professional sports leagues (including NCAA which is just another pro league IMO) much to the detriment of our own pro leagues (and yes I get it, the money is soooo much better down there). But that could be its own thread.
 
And a lot of our creative types have left Canada for the US - William Shatner, Neil Young, Alanis (dual citizen) are just three off the top of my head.
 
If Canadians really want to know about their military history, they can visit their local library.

Mine has over 1,700 books devoted to : "Canadian Military History".
 
Back
Top