3 April 2002 | billesvs
Almost flawless..but the flaws that are there are dumb!
It is hard to find fault with this terrific effort...great script, great actors etc...but why do they screw up such a super show with dumb things. Although I am complaining about only a couple of parts of the show, I do not know why these things took place. For example, at the end of episode one, after a great re-telling of the P.Laporte-J. Cross FLQ crisis, they resolve it with a multi-screen ending, that had no narrative, and made absolutely no sense at all to those who do not know how it ended. It was as if the director and editor suddenly realized that they only had 60 seconds left to wrap it up and tried to do everything at once. If you were new to the story and did not know how the events unfolded then you would have been lost. Likewise at the end of the second episode, so 'genius' decided to use an actual speech by the real Trudeau, but made it into a grainy scratch filled piece of black and white film as if it had been film in the time of Laurier not Trudeau. What exactly was the point of that. The only other complaint I had was a scene in which Trudeau and his reporter 'friend' were coming up the steps into the Centre Block and unlike every other shot in the series, someone decided to jump cut it as if it were a rock video. Again, what was the point of interupting the flow of the show to do that (unless it was to cut out the person walking in front of them). However, on the whole, the show was great, the portrail of historical figures fascinating. John Turner, Mitchell Sharp and even John Munro came across very well as did Pelletier, Marchand and Lalonde to mention just a few. But then why did they not use an actor to portray Joe Clark, using newsreel footage for his parts and not anyone else, including Levesque. These examples of disjointedness were irritating as they all interuppted the narrative flow of a great show.