From the Wednesday March 26th, 2008 Episode
Charles McVety’s arguments in favour of Bill C-10 were mind blowing – and not in a good way. He seemed to have a script and was sticking to it no matter what, essentially spewing rhetoric and dancing around George’s questions and observations. Who determines what is ‘grossly obscene’ content? George asked the question of him more than once and it was only in the last few moments of the interview that Charles McVety gave reply (and his words said so much about his true agenda – not violence, not hate – he does not want funding for any kind of depiction of sex – oh, dirty movies – oh my!).
At one point George brought up certain Canadian movies, such as Exotica and Crash, that had received international critical acclaim and without federal funding through tax credits might not have been made. Mr. McVety said that such movies could still be made, but would have to find other funding and doing so is not paramount to censorship.
McVety: They can make their movies on their own dime, but the government should not have to pay for it.
George: But realistically speaking, in this country if there is not funding a lot of these projects don’t get made.
McVety: Well, maybe that’d be a better thing because unfortunately Canadian films only make up 1.7% of the Canadian box office.
George: Well, there’s a lot of reasons for that though and it has nothing to do with the quality of the film. The films are great. That’s why they get recognized around the world.
McVety: Well, if they’d be recognized they they’d make more money.
George: That’s not true.
McVety: If they weren’t as offensive then they would be better recognized and more people would watch it so I think this will actually help the film industry.
Huh? I am confused.
Did he just say that Canadian films do not get critical acclaim? Exotica won 8 Genies and the International Film Critics Award at Cannes while Crash won 5 Genies and the Special Jury Prize at Cannes. Sounds pretty good to me.
Is he saying that the funding of a variety of Canadian projects, including provocative and controversial material, is the reason that Canadian films only make up 1.7% of the box office? Would cutting funding to such projects improve that percentage? Does he think the rest of the box office, the overwhelming majority being American films, are all free of controversial content like sex and violence and that is why we pay to watch ’em?
This man made no sense to me. None.
I’ll stop summarizing here because this situation and interview are both rife with things that clearly frustrate me and I could go on and on. Check out the interview for yourself if you want to learn more.
For more information on Bill C-10, from a few different sources, here are some links.
“If these people are so artistic and the product of their creativity is so magnificent — why do they need any money whatsoever from the Canadian taxpayer?” – Canadian Family Action Coalition
(Oh, I wonder if this applies to corporate tax rebates for other industries in our free trade economy?)
OK, one final thought from me – I do not elect politicians for their artistic judgment.