DALTON McGUINTY, AT THE MOVIES
by George Jonas
National Post
March 28, 2005

I watched with fascination last week what seemed like the Premier of Ontario starting a new career as a movie critic. If so, good news, and I'm saying nothing to discourage him. His selfless decision to shift "Dalton McGuinty" from a headline on the news pages to a byline in the entertainment section may do wonders for the quality of life in the province. The Premier selected a soon-to-be released film on Paul Bernardo for his debut. Despite a promising first performance, Mr. McGuinty could use some pointers. For instance, he needs to understand that it isn't customary to start film reviews with the line: "I certainly will not be viewing that movie." Such a proud display of obtuseness, fine for a politician, won't do for a critic. Critics can be obtuse, of course, but they mustn't appear to be proud of it. They should at least pretend to view what they propose to review. No one expects a politician to know what he's talking about, but people have certain illusions about a critic. As Premier, Mr. McGuinty could talk through his hat, but as a critic, he'll have to feign some vague familiarity with the topics he touches upon. The film the Premier promised not to see is called Deadly, and it's based on the lives and crimes of Bernardo and Karla Homolka. It's due to be released in the fall by Los Angeles writer-producer Michael Sellers. The film won't be a maiden effort. Mr. Sellers brought movie-goers something called Vlad before, and another thing called Goodbye America before that. His current opus stars a handsome Misha Collins (Girl, Interrupted) as Bernardo, and an even better-looking Laura Prepon (Lightning Bug) as Homolka. That's all I know about Deadly. I suspect Mr. McGuinty knew no more when he called on Ontarians in his review last week to boycott the movie. "I think it is an unfortunate development," the Premier was quoted as saying, "for people to choose to capitalize on a terrible and horrific tragedy." Let's stop here for a second. This is the kind of unutterably stupid statement a premier can get away with, but a critic can't. Making a movie about a terrible tragedy isn't "to capitalize" on it. It's simply to make a movie. And if it were unfortunate to make a movie about a terrible tragedy, many movies would be unfortunate. Titanic would be unfortunate, and so would be Hiroshima Mon Amour. If Mr. McGuinty is halfway serious about changing careers he must stop making know-nothing remarks, no matter how naturally they come to him. Somehow he has to learn to belay them, eighty-six them, throw them overboard. Unless he wants to stay a premier all his life. To wean himself from the worst impulses of philistinism, an asset for a politician but a liability for a film critic, Mr. McGuinty must start vocalizing the phrase "not what but how" just before breakfast. When repeated assiduously 15 times on an empty stomach, the line gradually penetrates a politician's mind and leads him to grasp that the value of a piece of art or entertainment isn't determined by what it is about but by how it is made. Many works of art -- cinematic, visual, literary -- capitalize on terrible tragedies. Schindler's List capitalizes on the Holocaust. Gone With The Wind capitalizes on the Civil War. Shakespeare capitalizes on some of the bloodiest chapters in English history. Much of medieval and renaissance art capitalizes on the story of the Crucifixion and Calvary. Here's what confuses many politicians. The same tragedies that inspire master craftsmen and superb entertainers also motivate tin-eared dilettantes and ambulance-chasing ghouls. Using the same kind of story Truman Capote used to produce In Cold Blood, the dilettantes and ghouls produce garbage. That's where critics come in. Brave and sturdy souls, they take a deep breath, wade into the cesspool, filter out the filth and guide us to the pure stuff. One can only commend Mr. McGuinty for volunteering to join their ranks. Alas, to be a critic requires (a) viewing movies before calling on people to boycott them, and (b) not spouting rubbish about capitalizing on tragedies. Will Deadly be deadly? There's a good chance, statistically. Mr. Sellers' previous movie, Vlad, told the story of a cursed necklace. One critic described it as having arch dialogue and tepid cinematography, which doesn't sound too promising. His recreation of the notorious Ontario couple's nauseating story could range from rock-bottom trash to gift-wrapped superior trash with a blue ribbon tied around it. Or it could be a masterpiece like In Cold Blood. I've no idea. Neither does Mr. McGuinty. Nor does Consumer Minister Jim Watson, another aspiring critic, who last week described the Bernardo movie he hadn't seen as "despicable" and called on theatres not to show it. With friends like Mr. Watson, Ontario's consumers need no enemies -- and I say this assuming that he'll turn out to be right. Mr. Sellers' film may well prove itself to be despicable -- but until it does, the only despicable sounds are coming from its critics. © National Post 2005

Printer-friendly version   Email this item to a friend