H2O

Paul Gross stars in this self-styled Canadian political thriller which aired on CBC over the past few nights. The two-part series originally aired last fall but I forgot to catch it, and heard little in its aftermath. It's a rare thing - a Canadian political thriller... I'd describe it as vaguely similar to House of Cards (the exceptional 1990 British political black comedy), with hints of the ridiculousness of Canadian Bacon and even X-Files.

Upon the death of his father, the Prime Minister in a suspicious canoeing accident, Tom McLaughlin-- a seemingly decent chap-- outwits rival and unlikeable snorer Marc Lavigne (right away, that name stuck out as bit too much like mass-murderer Marc Lepine) to become Canada's new PM. Backed by a media baron-- part of a trio of corporate bigwigs with mischievous smiles-- McLaughlin rides a wave of popularity to start hatching a subversive scheme. It becomes apparent McLaughlin is about to sell Canada down the river by exporting water through a far-fetched (or is it?) water pipeline from Northern Quebec. It's necessary, he claims, or else the increasingly parched United States will end up taking it anyway. But it turns out McLaughlin has a gun to his head, and is a mere puppet for a pseudo-Bilderberg all-powerful group of old men who control the world.

Strangely this group seems to only have the resources for one secret agent: the elusive Daniel Holt, who is everywhere and nowhere. He knocks off cops who get too close to the truth, wiretaps the Solicitor General (Lavigne), tortures wrongfully imprisoned muslims, and recruits Cree youth in Northern Quebec for devious plots.

Meanwhile, the head good cop Sgt. Leah Collins, played by Leslie Hope, is busy figuring out who Holt is and trying to establish what really happened to McLaughlin Senior during his canoeing trip 'accident'. Mild flirtations with PM Tom McLaughlin and finally a pact with Lavigne bring her closer to the truth.

The opinions we form of the various characters are in a state of flux; with the burning question being: If your neighbour were thirsty would you not give them a glass of water? It would be nicer if the plot had a smoother flow - more a Saint Lawrence than Hell's Gate. But the film editing, sound and cinematography are luscious. Night time fly-by shots of Parliament Hill are interspersed with evil looking Gargoyles and the Rideau Canal.

Gross by far steals the show, and I'm looking forward to seeing how the heck he's going to turn into John Diefenbaker in the upcoming Tommy Douglas Story.

The conclusion is unsatisfying, but it's hard to say what would have been a happy ending. It's almost as if the inevitable, the unavoidable, the manifest destiny took hold. All in all, any political nut would find this at least mildly amusing. Somehow though even with the explosions, blackouts and murders this film doesn't rate with the 2002 mini-series Trudeau.

Someone mentioned that McLaughlin could not have possibly become Prime Minister in such a short thing. Well, actually one doesn't have to even be elected to be Prime Minister, legally (remember John Turner, briefly 1984). And this movie does take place over a period of many many months. This is fiction, folks, and it's not bad. It's by no means a great film, but it's entertaining.

I watched this mini-series because I had seen Paul Gross in Due South and Slings and Arrows. I don't have to be a "spoiler" to say that this was a truly inane mini-series. The issue of Canada withholding water from the USA was an interesting one that was quickly and completely drowned. There was good acting but only in scenes meant to show off good acting rather than to move the plot in any understandable direction (watch the interminable "mother of the prime minister" scenes). Dissecting this misconceived film is hardly worthwhile. Canada has a fine talent in Mr. Gross, but that talent doesn't extent to script writing. H20 does not hold water.

As someone who is very fond of politics- especially Canadian politics- this film deeply troubles me.

It is the story of how the country can be bought and sold so easily. It is a warning. While extremely unlikely, this could happen. It uses characters very deliberately based on previous Canadian icons (Trudeau being the big one) to hit close to home. These people have already been in power and we never thought anything overly terrible of what they did while they were in power. This film- in a very Isaac Asimov way (though, obviously Asimov was brilliant and Gross, while a good writer, cannot compare) shows us how close we are to our greatest fears.

One day, the prime minister dies in a canoeing incident and after running and winning leadership of the party his father lead, his son takes power and starts pushing through some very aggressive legislations. Later, we find out that his father's death and that of the woman who was with him were suspicious in the extreme and we start to see little by little what's really going on, though the ending is a total shock. It is hard to describe without giving it away, so suffice it to say it uses past Canadian political experiences (the Free Trade agreement, the War Measures Act, Black October) to show how close we are to losing it all.

With outstanding direction (actually making Parliament Hill look sexy), great acting from Paul Gross, Guy Nadon and Martha Henry and a shocker ending, this is well worth watching. Especially for Canadian political junkies like me.

This movie is 3 hours long. It has a cast of tens of thousands (at least it feels that way.) I think Sebastian Spence was about the only Canadian actor _not_ in it. I exaggerate a tad. Much of it appears to have been filmed in the Canadian parliament buildings in Ottawa, 24 Sussex Drive (the PM's residence), military bases and other places that would have required endless bureaucratic pandering to get permission to film. The movie overuses some of this footage. "It cost us a bundle, and you are damn well going to appreciate it."

It deals in more substantial way than you would expect with Canadian political themes: separatism, water, bullying by the USA, fear of terrorists, NAFTA, political union with the USA.

The dialogue is quite wooden. I think it was all written by one person. It needs to be re-written to be more idiosyncratic for each character. The mother with her drinking is a little too one-dimensional. But I think that was partly deliberate. Everyone LIES, especially to the public. Because they are not good liars, they are unconvincing every time they open their mouths. It is thus quite a cynical look at political intrigue and under the table deals. Every public speech says the exact opposite of what the character said in private earlier.

One of the strangest things about the movie, there are no clear good guys and bad guys. Your loyalties shift back and forth. Some people you just can't decide. Others you know are bad, but can't figure out who they are working for or what they are attempting to accomplish with their mayhem.

The relationships and true motivations are MURKY, worthy of the machinations in an English murder mystery.

I am pretty sure I will watch it again, hoping with foresight to figure more of the movie out.

I also wondered just what facts form the framework of this story. It feels like a historical reconstruction (though it takes place in a fictitious 2004). The smug, power-crazy, plump, young Prime Minister played by Paul Gross bears a strong resemblance to the actual P.M. Stephen Harper. He even has the same articulate reverence for lying.

Paul Gross learned many things while playing a Mountie on US TV, I will grant him that. That is all, however, that I will grant him. This 2-part mini-series looks slick, but that is as deep as it goes. The attempts to portray a kind of unrequited affair with the female lead were pathetic. The portrayal that either the First Nations or Quebec would present a serious threat with actual violence (as seen in this film) is laughable; sorry, but Paul Gross is too much a pretty-boy to be taken seriously in this role. Bottom line: the premise is flawed (you cannot possibly be elected in a by-election, then become Prime Minister within the time-frame presented); and the enactment of such a thing as the War Meaures Act could not possibly occur within the context of this movie. Given what went on within Quebec the last time it was used (I was there), an enactment of it under the circumstances presented in this movie is an incomprehensible thing to anyone who lived there at that time. You want to create the situation for a referendum on sovereignty? That would be it, and sovereignty would win, with my vote helping! Second bottom line:way too slick overall to be taken seriously as any kind of drama/commentary on the world we live in in reality! 2 thumbs DOWN! Not even worth a re-watch.