Latest news with #ElaminAbdelmahmoud
CBC
a day ago
- Business
- CBC
How will Canadian film and TV change if streamers don't pay into it?
For the past two weeks, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) held hearings to expand their definition of Canadian content. The CRTC also discussed how digital streamers in the country, such as Netflix and Disney+, should contribute a percentage of their Canadian revenue toward a Canadian content fund — something every other national broadcaster does. But the streamers don't want to pay. Today on Commotion, host Elamin Abdelmahmoud speaks with storyteller Jesse Wente, policy expert Vass Bednar, and showrunner Anthony Q. Farrell about what this lack of investment means for the future of Canadian content. We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player. WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube: Elamin: If we look at the current rules, large English language broadcasters have to contribute 30 per cent of their revenue — it's a pretty significant chunk — back into Canadian broadcasting programming. Last year, the CRTC ordered that streaming services, like Netflix, like Disney, like Amazon, have to pay five per cent of their annual Canadian revenues to a fund to make Canadian content right here. So it's definitely not an even playing field by any stretch. To give people an example to wrap your head around it: you go to Disney+, the broadcaster. They carry Shōgun, right? Shōgun wins a historic amount of Emmys. That show is shot in this country, it's shot here in Canada. The streamer position, if I understand it correctly, is saying, "We'll invest in your industry on our own terms." Which is to say, "We'll shoot our shows here, but we won't necessarily make a show that is specifically Canadian," or that that money will necessarily have to stay in Canada. Vass, what's on the line if they don't pay an equal share? Vass: Higher barriers to entry for artists and creators, little to no investment in the next generation of content creators, a loss of voices and diversity and perspectives and richness. It's not just not paying into the system — it's also about control. I think [the hearing] is about being assertive and recognizing that there's a role for the state to make these markets more free and fair and tailor them in a way that works for Canada and is aligned with our values and what we care about for future generations. That's why I also come back to the element of control, and our algorithmic sovereignty in our everyday lives. I can't program my discoverability. I can't say on Netflix or on YouTube, "I'd like to see a certain proportion of Canadian content" or "Show me more films made by women." You're always dependent on their categorizations and what they're surfacing. So it really is about us versus digital forces and a data-driven context, where we're losing power — not just as Canadians, but we're losing power as consumers, too. In terms of our ability to choose what we enjoy, and what we support with our time and attention and our money, that's at risk too. Elamin: Anthony, the streamers already have so much power here. What does their stance in this position tell you right now? Anthony: Pardon the cuss, but that's malarky. The streamers are not here in Canada because they want to make Canada a better place. They're here because we're convenient. They're here because we're good at what we do. They're here because we are right beside America, who is the biggest exporter of content. We understand them. We can make shows similar to them. We can do a lot of those things for less of a price tag, right? They're here because we're good for them. So for them to say, "We're already putting money into the system"— yeah, you're doing that because it's helpful to you. What you should be doing, is you've got to play like everyone else. I have Disney+, I have Netflix, and as a TV writer, I also have cable. So my Rogers subscription, my money goes back into the system. My Netflix subscription, no money goes back into the system. And if people are cutting Canadian cable and just going to American streamers, how are we going to protect Canadian artists, to make future shows? And [the streamers] are saying, "We're giving all the key grips, and we're giving all the service production people money." Cool, but how are we going to be able to make more Canadian content, unless we're actually filling back up those coffers, right? So what [the CRTC] are asking for is not a lot, considering that they were suggesting five per cent, where other Canadian broadcasters are having to give 30. That's not a lot. You're already making money. It's not like we're taking money you don't have. It's based on your revenue. I think I understand the fight, because these big corporations are always going to be trying to figure out ways to keep their profits as high as possible… But I hope the CRTC is seeing all this, and we'll get a ruling in the next year or so, and we'll be able to build our business back up. Because it has been a struggle with the Canadian industry, over the last few years especially. So it'll be good to be able to get people working. Elamin: Right now, a show or a movie qualifies as CanCon based on who makes it and where it's made. That's interesting to me, because we're sitting a couple days after The Apprentice, the Donald Trump movie, won best picture at the Canadian Screen Awards. Famously, Donald Trump is not Canadian, and very few of the cast are…. That movie was made in conjunction with a Canadian production company, so it becomes a Canadian picture. One of the suggestions floated [at the hearing] was that to qualify as CanCon, a show would have to look and feel distinctly Canadian. I don't know what that means. Jesse, what are the pros and cons of expanding the definition to consider the Canadianness of a story here? Jesse: To understand Canadianness, I, like you, would struggle to understand what exactly that is. Beyond Anne of Green Gables as the most persistent Canadian storytelling, I don't know what else that would be, other than, I flash back to Score: A Hockey Musical. My approach to this has always been: I care much less about the what is being made and the storytelling, and I care much more about the who. For years, I've been advocating for Indigenous people to have space. And it wasn't so that they could tell a specific story, that wasn't the point. Because I don't know what stories Indigenous storytellers are going to want to tell, and I want them to have freedom. This is the point: the freedom to tell, whatever that looks like for them. The way the [CanCon] point system has worked — and this is true in music too — they would classify above the line talent. And what that means, is the folks who make the creative decisions: basically the producer, the writer, the songwriter, the artist. It matters less where it's made — although in music, it does very much matter where it was recorded — but it doesn't so much matter for that on film and TV. So we've famously made American movies, like X-Men movies and all of this stuff, in Canada for decades and decades. I think this always gets back to: what do Canadians want? Because the choice point is, ultimately, you could just become a service sector for America, which is what they do with China when it comes to their manufacturing. They outsource all the making of the thing to a different country, but all the money returns to America. And we already have a significant amount of the sector that already does that. We call it "service productions to the U.S." But what you don't necessarily get out of that is our own stories, and that's ultimately what we're asking for.
CBC
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- CBC
How NPR's Tiny Desk became one of our favourite places on the internet
Social Sharing For almost 20 years, NPR's Tiny Desk Concerts have featured some of the biggest artists and promising upcoming musical talents. Everyone from Adele, to Usher and even Blue Man Group have fit themselves into the internet's most beloved cluttered office space in order to give fans an acoustic set like no other. In a conversation recorded live in front of an audience at this year's Radiodays North America conference, host Elamin Abdelmahmoud talks with series producer Bobby Carter about the journey of Tiny Desk, and the role he played in making the series a crucial and trusted hub for Black and other racialized musicians. We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player. WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube: Elamin: I think about that time period and about the similar spaces to Tiny Desk. MTV had Unplugged. Right here in Canada, MuchMusic had Intimate and Interactive. When you think about Tiny Desk, what do you think makes Tiny Desk a different space? Bobby: First of all, the intimacy. I think that's key. And now over the years, the thing is we have a fingerprint, right? When you see a Tiny Desk, you know exactly what it is because of those shelves, because it's in a regular office. Many artists come into the space thinking that's a soundstage. It is not, and it's the first thing we tell artists. Like, "Look. This is exactly what this is. This is a regular-ass desk in a regular-ass office. There's no great acoustics…. So be prepared." But it's the intimacy. We strip away all of the bells and whistles. As much as I love Unplugged, we don't even give you that. Like, the monitors in front of the stage where the artists can hear themselves? We don't give you that. You either got it, or you don't. And I think that's one of the things that really separates us from a lot of the music platforms. Elamin: Okay, so Tiny Desk starts in 2008. You join the team in 2014. If I'm not mistaken, the very first Tiny Desk concert you produced was this one right here: WATCH | The Foreign Exchange's NPR Music Tiny Desk Concert: Bobby: That's my guy Phonte. This is a duo called The Foreign Exchange. Actually, one of the very first groups to put together an album over the internet before meeting each other. This was in 2014. This wasn't the first band that I pitched. This is the first band that got approved. Elamin: How long did it take between the first artist you pitched? Bobby: I have no clue, but it was a long road to get there because, you know, it's NPR. And NPR has thankfully evolved in a lot of different ways. They changed a lot of their perspectives and views on what belongs at NPR. But we weren't quite there yet, right? But this really sort of proved that the stuff that I love not only belonged, but there are millions of others out there that love it as well. Elamin: So that journey happens kind of quickly because you get to Foreign Exchange, and then … T-Pain. What ends up happening is this takes off in ways that I imagine maybe surprised some of the people on the team. Do you want to talk about how big of a viral moment this was? WATCH | T-Pain's NPR Music Tiny Desk Concert: Bobby: It was the first real moment. It truly put Tiny Desk on the map. I always say, if you ask me what Tiny Desk is, I point them to this, because it's T-Pain. If you know T-Pain, you know when you listen to his music, his voice is altered through Auto-Tune. Elamin: The most Auto-Tuned singer of the early aughts, yeah. Bobby: He helped to pioneer Auto-Tune — not necessarily the first one to use it, but he was the first one to use the way he used it, and it changed the music industry. And what my colleague, Frannie, challenged him to do was to come in and perform without Auto-Tune. And when you take that away, there was this discovery that this dude does not need Auto-Tune. He can really sing. Elamin: A generational talent when it comes to singing, yeah. Bobby: He utilized it as a tool, and it was his identity. But in that, he sang, and it was completely stripped. Not even drums; it was keys and that voice. It was an eye-opening moment for the music industry, NPR, culture at large. It changed the game for us.
CBC
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- CBC
In The Final Reckoning, Mission: Impossible forgets to be fun
Social Sharing Arguably the heaviest hitter in this year's summer blockbuster lineup is Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning. The eighth movie in the franchise just landed in theatres, and it picks up where Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One left off a couple years ago. Tom Cruise is back leading as special agent Ethan Hunt, whose latest impossible mission finds him trying to take down an AI enemy technology called the Entity. For 30 years, the Mission: Impossible franchise has promised audiences a fun night out at the movies. But does this latest — and perhaps final — installment deliver? Today on Commotion, culture critics Teri Hart, Rebecca Jennings and Eli Glasner join host Elamin Abdelmahmoud to get into the highs and lows of Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning. We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, including a discussion about the incredible AI-generated errors recently published by a lauded Chicago newspaper, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player. WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube: Elamin: Eli, the idea that this movie is weighted by the legacy of the franchise itself — eight movies, bajillions of dollars made — that's interesting to me. So walk me through the franchise and then arriving at this moment in the franchise. Eli: The problem with this film is that it takes itself so seriously. When Mission: Impossible started, let's remember: this was a remake of a kind of wacky TV show where people had disguises, and the main gambit when the Mission: Impossible movies started with Cruise was they had masks…. That was fine. That was nice. So it was basically like an off-brand James Bond. Like, "OK, Bond's got that thing covered — he's suave, he's international. We don't have that. We're gonna get Cruise to run around. Things are going to explode. He's going to get his gang of friends," and it was fine…. It was just fun. Elamin: But it got bigger. Eli: But then it got bigger. And I think the problem is, it got to this point where they didn't remember what we enjoyed about it. It wasn't an event when Mission: Impossible movies started, but it was fun. Like in between the various Bond films, check out a Mission: Impossible, and it was a good time. But now, it's so reverential— Elamin: He's carrying the box office on his back, Eli! Eli: But he's not. The problem of the film is that it treats it like he is, and like this is the most important thing in the world. Even the plot now is so nonsensical that there's no enjoyment anymore. The problem is they assume that we have a level of interest and knowledge of the franchise. Like, there's a bad guy, Gabriel — I can barely remember his backstory. They're doing all these callbacks! Elamin: I don't want continuity. Like, please, this is Mission: Impossible we're doing here. Eli: I didn't do my Mission: Impossible homework. I just went in kind of blind, and they're pulling all these things … I don't remember. The movies are all convoluted on their own, and now to try and weave together 30 years of shenanigans — there's so much gravitas, it's like we're on Jupiter. It is so solemn. It is so reverential. Elamin: Rebecca, we come to this place for magic, you know? There's something to be said about the escalating scale of the Mission: Impossible movies…. The gambit was, this will be a good time at the movies. You're not going to remember the plot. You don't need to remember who Gabriel is. But you will remember the stunts. You'll remember the thing as an event. For you, as you were sort of walking in and being like, "I'm saying goodbye to this universe." Did you feel the weight of that watching this movie? Rebecca: Well, I think the movie really wants you to feel the weight of that…. The first hour is mostly flashbacks or flash-forwards. The point of a Mission: Impossible movie is you go into the theatre, and then it all completely erases from your brain the moment you step out of it. Elamin: The minute you leave, it's gone. Rebecca: And that's why I love Mission: Impossible. But even though the movie was so divorced from reality in any stake sense, and it had to keep reminding you about what the timing was, but it's like, oh, that's not really the time. I think because this one was so weighed down by the myth of Mission: Impossible, which no one really cares about — it's not like a Marvel or a Harry Potter movie, you don't have to watch the previous ones to get it. But I think if they're calling this the final one, then great, wipe the slate clean. Start a new thing with the same name. But don't make us care about Gabriel, and Tom Cruise's 75 love interests over 30 years. Like, the way they kept flashing back to these various women that Tom Cruise has kissed, I'm like, who was that? Elamin: Well, the whole thing was that he was trying to protect his wife at the end of the first one…. You guys don't remember that? That's crazy to me. Rebecca: The fact that he had a wife, I'm like, what? This is like, just insert some brunette lady; that's his love interest. Watching movie stars do crazy stunts, that will never get old. But you don't need the Entity and Gabriel and the wives to do that. Elamin: "The Entity and Gabriel and the Wives" sounds like a great sequel, by the way, if any executive is listening.
CBC
21-05-2025
- Entertainment
- CBC
How Late Bloomer represents the breadth of the South Asian experience in Canada
Social Sharing Late Bloomer just wrapped up its second season, and the verdict is in: people love it. The Crave dramedy follows an aspiring content creator named Jusmeet Dutta, who's based on the show's creator and star, Jasmeet Raina (a.k.a Jus Reign). The series loosely mirrors Raina's own experience as a YouTuber and Punjabi Sikh millennial in Canada. Today on Commotion, host Elamin Abdelmahmoud speaks with journalists Jeevan Sangha and Joyita Sengupta about the acclaim for Late Bloomer and their favourite moments from this season. We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player. WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube: Elamin: Season two of Late Bloomer is being called the best one yet. Joyita, how did you feel about it? Joyita: I really liked it. I loved the first season, as well. I think the second season is even more ambitious than the first. And like it really leans into the drama side of the dramedy equation, although there are some really funny moments. But I think probably one of my favourite things about Late Bloomer, and specifically Season 2, is that in the canon of North American shows about South Asians, there's often, in my opinion, a huge lack of class representation. I always feel like I keep seeing the same stories about an upper middle class brown person whose parents are a doctor or something, and they want to go to an Ivy League school and blah, blah, blah. And they're made by great trailblazing creators, for sure — and they sometimes centre whiteness in a way that I don't appreciate — but it does speak to some people's experiences. But when it comes to Late Bloomer, you get to see a community that truly doesn't need to centre anyone else but themselves. And in terms of the class part of that equation, you see the first season ended with him [Jasmeet] falling out with his parents, mainly his dad. And now it starts with him living in a basement apartment with a bunch of international students. And there is a bit of tension there because those students are looking at him like, "You could just go home if you wanted to. You keep rocking the boat because you don't know struggle like we do." But then on the other hand, he's hanging out with this girlfriend who comes from a far more privileged and wealthier family, and there is a lot of discomfort around that and how they move through the world as South Asians. And I just think seeing that breadth of our experience from a class perspective? So refreshing. Elamin: Last week, [Joyita] was on this very show, talking about anti-Asian and anti-immigrant sentiments being aimed at Brampton, Ont. — specifically South Asian communities — being stoked by places like 6ixBuzz. Jeevan, what does a show like Late Bloomer offer to that conversation, do you think? Jeevan: I think this episode [Episode 6, which follows an international student who is also a food delivery person] of Late Bloomer, to me, is required reading for everyone in my life. I think that there are so many conversations about international students, about newcomers that are so vitriolic and so aggressive. One scene in that episode — it was very quick, but really important — is, after having the worst day ever, the protagonist of this episode opens his phone, and sees a video that he thinks is fun about folks that are just like him, and opens the comments, and it's just some of the most troubling and disgusting comments that you could ever see. And like any racialized person in Canada, but particularly South Asians in the last few years, know that feeling of seeing something on Instagram about someone in your community and just having to brace for impact. And I think the level of complexity that this episode brings to the international student experience, and presents to Canadians through the extensive research that was done, is so needed in this cultural moment in time. It is urgent to me, so if you haven't watched it please, please, please consider it.
CBC
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- CBC
The best films and biggest flops at Cannes 2025
Social Sharing Between the latest Mission: Impossible installment and the new red carpet dress rules, this year's Cannes Film Festival is filled with buzz and controversy. Today on Commotion, host Elamin Abdelmahmoud speaks with film critics on the ground at Cannes, Barry Hertz and Rad Simonpillai, about the hype around the biggest films of the festival, as well as the attendees' reaction to the festival's various new rules. We've included some highlights below, edited for length and clarity. For the full discussion, listen and follow Commotion with Elamin Abdelmahmoud on your favourite podcast player. WATCH | Today's episode on YouTube: Elamin: Rad, one of the big movies at Cannes this year is Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning. The expectations for this movie, truly through the roof. It's supposed to be the last of the franchise. What's your take? Elamin: Oh no, oh no. Just giving it a preface means you're not that excited, man. Oh, no. Rad: Yes, because I love the Mission: Impossible franchise. I think the Mission: Impossible franchise is the best franchise. Like, I don't think there's such a thing as a bad Mission: Impossible movie. However, this one certainly tested that belief. It's not that I didn't love and appreciate what this movie was going for. It's just that it was going for a lot. Of course, it's going for the big, spectacular action set pieces, where Tom Cruise is risking life and limb. It also wants to speak to the current moment in terms of how the internet is turning young men into trolls, basically. There's a whole subplot in this movie where there are radicalized young men becoming terror cells because they're following the villainous AI. So the movie wants to speak to now, but also wants to speak to and celebrate the past by incorporating story elements from the past 30 years of movies. Like, there's a guy that shows up from the original Mission: Impossible movie — like that dude's here. It's all part of this movie's big victory lap. And the thing is: it's just too much movie. There's too much going on. It struggles to bring all that together. It's the most convoluted and the most exhausting Mission: Impossible. At the same time, when it kicks into gear and you can set aside those frustrating plot elements, it still gives you some of the most beautiful looking action that will run circles around any other blockbuster. Elamin: Barry, I'm so disappointed to hear this tepid response to this particular Mission: Impossible movie that I'm just going to move it right along and pretend I didn't hear any of that until I see it on Friday because I refuse to believe that there's any hesitation about a Mission: Impossible movie. And instead I'm going to ask you about another big movie at the festival this year, The Phoenician Scheme, that's Wes Anderson's new movie, starring Michael Cera. Walk me through it. What do you think? Barry: I mean, this, on paper, should be a delight. Elamin: Oh, come on, you guys. More prefaces! Come on! Barry: OK, we'll get the good out of the way here. Michael Cera is great in this. It's a shock that he has never worked with Wes Anderson before. He walks out of an Andersonian picture book, basically. And they have been friends, apparently, for decades, but this is the first time they're actually collaborating. And it works. He has a great role, and it's kind of a little bit of a twisty role too, requiring some turns there, which I appreciated. But the rest of the thing is just really emotionally empty. There's a black hole of empathy at the centre of this movie. It's very picturesque, it's extremely well art directed, it's everything you would expect visually of a Wes Anderson movie. But whereas something like Asteroid City or The French Dispatch actually had characters you cared about and were exploring metacontextual elements of what film and storytelling means to Anderson, there's really none of that here. This is a lark — and kind of a dead fish lark at that.
