Masaryk University Faculty of Arts The Department of English and American Studies

To conclude the chapter and to proceed with the specific films analyses, I summarize the few topics that recur in the Canadian film. Firstly, it is the other – a hero who aspires to maintain his/her separate identity and who is usually multicultural. Secondly, it is the dangerous and powerful landscape. Thirdly, there are further issues Canadian directors engage with, such as, according to Katherine Monk, anti-hero, atypical sexual relationships, and death. Regarding American and Canadian film, their reviews differ profoundly. The reason for these opposing opinions might be the directors´ attitudes towards the handled topic. Canadians are masters of documentary, thus their versions of a story seems more depressive and less glamorous than the American. Finally, technology is coming to the fore and becomes one of the important issues of the Canadian film as well.

In the following part of the thesis, I analyse the set of films mentioned in the introduction. The titles I have chosen for the purpose are: The Earnie Game (1967) by Don Owen, The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz (1974) by Ted Kotcheff,, The Big Crimewave (1985) by John Paizs, and Last Night (1998) by Don McKellar. My aim is to find traits of Canadianness that were incorporated in the films by the directors, and explore their meanings and their role there. I also pay attention to the years of their production, since those influenced the content to a certain amount as well. Further, I include some of the films’ reviews to illustrate what impact they had on the audience and how they were generally accepted. All the mentioned films address their contemporary Canadian societies. As a matter of fact, it is not virtually possible to make a film without any contemporary society issues being reflected in it, even though implicitly. This fact makes it possible to actually define Canadianness by means of exploring the films.

The film by Don Owen, itself is supposed to be concerned more with the personal identity rather than the overall Canadianness, nevertheless, there are still features due to which we can observe Canadian society’s impact on the director. Likewise, it is apparently not an easy task to produce a film completely devoid of any society influence. Furthermore, The Ernie Game is mainly analysing the personal identity in relation to society, thus the Canadian community is also an important theme in the film.

The plot centres around Ernie Turner, who has just been released from an asylum, and tries to assimilate back into the Canadian society, which is not an easy task for him. On the way back to 'normal' life he encounters two women – his ex-girlfriend and his new lover. He wants to write, but cannot succeed in it, since everybody thinks he is not supposed to be a writer and discourages him from it. His ex-girlfriend even suggests: "Maybe you’re not a writer, alright? You know, maybe, you’re something else. Maybe you are a plumber or something…" (The Ernie Game). We might trace the distinctive general Canadian hero’s attitude to life. She does not encourage him to write. Instead, she claims he cannot do it, thus calling him a loser: "Canada as a country without an identity or as a nation in 'perpetual self-doubt'" (Resnick qtd. in Raney 20).

On the contrary, Ernie might be de facto able to do it, which is obvious in the scene following later in the film. He meets a girl in the library and among the poetical silence and complete stillness of books tells her about his lyrical dreams: "…and while he slept, he dreamt he was a butterfly flying through the garden and that he could see a man asleep. But when he woke up, he was no longer sure if he was a man dreaming that he was a butterfly, or if he was a butterfly dreaming that he was a man" (The Ernie Game). Although, before he manages to finish his contribution, the girl leaves, showing no interest at all in what he is composing. What this might indicate is the director’s awareness of the prevalent Canadian film situation – it lacks audience, like Ernie does.

It is inherently good, but only a few interested pay attention to it long enough to discover it.

The film was produced in 1967, and already back then technology was widely recognized and its advantages extensively exploited. This is reflected in the film, where

"…and while he slept, he dreamt he was a butterfly flying through the garden and that he

could see a man asleep. But when he woke up, he was no longer sure if he was a man

dreaming that he was a butterfly, or if he was a butterfly dreaming that he was a man"

(The Ernie Game).

"I wanna live. I just realized it" (The Ernie Game)

the telephone functions as a mediator for the people to maintain communication with one another. In the last scene when Ernie is slowly dying in his lover’s flat, it is the telephone via which he is finally able to convey his thoughts to her and frankly ask her for help: "I wanna live. I just realized it" (The Ernie Game). Owing to inventions like the telephone, it is easier to transfer one’s ideas instantly, almost at the moment of their realization, and concurrently "individual’s identity is challenged in the course of interaction with information technology" (Nach 620). With respect to this, the film’s theme dealing with a mentally challenged young man might be aptly pursuing the problems which the contemporary Canadian society was facing.

In the course of the film, Ernie develops a momentary obsession with another type of technology, and it is a camera, which similarly gives one a distorted image of themselves. Despite that, it makes Ernie satisfied when he acquires it. In order to do this, however, he is forced to steal a typewriter from an officer in the asylum. This might be interpreted as a reaction to the contemporary society evolution – disposing of old technology, superseding it with the new one, such as camera over a typewriter, in this particular case. "Indeed, a user may find that a given technology provides a creative way of doing his or her job, one that may add a desired role that confirms, supports and reinforces his or her identity" (Nach 621). Ernie is constantly pestered by his girlfriends to find a job, which he does not. As a consequence of one such an argument with his girlfriend, he departs from the house to steal the typewriter, and buys the camera, feeling himself employed while taking images of others in the streets. He is predominantly consumed by capturing images of ordinary every-day images, as Canadians in general are when making documentaries.

On the contrary, technology does not only improve one’s life as suggested above. There is a scene when the phone is ringing while Ernie is about to leave his girlfriend’s house at night. On hearing it, he decides to wait until she finishes the call. What follows is a 10-second shot when the audience can only hear the phone ringing aloud in an irritating manner, and feel the tension of the two protagonists silently standing in the small hall. As if this was to alert the audience of what might come if they allow the technology to occupy their lives excessively. Technology is on the other hand also the only 'companion' to Ernie when he is dying. He tries to contact various people on the phone to talk to them, to ask them to save his life. However, his calls for help are mediated through the phone so heavily that the reality of the situation does not strike anybody as real. Thus, nobody helps Ernie, and he dies in the kitchen alone surrounded by the state of the art appliances, and only the phone talking to him, using the voice of Donna, his girlfriend.

Apart from technology, Owen pays attention to depiction of Canadian character as well. "There you have it. The blandest adjective in the English language, and we have claimed it proudly as our own. Canadians are nice. I was never more depressed" writes Will Ferguson in his book Why I Hate Canadians (9). The Canadian nice is illustrated in the film as Ernie and his friend rob a gas station. After that Ernie shoots at his accomplice just for the sake of fun and despair. He later slaps him for that. On departing, though, as he is taking his fair share of the stolen money, he does not take everything, but allows Ernie, who he has barely known for one day, to keep an equal amount. This indeed is a nice Canadian!

What Canadian directors also often employ is sarcasm, irony and dark humour. The Ernie Game contains plethora of examples of those. Nevertheless, every time it is appropriately inserted by Owen to complete a certain scene. One instance of that might be the moment when Ernie meets his new girlfriend on the street and starts to pursue her when she initiates a conversation: "'Are you an alcoholic?' 'No, why?' 'The way you walk. So slow…'" (The Ernie Game). It is inserted suitably here just to fill up the awkward silence that could occur between those two strangers. It relaxes the audience watching this awkward moment. The whole film per se, actually, is a collection of sarcasm and irony. Everything seems to be possible here, and people are helpful at all costs. The scenes are construed in a sarcastic manner, the characters are made excessively frank, yet are not at all. Nothing seems real, and the moments are often exaggerated profoundly. With reference to that, the film style may remind the audience of camp, often employed by Guy Maddin in his films, though in Owen´s case it is not as cheesy as camp usually aspires to be.

The film was being produced at the time when Canada was beginning its lengthy journey towards multiculturalism. There is one sequence in the movie which might be conceived of as an allusion to those events taking place in the 1960s. It is Ernie’s encounter with the African-Canadian immigrants. While talking to them, they introduce the object of his later short-time obsession to him – the camera. This scene might aspire to ensure us the immigration is a positive aspect of the society, it might bring something fresh and new into self-doubting Canadian life, as it, for instance, brought to Ernie.

What might strike one in the movie is a scene when Ernie slaps his girlfriend while talking to her, after she has just said calmly: "You’re not gonna see me around any more if you keep this up…" (The Ernie Game). His action appears not to fit the moment entirely. Nonetheless, there is a potential explanation in a book by John Gray

Lost in North America, where he claims that "there is such a thing as Canadian violence…Brutality is part of Canadian culture too. But we fail to bring this up in our media. Too complicated. Too relativist and ironic. Too Canadian" (37). This is applicable to the mentioned scene, where all of a sudden violence is unveiled. It is not

It is Ernie’s encounter with the African-Canadian immigrants. While talking to them, they

introduce the object of his later short-time obsession to him – the camera.

"there is such a thing as Canadian violence…Brutality is part of Canadian culture too…"

included in the scene when Ernie encounters a drunk quarrelsome man, being drunk himself, but it happens unexpectedly, as if the director felt a sudden urge to incorporate it, even though the timing might not seem fitting.

As stated earlier, Will Ferguson in his book mentions the fact that Canadians are very nice people, which he is not overly glad about. This aspect of Canadianness is depicted in the film as well, and in more than one scene. All the characters behave politely to each other, no matter what the situation is, how tense it appears to be. The characters always seem to mind their good behaviour. For instance, the scene when Ernie encounters the drunk man would certainly turn into a fight if the same material were treated by a Hollywood director. However, it ends up in a lively and polite discussion and eventually biding good nights to each other, when treated by the Canadian Owen. The same situation occurs in the scene where Ernie pursues a lonely girl at night. In the streets he meets another young drunk man who is later willing to rob a cinema with him. Yet, this delinquent saves the girl from being bothered by Ernie. The director usually displays both negative and positive traits of his/her hero. He/She does not allow their characters to assume a definite attitude to being good or bad. Recurrently, we can notice Canadian mystery of a documentary style. They incline to depict the characters as realistically as possible. They are not thoroughly bad nor thoroughly good, exactly as it happens in real life.

The response to Canadian nice and polite behaviour should apparently be nice and polite behaviour from the others, as well. At least, it is what Canadians might expect: "Just sew a maple leaf on your backpack, my boy, and when the terrorists storm the bus they’ll be offering you tea and crumpets while the Americans, Israelis and Brits are being lined up against a wall and shot" (Ferguson 12). This assertion is also depicted in the film, specifically in the scene when Ernie plays with the tourists’ camera and he seems unwilling to return it. Yet, they do not argue with him nor push him to return it too assertively, merely wait until he gives it back to them. He is a nice Canadian, hence they return the niceness.

Regarding Ernie’s girlfriend, she utters a sentence in the film which conveys an important message to all the Canadians. She says: "You just have to think differently" (The Ernie Game). As if she tried to address the Canadians, not only depressed Ernie. As if she wanted to change their depressive way of thinking: "'Poor Ernie, always feeling sorry for himself.'…'What are you trying to do?' 'I´m trying to get you to see that you create these things for yourself'" (The Ernie Game). Owen possibly realized what Shebib did (see Hofsess’ quote in Chapter 4.1.3): Canadians handle the given topics in darker and more depressive way than Americans usually do, hence the films’ popularity is not as acclaimed, since their overall form might impress the audience as too pessimistic and arousing negative emotions. Owen might have inserted this short utterance in order to point out that fact. He does not employ the encouragement of Canadians only once. Later he introduces Ernie himself to mediate this 'encouraging' message. "Gotta remember the right mental attitude. Come on! Be happy! Think positive…right?!" (The Ernie Game).

On the other hand, there is one aspect included in the film that is not typically considered Canadian. It is Ernie’s narcissism. Ernie is a typical depressed Canadian loser, however, at the same time, he is obsessed with his looks and image. He often looks into the mirror exploring his face. One scene is all taken up by Ernie getting dressed trying various models on, indecisive about what to wear for a day spent at home, anyway. Canadian heroes cannot usually afford such vanity. "Ehm…well…what am I gonna put on today? I think I’ll wear my brown shirt and my brown pants and my …." (The Ernie Game). This monologue about clothes takes a few minutes. Ernie is overtly vain in this scene, which Canadian heroes usually do not have a chance to be. The surrounding conditions do not allow them.

The final scene of Ernie’s suicide consumes seven minutes of the film. It lets him talk, yet, nobody listens again: "No, I’m not crazy. I’d just like to speak to somebody. That’s all" (The Ernie Game). One can again find a resemblance to the situation of Canadian film which has only little audience. The final shot of the film shows Ernie at the window, separated from the life outside. It might be another allusion to Canadian film, which is safely stored in the NFB archives, hidden from the outer world as well.

To summarize the analysis, the film from the 1960s contains all the aspects influencing the Canadian society then – the technology progress, multiculturalism and social illnesses, such as depressions Ernie suffers from. The director Don Owen as if aspired to compare Ernie’s life to Canadian film’s situation, at least it might strike the audience as so. It seems Ernie plays the role of Canadian film. Unfortunately, he/it dies in the end. Nobody wants to pay attention to him/it since he/it is generally conceived of as too depressing and a loser.

The film itself is based on a novel written by a Canadian author Mordecai Richler, a Companion of the Order of Canada, "the centrepiece of Canada’s honours system [that] recognizes a lifetime of outstanding achievement, dedication to the community and service to the nation. The Order recognizes people in all sectors of Canadian society" (The Governor General of Canada). It is an important Canadian film, since it "was a rare box-office success that temporarily revived a dormant Canadian film industry", however, it still contains much Canadian dark sense of humour, pessimism and more than one failure of the main character - Duddy Kravitz (Betzold 2). Regardless the fact that it contains all the aspects they did not like in other Canadian films, the audience shows recognition this time. One of the reasons might be the excellent performances given by, among many, Richard Dreyfuss, Randy Quaid and Denholm Elliott, who all make the film look documentary. The success might also be ascribed to the fact that Mordecai Richler himself participated in making the film with his cooperation on the screenplay, which certainly influenced the final shape of the film, and the perception of the audience as well. Kotcheff himself acknowledges Richler’s significant contribution: "But finally I persuaded him. I said: 'Look Mordecai, you gotta come and write the dialogue. Only you know how these people talk.' And he did come….and he wrote all the dialogue from beginning to end" (Kotcheff).

It seems Canada in general profits from co-operation. It does not manifest itself only in the multicultural 'mosaic' society, where there are many cultures co-operating on at common territory, but also in the film realm: "those [films] with separate writers and directors can be and are highly successful on all levels…[and]…Canada…[is a country] with more co-production treaties than any other country in the world…" (Kaye 66). Based on the previous assumption, it might be appropriate to rather than search for Canadian identity, to consider endeavours to find Canadian commonality.

The plot of the film centres around Duddy Kravitz, a young Jewish man who is soon turning 20. He lives in a small flat together with his father and his brother who is a medicine student, financially supported by their rich uncle Benjy. Duddy is a very ambitious person and desperately yearns for success, regardless of in what field. Throughout the movie, he invents several schemes which help him to gain the longed-for fame and moves him closer to reaching his goal. The only aim Duddy has in mind is to buy a lake, since his grandfather has always told him: "A man without land is nobody" (The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz). The importance of land is emphasized here, and much of Canadian landscape can be seen in the film, yet this time it is not covered in snow, and the temperature is not dangerously below zero. On the contrary, it is dangerously boiling this time. The director keeps the fact that Canadian climate is to be considered dangerous and harsh, however, he shows the audience that not only in winter. In many scenes the characters are sweating profusely. Duddy even vomits once after having been exposed to heat for a whole day. Kotcheff as if reacted to the 1970s environmental activism connected with increased awareness of global warming: "Environmentalists are still fond of recalling the outburst of environmental activism in 1970, epitomized in the 20 million Americans who joined the first Earth Day celebration on April 22" (Uekoetter). He seems to, if only unconsciously, point out there are such problems as over-heating of the planet, hence he made his actors to bathe in the consequences of the contemporary events, as well.

During the film Duddy hurts several of his closest friends and family members. By forging a cheque, he steals money from his disabled friend, whose injury was partially caused by Duddy´s neglect. He uses his French girlfriend Yvette whenever he needs and wants. He disappoints his Jewish grandfather for whom he claims to do everything connected with acquiring land for him. Moreover he insults Dingleman, a powerful businessman in the Jewish community, and he lets his uncle Benjy die without visiting him at his death bed once again. There are more failures in Duddy’s life, yet they all as if were balanced with good things happening to him throughout the whole movie. This balance might, de facto, remind the audience of a co-operation of two people – a Canadian-Bulgarian director and a Canadian-Jewish writer, in this case. The transitions between positive and negative events happen so quickly that the viewer sometimes does not have time to dwell on them for too long, thus it does not manage to cause him/her any depressive feelings nor exaggerated happiness: "Duddy’s successes and disasters follow upon each other as quickly as … [t]hey seem almost magical" (Canby).

The opening scene starts with a march of Duddy’s High School Cadet Corps, where the leader of the parade steps into excrement lying on the street while ceremonial music is being played in the background. We might take this as a preview to the film: 'Yes, indeed, it is Canadian, it will be full of losers, it will be exaggerated, but it will all be fun together.' This indeed happens. As the previously analyzed movie, this one too includes plenty of artificial postures and exaggerated feelings and acting, in this case it is presented in the shape of hyper-active and frantic Duddy.

Apart from the traits of camp, which tends to be used by many Canadian directors in their productions, there appear other features typically employed in Canadian film. It is documentary, which is chiefly provided by the excellent performance of the main protagonists. Furthermore, traits of body horror, very typical of David Cronenberg’s style, are visible as well. It is specifically in the scene when the forbidden and unknown director Mr. Friar (Denholm Elliott) makes a short film, where there is a process of circumcision shown on the screen, accompanied by another scene with a man eating razors, followed by Hitler’s speech. This film becomes popular and acclaimed among the audience. The allusions are rather evident here. The director as if had an optimistic view of the future of Canadian film again, as if this un-known director (be it Mr. Friar or David Cronenberg) with his short film could possibly gain a world-wide acknowledgement one day, without a necessity to leave his country.

The family who gather to watch the film look quite sceptical when the scenes full of cutting, blood and swallowing razors start appearing on the screen, and there is silence among them when the films ends. Nonetheless, somebody starts applauding in the end and the crowd joins in: "An Ekos survey…found that…92% [of Canadians] considered ´attending a performance of a Canadian artist or seeing a Canadian filmˋ important to their ´sense of belonging`" (Kaye 71). They realize it is still a film about them, even though pessimistic and dark and sometimes even immensely shocking. It is them in the film, thus they are bound to acknowledge it once they encounter it.

The film also deals with Francophone society. It is though more Richler’s pre-occupation than Kotcheff’s, since he as a Jew felt a member of minority, living and growing up in French Montreal full of "superstitious anti-Semitism of the French Canadian "other"" (Brauner 77). He demonstrates his feelings on Yvette, Duddy’s girlfriend, when he allows Duddy to use her meanly and sometimes treats her badly: "I'm sure many of them [French Canadians] believed that…the St Urbain Street Jews were secretly rich. On my side, I was convinced all French Canadians were abysmally stupid" (Brauner 76). The film is about Jewish community, however, it is not concerned only with it. The plot does not only happen behind the closed door of the Jewish community. They are open, as proper Canadians should be. They accept multicultural Canada. Duddy finds a French girlfriend and a non-Jewish friend. The story mentions

anti-Semitism, but it never causes too many obstacles to Duddy nor any other Jewish character in the film. The characters are of various nationalities, however, are able to co-operate and live along with each other, exactly as in real Canada. Although, a hint to

Francophone separatist society’s situation might be observed towards the end of the film. Yvette eventually breaks up with Duddy, in a way as Quebecois aspire to break up

…as if this un-known director (be it Mr. Friar or David Cronenberg) with his short film could

possibly gain a world-wide acknowledgement one day, without a necessity to leave his country.

The only aim Duddy has in mind is to buy a lake, since his grandfather has always told him: "A

man without land is nobody" (The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz).

with the rest of Canada. In this scene, Duddy might represent Canadian society while Yvette acts on behalf of Quebecois separatists: "I don´t want to see you…ever…again" (The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz).

Another widely addressed topic is the dysfunctional relationships. Duddy is the less popular out of the two sons in the family, though the audience does not in fact throughout the course of the film find out why. Duddy himself asks his family several times, nevertheless a clear and proper answer does not come. Kotcheff as if reflected upon the fact that Monk asserts; that "typically Canadian themes and motifs in the film… include … dysfunctional relationships", and tried to keep them in the film to make it more genuinely Canadian (see Chapter 4.1.3). Another theory proclaims that the dysfunctional relationships, mainly within a family, that recur so amply in Canadian film are connected with the ties between the family consisting of a mother and two siblings – the US, Canada and the UK:

The ongoing conflicts between the two cultures and languages [Anglophone and Francophone] have been acted out, usually indirectly and unacknowledged, in Canadian movies. Some results have been filmic themes of family dysfunction, siblings or sibling-coded characters and twins, plus outright or subtextual incest" (Monk and Kaye qtd. in Kaye 74).

Sometimes, the family might consist of three members, including the Francophone part of Canada, as well.

On the other hand, the characters playing Canadians in the film are indeed nice people overall, who help each other and are polite to each other: "The movie breaks with the unbearable niceness of being Canadian. Its characters arouse sympathy because of their comically flawed humanity, not because they are abstract symbols of class or nationality" (Alioff 1). The arch-enemy, Irwin, even gives Duddy back all the money he lost to him in a poker game. The guests in the summer resort collect quite a big amount of money for Duddy, because they simply find him a nice and cheerful attendant. The movie would indeed cause many sleepless nights and goose bumps to those similar to Will Ferguson, who are not excessively happy about Canadian niceness (see Ferguson’s quote in Chapter 4.2.1).

Search for one’s personal identity is an issue taken into consideration as well. However, it is conceived of as negative, in this case. It affects Virgil, who identifies himself mainly as an epileptic and wants to set up an association for all epileptics. He wishes to belong somewhere, to have a family. In the movie he asks Duddy: "Do you like me?" (The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz). His identity makes him lonely and his happiness depends on the others, such as Duddy and Yvette. Again, identity is closely tied to the other as referred to in Chapter Two. Duddy likewise feels the loneliness when asking his father about his dead mother: "Did she like me?" (ibid.) The answer he gets is: "Sure, why not?" (ibid.). What happens here, according to Daniel Golden, is that "family bonds seem to twist or break under the pressure of assimilating" (1). The Canadians who strive to assimilate with the Canadian society come farther and farther from their family circles, and sometimes severely damage their ties, as it happens with Duddy. The film might be deemed a warning against too overwhelming attempt to adhere to Canadianness.