Prairie Giant: The Tommy Douglas Story

One might expect a mini series over 3 hours about the father of Medicare would be full of fillers but they would be mistaken. The life of T.C. Douglas goes by very quickly in this movie yet manages to cover much of his major accomplishments, personal highlights, and famous speeches. Tommy Douglas was first and foremost a great orator. His experience as a Baptist pastor honed his public speaking skills and also his moral commitment to his promises. "PRAIRIE GIANT" shows the extent of his persecution both religious ("The trouble with you Baptists is they don't hold you under the water long enough") and political (his C.C.F. party is referred to as Communists and the Red Menace). His accomplishments can best be viewed on related web pages and publications. The biopic wisely focuses on his personal life which in large part shaped his social attitudes. The music and cinematography are a big part of this film but Canadian films about the Depression and mid 20th Century have always been of high quality. The acting is also as good as anticipated. Many famous faces have yet to be posted on the IMDb list. For example, Nicholas Campbell (the star reporter on Ron Howard's Cinderella MAN for those of you who haven't seen DAVINCI'S INQUEST)plays Liberal E.J.Young, CODCO's Andy Jones plays P.M. MacKenzie King, and Aidan Devine (Gordie Howe on NET WORTH) plays M.J. Colewell. Of course, it would not seem like a Canadian biopic without R.H.Thompson who's been in docu-dramas about other Canadian heroes like Ken Taylor, Terry Fox, Ted Lindsay, Frederick Banting, and Pierre Trudeau. The producers really pulled out all the stops to make a movie that will live as long as the memory of T.C. Douglas lives on.

"Prairie Giant" is a very good film about the great Canadian social democrat Tommy Douglas, the creator of the first Medicare system in North America, along with the first provincial government leader to sign into law a bill of rights and to legally guarantee collective bargaining in all sectors of the economy. Douglas was a witty and clever speaker, and Theriault does a good job at conveying his oratorical skills. The usual minuscule CBC budgets aren't noticeable here. A few of the minor actors don't seem terribly well cast: Paul Gross as Diefenbaker, Andy Jones as Mackenzie King, though they give it the old college try. Yet Don McKellar is good as Saskatchewan's finance minister, as is Kristin Booth as Irma Douglas, Tommy's wife. Douglas' final speech to the 50th Anniversary meeting of the CCF about the greed of private enterprise still rings true today in our globalized, McDonaldized, corporatized world.

It would have been nice to see the political struggles of the late 1960s and 1970s, which were skipped over the film, but these were sacrificed to show the struggle over Medicare in detail. You might have thought this would be a somewhat dull three hours... yet it could easily have filled five hours and kept my attention. We need more films like this from the CBC.

Very interesting movie in 2-parts about Tommy Douglas. He's the father of medicare in Canada, but so much more. This mini-series (4 hours total) tells the story of a great Canadian. In fact, he was voted the greatest Canadian by the citizens of this country a couple of years ago. Unfortunately, his work and accomplishments are not well enough known by ordinary Canadians. That's why this mini-series is so important. It helps that Michael Therriault is doing a terrific job as T.C. Douglas. It helps also that the supporting cast is great. And the use of archives adds on to the story. Too bad though that the mini-series focuses almost entirely on the creation of medicare. A longer series was perhaps needed.

Seen at home, in Toronto, on March 12th and 13th, 2006.

81/100 (***)

I am probably the only person on this string of comments who actually met Douglas. That said, I acknowledge the sincere effort of the producers of telling an important historical story, but I was utterly shocked by the inaccurate depiction of Jimmy Gardiner as an ultra right-wing ogre. Despte what you saw in this film, Gardiner was a teetotaler and a defender of oppressed minorities (Eastern European immigrants during the heyday of the Ku Klux Klan in the late 1920s and the On-to-Ottawa trekkers in the summer of 1935). There has been much controversy in Saskatchewan over the sadistically inaccurate depiction of Gardiner. Also, the Estevan coal miners strike of 1931 was inaccurately depicted: the bodies of the dead were not left to rot and Douglas and his wife were not in the area at the time. Moreover, Gardiner was not the premier at the time and did not, despite what you saw in the movie, order the shooting or exult in the miners' deaths. On and on and on go the list of historical errors, all of which just happen to aggrandize Douglas and his party.

What this movie "got right" was the important role of provincial finance minister Clarence Fines and cabinet minister Woodrow Lloyd during Douglas' term as premier. Actor Michael Therriault did an exceptional job of capturing Douglas' personality and speaking style.

There is a school of thought here in Saskatchewan that Douglas did as much harm as good...by waging war on business so effectively, he provoked it into a six-decade boycott of Saskatchewan, setting the stage for relatively few jobs. It has taken 60 years for another NDP government (see the April 6, 2006 budget brought down by NDP premier Lorne Calvert) to reverse years of anti-business rhetoric and policy--and throw open the doors to the private sector.

Among Canadian leftists, there is something akin to a cult around Douglas' life and deeds that prevents an objective, balanced analysis of his legacy. This ambitious but flawed feature will not make that consideration any easier.

The comments by people who "hated" this movie were very good comments. There are a few parts of the film which are crafted more for the enjoyment factor than the education factor. In doing so, the filmmakers sacrificed maybe one tenth of this film's historical value. I also agree with the people who loved this movie because it was so well produced and acted. All in all, this is a good film for anyone who cares about good government, family values, whether liberal or conservative. It provides a sound basis for further research if you are at all interested in the history of good government in the 20th Century. Speaking of "liberal," in the movie it is a puzzle why "liberal" seems to mean one thing in Canada and something else in the United States. Ah, well.