H2O

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.

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.

After a few decent stabs at producing good Canadian movies, CBC has laboured mightily and brought forth a turkey this time. The scenario is absurd. The acting is overwrought. The production is pretentious. The facts are shaky. What is this "Canadian Federal Police?" Do they perhaps mean the RCMP? And what is this emergency power thing that this young whelp of a pm invokes. I thought it was called The War Measures Act. Nor does the office of "deputy prime minister" have any constitutional standing. He (or she) does not automatically take over as does the US vice president if the big guy dies in office. It would be a matter to be resolved by the Liberal party and/or the Governor-general. And a black US president??? Not in our lifetime! This is really a stupid movie that reflects our insecurity, our naivete and our incompetence at making movies. We're very good at snowmobiles. And beer. Not movies.

Having just watched this on tape I have to was both shocked and in awe at the magnitude of this mini-series.

We know for a fact that the American water supply is dwindling, and their first port of call for a refill will be north of the border, so why not make a movie about it ?

As political junkie, I can tell you yes a candidate can be elected in a by election, have a leadership race, win it and then become defacto PM, unlikely but possible [which is the basic premise for this whole movie].

Acting was excellent, sets were above average, some scenarios was jaw droppingly plausible, especially the playing of Quebec and First Nations off each other. The idea of solicitor general as being a national hero was a bit of a stretch. However, once the war measures act was dropped he was about the only person in the country that could have done what he did. The mis-use of absolute power under the act played equally in to the hands of both sides here, the sight of tanks on parliament hill was scary enough.

I think this is a plausible future, not much different than the millions of Austrians who were a little shocked when Germany annexed them prior to WW2.

The scenario I would like to see played out would have been what next ? The annexation of Canada by the USA would lead to what ? I envisioned WW3 with Europe and the UK coming to the aid of Canada and a conventional WW3 being fought right here in North America.

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.