Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 1995-10-18, Page 5International Scene ayrno an THE CITIZEN, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1995. PAGE 5. Top billing goes to the honeywagon driver The way to get things done is not to mind who gets the credit for doing them. Benjamin Jowett Poor old Ben. As a classical theologian he was undoubtedly first-rate. He was easily one of the best loved Masters in the entire history of Balliol College in Oxford. But if he'd ever tried to peddle that who- cares-who-gets-credit philosophy in the movies they'd have strung him up from a lamppost at the corner of Hollywood and Vine. Who gets credit for what is everything in Hollywood. If you don't believe me, go shell out six or eight bucks and sit through Waterworld, the Kevin Costner epic currently inundating movie screens around the world. Don't bother sitting through the movie. Arrive late, just in time for "the credits". The credits for Waterworld are a mini- documentary unto themselves. They roll for an incredible seven minutes — and they don't just name stars and co-stars. The Waterworld credits sing the praises of "the chief dockmaster," the "vault manager," "trimaran co-co-ordinators" and some poor creatures known as "digital roto supervisors". There are more than eight hundred An American horror story A number of years ago when I was doing business in the Middle East on behalf of several Canadian companies, I was contacted by one of the Arabs there with whom I had done business. He had, he said, an egg contract worth millions of dollars and wondered whether I might be able to arrange a deal with any Canadian egg producers. I got a copy of the contract and then checked with the appropriate embassy to make sure that it was as valid as it seemed to be. An answer to the affirmative set me on my way and it was in the following three months that I came to discover the incompetence, greed and arrogance of the Egg Marketing Board. They resented the fact that anybody outside the board was trying to do business with Canadian eggs anywhere in the world. As my frustration mounted, I went to the Canadian government trade officials, who knew me and my work, and asked them for advice. They looked into it and came back with the answer that I should just forget it. The Marketing Board would frustrate any attempt I made to sell eggs. If they could not do it themselves, nobody else could. Off the record they admitted the board was all the things I accused it of being, but what else was new. individual credits immortalizing the folks who helped make Waterworld. — and that's for a flop. The mind shudders to think how many extra legions Costner would have needed to make a successful movie. Back when I was a kid all you had to do was blink and you'd miss the movie credits. In the early days the credits rolled before the feature film and they kept them simple. They told you the name of the director, the producers, the leading man, the leading lady and then they told you you only had five more minutes to get your popcorn. I can remember years ago being mystified by such credit designations as "gaffer", "grip" and "best boy". A cousin who'd played an extra in a few Hollywood movies straightened me out. "Gaffer" she explained, was a lighting technician. "Grips" were the guys who lugged the heavy movie cameras around. And "best boy" was a kind of rarefied gofer who fetched coffee and anything else the grips and gaffers needed. But then the movie credit business got complicated. In the credits to the movie Batman Forever you will see acknowledgements for the "Batsuit wrangler" and even a "Robinsuit wrangler". What the hell is that? I can see they might want to have somebody specifically in charge of seeing that Batman's cape doesn't get wrinkled and Robin's fly stays zipped up — but wrangler? My dictionary defines wrangler as 'a However, I find that Canada is not the only one with price-support problems. I recently came across some details of an American effort to protect the peanut farmers in the U.S. and they certainly have a similar incompetence as I found in the egg business. Back in 1949 the U.S. government set up a program which had, as its sole purpose, the protection of family farms. The peanut farms are permitted to grow their crop for export and do not need a licence. The control begins when the government goes to inordinate lengths to prevent any peanuts whatsoever from finding their way into the domestic market. The domestic market is serviced by farmers with a licence but, far from protecting family farms,•two-thirds of all peanuts are grown by absentee landlords (doctors, lawyers and similar professions). The farmer who runs the farm must rent the licence from these absentee landlords and this rent is frequently the most expensive cost of growing the peanuts. Because of all the protection, the farmers that do own their own licence have a nice thing going for them — profits are calculated to be just above 50 per cent of costs. All this costs taxpayers about $120 million a year and consumers at least $one-half billion in extra costs. Small wonder that the support price for American peanuts is about twice the world price. Just to show you that normally rational people can make egregious blunders, when Congress got around to deciding what the price of peanuts should be based on, it was considered that the best place to start would be the costs of production. So far, so good! cowboy...esp. in charge of saddle horses'. Never mind — it gets weirder. Batman Forever also gave a credit line to a 'grecnsman', a 'patcher' and — my favourite: a 'hair puncher'. The only person I know who could use a hair puncher is convicted-felon-turned- boxing-impresario Don King — but he doesn't act. At least not in movies. Movie credits have gotten more complicated because films arc a lot more technical than they used to be. Half the movies on the screen these days would be laughed out of the theatre if it wasn't for the special effects. Naturally, the people responsible for those special effects think they deserve a pat on the back too. Plus it's a form of Hollywood currency. Anyone who can point to their name in the credits for, say, Rocky One through Twenty- Three — probably isn't going to have trouble landing a job on Rocky Twenty-Four. Still, the credit business is getting pretty silly. There's a movie called Carrington coming soon to a theatre near you. After it's over, when the credits roll you will see a . credit for "honeywagon driver". A honeywagon driver is the guy who brings in and removes those Johnny-On- The-Spot portable toilets they use on location. For some of the movies I've seen lately, the honeywagon driver should get top billing. Then the silly season set in and the same Congress decreed that the price could move upward but never downward. Back in 1990 a shortage of peanuts due to a drought forced the price upward. When the resulting shortage was finally removed, you do not need to be a genius to predict what happened. The price paid the peanut farmers stayed at this artificially high level. The latest ploy is to cut acreage planted, the same as they do in the tobacco marketing board in Ontario but even at that there is a surplus. When the market price falls below the government support price, the farmers unload the resulting surplus on the government. Meanwhile back to the exports. I won't go into too much detail but one observer has stated that the government has tighter controls over the shipment of U.S. peanuts to the port of loading than it does over the shipment of plutonium used in nuclear weapons. Nor were American farmers the only ones to feel the long arm of government controls. Until 1994 the U.S. restricted the entry of foreign peanuts to about two per year for each citizens. The GATT and NAFTA agreements forced the government to allow for gradual increases. To placate the farmers the Clinton government put a 155 per cent tariff on imports. So much for the brave talk in the U.S. about the merits of free trade. So much, too, for the same government that wants to hammer the Canadians for doing the same thing to their domestic poultry and dairy products. At the rate Washington is going, there may soon not be any peanut industry to protect. A. The short of it By Bonnie Gropp Say Non please For those of us who are ready for assurances of any kind, you'll be pleased to hear that physic JoJo Savard has predicted that Canada will prevail, Quebecers will vote Non to separatism. For me to offer my views regarding the choice Quebecers are going to be making in a few weeks, may not be as frivolous as some, nor as astute, as those of political science students, but like most Canadians these days, 1 do have them. Admittedly, as a self-described scholar of people, rather than of the fields in which they are involved, my politics arc usually ruled by my heart rather than my head. When I make a choice regarding government, it is often less about policy than about a feeling. The facts, stated simply are not so difficult to understand; Separatists feel removed from Canada and believe they should become independent. Federalists believe in a united Canada. Obviously such a large issue can't be explained with such brevity; its seriousness and scope demand that it be judged by the facts. Yet, much has been said of the ambiguity of the referendum question. A recent article in Maclean's stated that "Parizcau's (referendum) question attempts to paint independence in softer, more voter-friendly hues, not as the abrupt end of the country as it has existed since Confederation in 1867, but rather as the promising beginning of an entirely new relationship between Quebec and Canada." Maclean's goes on to say that the question couples a vote on Quebec sovereignty to "formal" offers of an economic and political partnership with a divided Canada, an idea that Federalists have called an illusion. In echoing the views of many Canadian premiers, that there would be no special deal if Quebecers vote Yes, Ontario Premier Mike Harris, as so many others have, likened the move to sovereignty to that of divorce. Quite simply, two households will cost more to run than one, he said. It is when the issue is given a human condition that my feelings come into play. This past weekend, a snafu turned an outing into a less than pleasant experience for my family. Bickering and accusations erupted until the closeness of being a family led us to see the humour in the situation and unite us. Families don't always see eye to eye, but there is strength in being together and that bond is generally too important to cast off lightly. I was a Grade 7 student in 1967, the centennial year of Canada's Confederation. I recall learning a song, verses of which told about the country's 10 provinces and two territories. The lyrics and music not only described the physical uniqueness of each province but celebrated the traditions that made each special. We sang with pride about those differences believing we were a united family. I know now, that wasn't necessarily so. Separatism has been debated for decades. If this were really a family it is likely that some well-intentioned therapist would have recommended we call it quits long ago. There are those among us, who are tired of the arguing and bickering and believe we should just let them go. But, I'm hoping that most believe the union of this great country is worth saving, that the two sides can work out their differences to reach an equable solution. Arthur Black