Strike Update
- Thread starter brianluce
- Start date
If it isn't in the form of a series of quatrains, I'm not interested.
karapetkov
Well-known member
This thread went crazy, didn't it?
That doesn't sound very nice now, does it? And I have to join sides with Alex Whitmer on this. [Isn't it ironic?
]
No, he was juxtaposing "civilized and free people" to India and it citizens, indirectly implying that they are not civilized and free.
Obviously uninformed and uneducated statement.
India has had civilization and high culture long before the US and even European countries existed as definite entities.
When I say long, I'm talking millenia...
When India had central government, cities, literature, religion, etc., most of our ancestors were a bunch of monkeys, running around, figuratively speaking.
So, when you're obviously incompetent of something, maybe you should just keep quiet.
OK, now about Indian cinema.
I'm not very well acquainted with it, but I watched two movies of Pan Nalin - "Samsara" and "Valley of Flowers" - and they were very good, especially "Samsara".
I also watched another Indian movie [forgot its name], which was also OK.
Well, most of these are co-productions, but yet - enough Indian talent involved.
And yes - the future belongs to co-productions, so all this - Hollywood vs. Bollywood vs. Schmollywood crap isn't very far-sighted.
That doesn't sound very nice now, does it? And I have to join sides with Alex Whitmer on this. [Isn't it ironic?
]No, he was juxtaposing "civilized and free people" to India and it citizens, indirectly implying that they are not civilized and free.
Obviously uninformed and uneducated statement.
India has had civilization and high culture long before the US and even European countries existed as definite entities.
When I say long, I'm talking millenia...
When India had central government, cities, literature, religion, etc., most of our ancestors were a bunch of monkeys, running around, figuratively speaking.
So, when you're obviously incompetent of something, maybe you should just keep quiet.
OK, now about Indian cinema.
I'm not very well acquainted with it, but I watched two movies of Pan Nalin - "Samsara" and "Valley of Flowers" - and they were very good, especially "Samsara".
I also watched another Indian movie [forgot its name], which was also OK.
Well, most of these are co-productions, but yet - enough Indian talent involved.
And yes - the future belongs to co-productions, so all this - Hollywood vs. Bollywood vs. Schmollywood crap isn't very far-sighted.
CallaghanFilms
Veteran
First off, Hollywood ain't going anywhere.
Why read so much into it?
Christ, yuz need to relax a little.
:grin:what a great poo pooin' line!:grin:
Why read so much into it?
Christ, yuz need to relax a little.
It doesn't help your argument to take the guy's stupid joke way out of context. He was dissing Bollywood films, and that was all. You guys are just looking to create an argument.
karapetkov
Well-known member
The whole thread went astray, let's focus our offenses on greedy producers and away from multi-millenial cultures, ok?
Last edited:
I'm sure I speak for all civilized people of the free world in saying someone should take this thread into a dark alley and shoot it in the head--third world style.
Last edited:
Simon Höfer
Veteran
Nothing against german cars! They are great 
Japanese as well. Not so sure about the korean cars though. ^^
Japanese as well. Not so sure about the korean cars though. ^^
Mattykins
Cute Member
Holy ****.
Alright, first in regards to international relations. Third-world is out-dated as of the fall of the soviet union. It is politically correct to state Developing Nations. And it's not only "third-world" that has problems with terrorism. Assassinations are not limited to "third world".
"I think I speak for Americans and all civilized people of the free world when I say that what gets made in Bollywood hopefully STAYS in Bollywood. Sometimes a billion Indians CAN be wrong."
This is about the WGA and THEIR rights, not about an ethnocentric view upon the rest of the film world, or the rest of the world for that matter. Film makers in Bollywood are severely talented. Hell, film makers worldwide are ungodly talented. Look around you. There are people from all over the world on THIS forum. Are you saying they are bad film makers because they don't follow the hollywood model?
China has an amazing film industry, and unfortunately for you Brian, most international films (are sponsored by the government -- we don't have that here now do we) and are created for EXPORT. So they will be seen by INTERNATIONAL AUDIENCES. Thus the definition of EXPORT.
Have you ever seen a Bollywood film? They actually focus on story and not blowing **** up like Hollywood does.
That aside, and back to the original statement that this issue has become.
Both of you are on a HIGH HORSE. Step down. And understand that the system CANNOT work without FULL COLLABORATION in all DEPARTMENTS. This also means that without a script, there is ESSENTIALLY NOTHING.
Even IMPROV is not truly UNSCRIPTED. Have you ever done a film before in your life? I am not talking little, lets film my family thing, I am talking like real film with actors.
If you don't have a general idea of the story AKIN A SCRIPT, you can't have actors or donut makers, or dog trainers, or film loaders. You can't bring them all together.
Have you ever heard of a SCRIPT BREAKDOWN. Yes, the little thing that you use when you go on set to be sure you have the right equipment, the right actors, the right crew, the right...well everything. Thats not even including the Time Schedules. How do you plan on shooting a film without a plan?
This PLAN is generated from a SCRIPT which, coincidentally is written by a scriptwriter, which is further probably unionized if they are a writer of any context.
So essentially, what does this mean?
Without the script, there is no story, no concept for shooting, no way to shoot. If you tell me you have done a film simply by setting up a camera and yelling "action" to see what that gets, I applaud you. Even reality TV is based off a concept that SOMEONE designed.
So without the creative writers there is NO SYSTEM at all. There is NO NEED for everyone else. NO NEED for burger flippers, or toilet cleaners, or sweepers, or cleaner-uppers, or grocery store baggers, or the friendly-face at wallmart that cashes you out as you pick up some food for the crew, or the friendly voice at B&H that you talk to when you make an order, or the guy from KODAK who confirms what film stock you just ordered, or the man with your distribution liaison, or your producer, or your director, or your best boy grip, or the production assistant, or the person at Dunkin Donuts that fills the multitudes of coffee that your director craves so dearly, or the person sitting in front of their computer at DVXuser to discuss why we don't need or we do need scripts. And that WGA writers are or are not as important as all those people listed above. Fact of the matter is that without the writer, there is no stage to set the film on.
AKA, the Writers is the infrastructure whist the film itself and the support crew is the superstructure. Neither can exist without the other.
Now really, do you need to keep fighting back and forth about this? Either way, without the writer there is nothing. So like it or not, the writers are needed.
Also, just to mention, the contracts for SAG and Directors Guild run out in Feb (I think). Will this be the same situation again when we discuss that the actors are as important as the Production Assistant? If the writers fail now, SAG and the Directors are out too. This will change the entire industry. Basically if the writers win, everyone will get more money from it.
The mediator rests -- as you state.
-Matt Watkajtys
Screenwriter (non-union)
Independent Director and Producer.
Production Assistant for hire.
Alright, first in regards to international relations. Third-world is out-dated as of the fall of the soviet union. It is politically correct to state Developing Nations. And it's not only "third-world" that has problems with terrorism. Assassinations are not limited to "third world".
"I think I speak for Americans and all civilized people of the free world when I say that what gets made in Bollywood hopefully STAYS in Bollywood. Sometimes a billion Indians CAN be wrong."
This is about the WGA and THEIR rights, not about an ethnocentric view upon the rest of the film world, or the rest of the world for that matter. Film makers in Bollywood are severely talented. Hell, film makers worldwide are ungodly talented. Look around you. There are people from all over the world on THIS forum. Are you saying they are bad film makers because they don't follow the hollywood model?
China has an amazing film industry, and unfortunately for you Brian, most international films (are sponsored by the government -- we don't have that here now do we) and are created for EXPORT. So they will be seen by INTERNATIONAL AUDIENCES. Thus the definition of EXPORT.
Have you ever seen a Bollywood film? They actually focus on story and not blowing **** up like Hollywood does.
That aside, and back to the original statement that this issue has become.
Both of you are on a HIGH HORSE. Step down. And understand that the system CANNOT work without FULL COLLABORATION in all DEPARTMENTS. This also means that without a script, there is ESSENTIALLY NOTHING.
Even IMPROV is not truly UNSCRIPTED. Have you ever done a film before in your life? I am not talking little, lets film my family thing, I am talking like real film with actors.
If you don't have a general idea of the story AKIN A SCRIPT, you can't have actors or donut makers, or dog trainers, or film loaders. You can't bring them all together.
Have you ever heard of a SCRIPT BREAKDOWN. Yes, the little thing that you use when you go on set to be sure you have the right equipment, the right actors, the right crew, the right...well everything. Thats not even including the Time Schedules. How do you plan on shooting a film without a plan?
This PLAN is generated from a SCRIPT which, coincidentally is written by a scriptwriter, which is further probably unionized if they are a writer of any context.
So essentially, what does this mean?
Without the script, there is no story, no concept for shooting, no way to shoot. If you tell me you have done a film simply by setting up a camera and yelling "action" to see what that gets, I applaud you. Even reality TV is based off a concept that SOMEONE designed.
So without the creative writers there is NO SYSTEM at all. There is NO NEED for everyone else. NO NEED for burger flippers, or toilet cleaners, or sweepers, or cleaner-uppers, or grocery store baggers, or the friendly-face at wallmart that cashes you out as you pick up some food for the crew, or the friendly voice at B&H that you talk to when you make an order, or the guy from KODAK who confirms what film stock you just ordered, or the man with your distribution liaison, or your producer, or your director, or your best boy grip, or the production assistant, or the person at Dunkin Donuts that fills the multitudes of coffee that your director craves so dearly, or the person sitting in front of their computer at DVXuser to discuss why we don't need or we do need scripts. And that WGA writers are or are not as important as all those people listed above. Fact of the matter is that without the writer, there is no stage to set the film on.
AKA, the Writers is the infrastructure whist the film itself and the support crew is the superstructure. Neither can exist without the other.
Now really, do you need to keep fighting back and forth about this? Either way, without the writer there is nothing. So like it or not, the writers are needed.
Also, just to mention, the contracts for SAG and Directors Guild run out in Feb (I think). Will this be the same situation again when we discuss that the actors are as important as the Production Assistant? If the writers fail now, SAG and the Directors are out too. This will change the entire industry. Basically if the writers win, everyone will get more money from it.
The mediator rests -- as you state.
-Matt Watkajtys
Screenwriter (non-union)
Independent Director and Producer.
Production Assistant for hire.
Last edited:
alex whitmer
Veteran
I get the holy shi@ part! We have gone astray.
Totally agree with part two. No script, no film.
What had been mentioned earlier was ONE appoach to filmmaking, that being guerrilla filmmaking. It was also stated that success varies. And I agree that there is most likely a 'conceptual' script rolling around in somebody's head, but not a printed and bound script as we have all come to know and love.
Again success varies, and I wouldn't put my money on it.
Also agree on the improv, sorta. I have done improv, and it was usually done with just one cue from the director. The rest had to be made up on the spot. I believe Drew Carrey has a show that delves into just that.
Not sure I understand you final comment quoted here. Something about unionized writers and writers of any context ... I don't get it.
Pretty much agree with everything else. All good arguements ('cept maybe the high horse thing).
Alex
www.alexwhitmer.wordpress.com
www.guerro.wordpress.com
Last edited:
alex whitmer
Veteran
Okay ...
Do you feel this strike will really change anything? Or will it be just another small victory soon overshadowed or even neutralized by yet another unforseen problem?
Is there something else writers can be doing to prepare themselves for the brave new world?
No script, no film. I think we all agree. This gives us the upper hand, or so it would seem.
Maybe the union really isn't all that effective after all, and the writers need to find something far more terrifying to counter unscrupulous production companies.
alex
www.alexwhitmer.wordpress.com
www.guerro.wordpress.com
.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Like what, Die Hard 6? :cheesy:
alex whitmer
Veteran
Nobody is looking for an arguement or taking any one part of the comment of of context. The point was clear.
Read it again.
Some in Hollywood may not like the competition, but it is not going to go away. It is Hollywood that needs to make the adjustment in paradigms.
Warner Bros has already made an aliance with China, and I'm guessing others have are will find international partners.
So, what are the next generation of filmmakers, and in our case writers, going to do secure a spot in the new order of things?
How is the internet going to effect our work, and is fighting for the residuals really going to matter over the long haul? Or, will it only create a new impetus for other scams to short-change us?
How will the new 'globalization' of film play out in our field?
I personally see this whole strike as short-sighted folly. There are far larger issues at stake with far larger repercussions.
Be prepared.
Alex
www.alexwhitmer.wordpress.com
www.guerro.wordpress.com
karapetkov
Well-known member
Maybe it won't, I don't know, but maybe it will and if there's no strike there will definitely be no change, which is bad.
I believe that every member of the crew should get a rightful share of every ticket sold, every DVD rented and every download from the Net [as a matter of fact, I believe DVD rentals will disappear in the future].
It was Spielberg, if I'm not mistaken, who suggested that directors and actors should sign contracts for percentages of the profits and not fixed fees. And that's the way it should be with all departments - signing on percentage of the profit or - a smaller fee + percentage.
Cause if you make Sh*t, you should get Sh*t, and if you make gold - you should get gold!...
This way it is better for producers too, cause they won't have to pay you, for example, fixed 20 mln. bucks , but instead 2 mln. + %, and I believe they won't be unhappy if the movie actually makes 2 billion and they have to give you 40 mln. ! It's better for you too!
To not strike would be the "short-sighted folly." Within 5-10 years, the internet will be the largest source of broadcast content in the world. I suppose you think that writers should be content with receiving no residual payments for their work? That's what would happen if they didn't strike.
You clearly have no idea what this strike is about. You realized that a while back, and you've since been trying to change the subject to foreign markets taking over Hollywood. The whole internet dilemma is actually much more important right now.
This strike is about making the producers admit that this is the 21st century.
Last edited:
I know many people who are out of work because of the strike, but I do not know a single one who sits around complaining that the strike is doing more harm than good. This is a business of unions, and where unions are concerned, there will be strikes. They know that, and they accept that. If it wasn't the writers it would be the Directors or the Actors.
Some people act like this is the first such strike to ever happen. I have a feeling that they haven't been in the business that long.
alex whitmer
Veteran
I understand what the strike is about. I'm just not sure writers are fighting the right battle.
Wrong battle at the wrong time.
As a writer, residuals can be an intregal part of our incomes, and some production companies are doing all they can to keep this money in their own pockets. The producers in question are well aware that this is the 21st century, and are using its technology to pull just such a scam.
Writers are, and will continue to be, the most 'marginalized' players in the process of filmmaking, at least in some countries. However, I feel unions and their tactics are outdated, and writers need to find more effective ways of recourse and due recognition for their contribution.
Read Karapetkov's blurb on profit sharing!
Right battle at the right time.
The internet issue and the globalization of film are concurrent problems / opportunities, and therefore discussing Bollywood and the growth of the international film industry is relevant, not a diversion.
For the sake of arguement, let's say the writers win this one, and they get what's due. This will in turn cause profit-driven production companies to seek out cheaper sources and options.
Action, reaction.
Other industries have done just that, with the manufacturer usually outsourcing to avoid union wages and benefits, as well as the burdens of over-regulation, and thus denying the work to Americans altogether (and usually engaging in the slave labor of children, but that's another issue).
Could that happen to the writers as well? Could a writer from the US be replaced by a writer from say, Pakistan? The internet makes it entirely plausible, and judging from the poor English skills of many American writers, a talented writer from Pakistan or wherever could easily turn in a better screenplay at a fraction of the cost.
Unions can and do force businesses into drastic measures. Could U.S. writers be the next victim?
Miscellaneous ...
One of our biggest problems is our numbers. There are thousands of writers for every project, and this puts us at an immediate bargaining disadvantage.
In addition, the overriding American mindset in filmmaking is profit, profit, profit. High concept and box office orgasms are what drive the business. This makes doing business in the US expensive. Other counties use other measures to gauge a films success, and can produce great films for far less money.
I admit however, when Hollywood does it right, there's no comparison. But Hollywood best not rest on its laurels, and make needed adjustments sooner than later.
Conclusion? The globalization of film just might make the residuals issue a moot point by forcing the profit-mongers to the extreme measure of outsourcing writers.
I suggest we as writers figure out what is the best battle to be fighting right now.
Alex
www.alexwhitmer.wordpress.com
www.guerro.wordpress.com
Last edited:
alex whitmer
Veteran
This leads me to uncertainty as to the degree you're really understanding what the strike is all about. But hey, different strokes...
Well, did you vote for or against the strike, yourself (that is, if you don't mind revealing your vote)?
Not production companies The Producers' Guild. This is contract-wide and industry-wide, at least, union industry-wide, which is frankly where most of the resources go, and most of the work gets done, in the USA.
So is there any doubt, as to whether or not they should be allowed to continue getting away, with that?
Have a talk on that score with some PAs. Or Art Department Coordinators. Or laborers. They'll set you straight, in no time flat...
Why are unions and our tactics outdated? If you have more 'modern' systems of organization, or arrangements for collective bargaining, let's hear about them, but without offering effective alternatives don't be so quick to dismiss unions. They continue to exist for some very good reasons.
I did. It doesn't impress me as more than a nice idea that will never be adopted.
Which is...what, exactly?
When the discussion (and negotiations) at hand don't concern globalization of production, then Bollywood is indeed an irrelevant diversion.
Screenwriting, like literature, is curiously non-portable. While there are of course a small number of films that - in large part thanks to their screenplays - do have broad international appeal, most content for domestic consumption remains the province of domestic producers. Where there are domestic producers, worth noting.
Exporting an assembly-line job is much more easily done, than exporting a screenwriting job, for obvious reasons.
*chuckle* if you say so.
1) I'm inclined to call bullsh*t on that first item. The fact that businesses sometimes choose to adopt drastic measures, rather than deal with unions, does not mean that the unions forced them into it.
2) Almost certainly not.
Not so much when you consider that a very small proportion of those writers are (a) capable of professional performance and (b) any damn good.
Unlikely, for reasons indicated above.
The one they're presently fighting. Not much doubt about it.
alex whitmer said:
He could be talking to me, or to any one of my colleagues.