Sag

[michaelbay]

Oh my god. SAG wants more than Directors and Writers? That's a smart tactic I guess. When are people going to understand, most importantly actors - we are at war - we are facing a major recession - our country is in dire need of being fixed - our country also has no money because we have given trillions to the Iraq war and we have NOT even started to pay for it - it is just paid right now by printing more money on presses - China owns our ass in every way. Why not strike on a business in a down fall. Just like the writer's they made pennies on the four extra months striking - when you do the real math and they are paying the price for it still - so many writer's out of work still!!! I want this business to thrive - I know the studio heads and they will punish those that defy them. Okay, be an idealist - but you will never get a better deal then the writer's or directors - only the same - the studio's will never allow it, don't kid yourself. The working actors don't want a strike - they have said so. Too many non working actors have a say which is crazy - maybe there are just too many actors?? Gosh I'm even a member of SAG, but I don't feel I've earned the right to vote in this guild.

One hunch, the leaders of these guilds seem to like the limelight they get in the press, it becomes more about the ego in the room rather than something smart. Striking is not smart. Through the history in America, strikes in businesses have only gained the union worker 6% at the max - so take the emotion out of it and go for the 6%. A path to strike is not smart for the the hundreds of thousands of people in this business. Sanity needs to prevail here - talk real and talk the same talk as your union brothers - not more!

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Greed is horrible thing...

These strikes only lead to lowered standards. It's because of all this crap that the entertainment world has been overcome by shitty (cheap) "reality television." Screw that.

[Mobe1969]

I don't know the details of their demands, but I have a lot of respect for the amount of hours a lot of actors have to do. I'm not talking big budget movie stars that just work occasionally. But take for example an hour long TV series like say the XFiles, 22+ 1 hour episodes a year, mostly night shoots, and lead actors in pretty well every shot in every episode. That is just gruelling. The amount of hours an actor like that would do would put me to shame. People at the low end of the acting barrel do have to work for a living, and I've no idea what they get paid. But I expect there are a lot of people that just want to act that don't make much.

[sora]

Now SAG? Haven't they learnt from arduous strikes in the past months?

[nelson]

I think one of the very smart thing the DGA did was go out and research how much of a deal they can get.

It appears that the presidents and negotiators just want to go into negotiations -- if thats what they're doing -- and basically start a pissing contest.

[Bumblebee1983]

But hey, this strike will give directors a chance to find new talent.

*hides under desk*

But yeah, the demands are outstanding.

[mblase75@gmail.com]

These strikes only lead to lowered standards. It's because of all this crap that the entertainment world has been overcome by shitty (cheap) "reality television." Screw that.

Let's not be hasty, shall we? Striking, throughout history, has been instrumental in getting essential laborers the rights they need by business managers who treat them as interchangeable parts in a machine.

That being said, I have little sympathy for those "laborers" who work in the entertainment industry and feel they're not getting what they deserve. Few people would argue that Hollywood screen actors are "essential" for anybody other than the people who work in entertainment.

Every time one of these strikes takes place, movies and television shows I enjoy get held up for months. On the other hand, I'll be the first to admit I can live without them for a while anyway. In fact, it gives me a good excuse to catch up on my reading.

Mr. Bay, I'll accept that as a director this screws up your chosen career for months on end. But come on, let's not pretend you personally are hurting for money this time around.

[jwebb1970]

Oh my god. SAG wants more than Directors and Writers? That's a smart tactic I guess. When are people going to understand, most importantly actors - we are at war - we are facing a major recession - our country is in dire need of being fixed - our country also has no money because we have given trillions to the Iraq war and we have NOT even started to pay for it - it is just paid right now by printing more money on presses - China owns our ass in every way. Why not strike on a business in a down fall. Just like the writer's they made pennies on the four extra months striking - when you do the real math and they are paying the price for it still - so many writer's out of work still!!! I want this business to thrive - I know the studio heads and they will punish those that defy them. Okay, be an idealist - but you will never get a better deal then the writer's or directors - only the same - the studio's will never allow it, don't kid yourself. The working actors don't want a strike - they have said so. Too many non working actors have a say which is crazy - maybe there are just too many actors?? Gosh I'm even a member of SAG, but I don't feel I've earned the right to vote in this guild.

One hunch, the leaders of these guilds seem to like the limelight they get in the press, it becomes more about the ego in the room rather than something smart. Striking is not smart. Through the history in America, strikes in businesses have only gained the union worker 6% at the max - so take the emotion out of it and go for the 6%. A path to strike is not smart for the the hundreds of thousands of people in this business. Sanity needs to prevail here - talk real and talk the same talk as your union brothers - not more!

Mr Bay....that may have been the smartest, most cogent arguement you have ever posted here that I have read (I visit occasionally, but rarely if ever post). Bravo, sir!!!


I agree that actors (albeit not the vast majority of those with gigs) striking over a few more cents on DVD sales or download/streaming, what with the situation here & abroad right now.....it reeks of greed & narcissism.

The WGA strike not only put a lot of folks out of work, it also led to an overal decline in TV viewing even after the strike ended. Whatever bitter taste that situation left in the avg viewer...well, ACTORS doing similar will likely be viewed as an even worse situation.

Besides, if viewship goes down, whos to say that the $$ you strike over will ever materialize if you got your way? Fewer people watching your show in primetime or on DVR could very well mean fewer buying DVDs or watching it on the Web. Those "extra points" still end up in a loss of $$ if no "new profit" is generated.

And obviously when I use "you" I mean SAG or whatever other union that was involved in strikes agaisnt studios/producers....not Mr Bay.

Last thing I need is you sir, tracking me down & tearing my head off with that on set bullhorn of yours!

But it's good to see a "Hollywood insider" such as yourself speaking out on the idiocy that is this proposed strike.

[Bumblebee1983]

Well....if the actors are going to strike and throw a fit and keep it up until they get their way (like three year olds..., no, wait, I've seen some three year olds act better than this), they might as well be productive in other areas, like, oh say, help with the recovery and aid over in Myamar, and realize how great they have it here in the good ol' US of A.

Greedy motherf'ers is right.

And good God that was a long friggin' sentence....

[Beej]

That's one point of view, Bee. It is all too easy to point the finger at one place and blame them.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...ance-with-wga/

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...riters-strike/

[Bumblebee1983]

That's one point of view, Bee. It is all too easy to point the finger at one place and blame them.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...ance-with-wga/

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...riters-strike/

Well, either way it all comes down to the moolah.

[nelson]

That's one point of view, Bee. It is all too easy to point the finger at one place and blame them.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...ance-with-wga/

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...riters-strike/

Well, if the DGA (Directors Guild of America) could secure a new contract, why can't they?

[Bumblebee1983]

Well, if the DGA (Directors Guild of America) could secure a new contract, why can't they?

*shrug*

You got me there.

[Beej]

Well, if the DGA (Directors Guild of America) could secure a new contract, why can't they?

You ask if one child can do it why can't the other children... but they are not the same, so you can't treat them as if they were.

It takes two to tango and a sour relationship comes from both sides, but yeah, these folks sure could use a pinch hitter.

SAG has every right to negotiate for the best deal they can get. Having to negotiate your rights and work product in the public eye isn't an easy thing to do, but that is part of the arsenal at the disposal of the AMPTP, that and public opinion, the economic situation, etc.

Can't see a strike happening for all the reasons in MB's post, but it's not SAG is bad or the leadership is bad -- on either side. It's a negotiation. Happens all the time, and as humans, we really suck at it.

[STEPhon IT]

Well, if the DGA (Directors Guild of America) could secure a new contract, why can't they?

Because they don't want to. This is a way to show that the unions run the show not the studios and they will hurt many peoples jobs to do it. I agree with Michael, there are so many ways to handle this w/o striking, but it's an ego trip. I am so pulling for a straight up studio system and banish SAG and the workers unions for good. Why does studios need to tolerate this? THEY ARE THE BOSS!

[First Gen]

If the SAG feels they're getting cheated for their work, have them switch jobs with me for a while. Working at a small non profit office with gas prices reaching "The Jetsons" high's, Im sure after a while of living like me, they'll be happy to earn what they get.

Thats just one mans opinion.

[mblase75@gmail.com]

If the SAG feels they're getting cheated for their work, have them switch jobs with me for a while. Working at a small non profit office with gas prices reaching "The Jetsons" high's, Im sure after a while of living like me, they'll be happy to earn what they get.

Look up when the SAG was founded, and why. Back in the days when actors' lives were almost literally owned, publicly and privately, by specific studios, it was a mighty good thing for them.

[Z28 Autobot]

all I can say is these unions need to get thier heads out of thier ass' and get to work. Like Bay said and I have been saying the same this country is going down faster than anyone likes to think. Hell I know Bays giving the speach but does he really know the problems that the blue collar worker has to face? The same people that buy the tickets to his movies so he can have his way of life. He wont have a problem living if he does not do another movie. Us? we need to work..and if unions like this "FAG" do this we all suffer..I'm not giving him shit its just that I see he gets it and hes not in the thick of it as much as us here on the board.

But just wanted to say thanks Bay for just speaking the truth..sounds like many have lost that idea..and hide behind old lies..

[redqueenar]

The war in Iraq costs the US federal government $12 billion dollars a month, according to Time magazine. I remember, years ago, when it all started that Bush admitting that he knew that many people in America were against the idea of going to war but that he thought it was the right thing to do and therefore he was going to do it. The President of my nation--a nation I care for deeply, btw-- essentially told us flat out that he really didn't give a shit what we thought and was going to do it his own way. I fully realize that self-interest and ambition takes a person very far in life and there were aspects of his original position that were quite valid. But it has gone too far. (The man had an personal exit strategy for Vietnam, but not this one. )

No one becomes President by accident. I can respect those achievements for what they are, but I have no respect for an individual with enormous power and responsibility over the lives of so many people, who ignores the awful facts for the sake of his own ego. When you fuck the people, the people will turn on you, they'll come after you, and you will deserve it because "staying the course" has thrown you off your true purpose.

Beej:

Scorpion wants to get across the river, so he asks the Turtle for a ride. Turtle says, "I can't trust you. You'll sting me." Scorpion says, "No, no. I just need to get across." So Turtle lets him hop on, and off they go.
Midway across the river, Scorpion stings the Turtle. Turtle says, "why did you do that?! Now we're both going to drown!" Scorpion says, "I can't help it. I'm a Scorpion."

[BeetleJuice]

Oh my god. SAG wants more than Directors and Writers? That's a smart tactic I guess. When are people going to understand, most importantly actors - we are at war - we are facing a major recession - our country is in dire need of being fixed - our country also has no money because we have given trillions to the Iraq war and we have NOT even started to pay for it - it is just paid right now by printing more money on presses - China owns our ass in every way. Why not strike on a business in a down fall. Just like the writer's they made pennies on the four extra months striking - when you do the real math and they are paying the price for it still - so many writer's out of work still!!! I want this business to thrive - I know the studio heads and they will punish those that defy them. Okay, be an idealist - but you will never get a better deal then the writer's or directors - only the same - the studio's will never allow it, don't kid yourself. The working actors don't want a strike - they have said so. Too many non working actors have a say which is crazy - maybe there are just too many actors?? Gosh I'm even a member of SAG, but I don't feel I've earned the right to vote in this guild.

One hunch, the leaders of these guilds seem to like the limelight they get in the press, it becomes more about the ego in the room rather than something smart. Striking is not smart. Through the history in America, strikes in businesses have only gained the union worker 6% at the max - so take the emotion out of it and go for the 6%. A path to strike is not smart for the the hundreds of thousands of people in this business. Sanity needs to prevail here - talk real and talk the same talk as your union brothers - not more!

Interesting post from a Hollywood insider, and major filmmaker.
It is a known fact that the film industry leans politically to the far left. They make no secret of their views.
Liberal lunatics such as Alan Rosenberg have no concept of reality. Defender of the poor artists against the evil studios, typical socialist ideology. Funny, he's a rich man himself. In England they are called champagne socialists. Hypocrites.
The Iraq war could be won tomorrow, the current political landscape doesn't allow the military to do its job properly. Liberal politics are costing America dear, and how China must be laughing! The US is trying to fight with one arm tied behind its back, much too mindful of criticism, at home and abroad. The longer it takes, the more it costs, in lives and money. Just like Vietnam. World War Two was not won this way.
If you want to talk about a disaster, what about the uncontrolled immigration into the US, and its catastrophic effects on culture, lifestyle and standard of living?
Anyway, what do SAG care about other than themselves, and their bank accounts? Selfish.

[Beej]

Interesting post from a Hollywood insider, and major filmmaker.
It is a known fact that the film industry leans politically to the far left. They make no secret of their views.
Liberal lunatics such as Alan Rosenberg have no concept of reality. Defender of the poor artists against the evil studios, typical socialist ideology. Funny, he's a rich man himself. In England they are called champagne socialists. Hypocrites.
The Iraq war could be won tomorrow, the current political landscape doesn't allow the military to do its job properly. Liberal politics are costing America dear, and how China must be laughing! The US is trying to fight with one arm tied behind its back, much too mindful of criticism, at home and abroad. The longer it takes, the more it costs, in lives and money. Just like Vietnam. World War Two was not won this way.
If you want to talk about a disaster, what about the uncontrolled immigration into the US, and its catastrophic effects on culture, lifestyle and standard of living?
Anyway, what do SAG care about other than themselves, and their bank accounts? Selfish.

I agree that was a heck of a post which was posted for a reason and effect.

The Democratic Party itself sits to the far left and has favored the liberal position for the last 100 years. Most of the people you hear about in Hollywood are extremely well off and are close to if not part of the 1% of the population (elite). Entertainment as an industry is the epitome of the belief and idealism of social equality -- no matter where you come from, you can achieve and be successful. The Democratic Party has favored laborers and labor unions. The unions in general serve all the members, not just the 1%. It's the ones who are not headliners that this negotiation is for. They have rights and the union is there to protect those rights.

Studios and unions are run by people. Being selfish and greedy is an individual thing and can be on both sides of any issue and situation. It's called free will, and each individual has days where they are not a very good human. Most of them don't live in a bubble and they are aware of the world -- they still live and die in it same as the rest of us.

The world isn't as it was in 1939. Yes it would have been easier to have had the support like there was in WWII. I've listened to both sides and people believe they are correct and are very passionate about it...extrememly so. But yes, we are fighting at a disadvantage and it is costing as you say.

As for China, that country has its own problems and will continue to have its own growing pains for it is deeply confused and conflicted. The USA has a lot of foreign money invested here, be it China, Dubai, or India. The USA is a good investment and will continue to be. Mexico -- I wouldn't want to live there either, but its part of the world. The USA is part of the world. China is part of the world. All are components of one economy. There are good times and tumultuous times, but there will never be perfection. Last time I checked, we were all human. But we aren't very good to each other that much is for sure. But I'm not giving up on anyone.

[Bumblebee1983]

Interesting post from a Hollywood insider, and major filmmaker.
It is a known fact that the film industry leans politically to the far left. They make no secret of their views.
Liberal lunatics such as Alan Rosenberg have no concept of reality. Defender of the poor artists against the evil studios, typical socialist ideology. Funny, he's a rich man himself. In England they are called champagne socialists. Hypocrites.
The Iraq war could be won tomorrow, the current political landscape doesn't allow the military to do its job properly. Liberal politics are costing America dear, and how China must be laughing! The US is trying to fight with one arm tied behind its back, much too mindful of criticism, at home and abroad. The longer it takes, the more it costs, in lives and money. Just like Vietnam. World War Two was not won this way.
If you want to talk about a disaster, what about the uncontrolled immigration into the US, and its catastrophic effects on culture, lifestyle and standard of living?
Anyway, what do SAG care about other than themselves, and their bank accounts? Selfish.

Not to mention the economy....*cough* medicine/health care *cough*

I digress.

[Bay_Fan_Gibson]

Oh my god. SAG wants more than Directors and Writers? That's a smart tactic I guess. When are people going to understand, most importantly actors - we are at war - we are facing a major recession - our country is in dire need of being fixed - our country also has no money because we have given trillions to the Iraq war and we have NOT even started to pay for it - it is just paid right now by printing more money on presses - China owns our ass in every way. Why not strike on a business in a down fall. Just like the writer's they made pennies on the four extra months striking - when you do the real math and they are paying the price for it still - so many writer's out of work still!!! I want this business to thrive - I know the studio heads and they will punish those that defy them. Okay, be an idealist - but you will never get a better deal then the writer's or directors - only the same - the studio's will never allow it, don't kid yourself. The working actors don't want a strike - they have said so. Too many non working actors have a say which is crazy - maybe there are just too many actors?? Gosh I'm even a member of SAG, but I don't feel I've earned the right to vote in this guild.

One hunch, the leaders of these guilds seem to like the limelight they get in the press, it becomes more about the ego in the room rather than something smart. Striking is not smart. Through the history in America, strikes in businesses have only gained the union worker 6% at the max - so take the emotion out of it and go for the 6%. A path to strike is not smart for the the hundreds of thousands of people in this business. Sanity needs to prevail here - talk real and talk the same talk as your union brothers - not more!

I know little about the SAG or about this stuff in detail, but this is the internet and random people like me are just gonna post their opinions regardless.

My uneducated opinion is as follows.


This is lunacy. Actors cannot afford to strike.

First of all, competition with TV shows/movies today is more fierce than it has ever been. Everything from internet to Xbox to import movies...people don't even go to the theaters the way they used to...it's mostly just young people today, right?
Isn't the average age of prime time TV viewers like 50 or older or something? It's too competitive.

Secondly, the people who do go to theaters go there to see only a handful of names....Tom Cruise, Julia Roberts, George Clooney...a handful of directors....Steven Spielberg, Michael Bay, George Lucas, John Woo...and a handful of properties....Star Wars, comic books, Transformers....without these handfuls of brand people the movies lose out. How can the actors have any leverage at all?
Isn't striking simply akin to taking food off the table? You cannot strike.


There. My uneducated opinion. I look forward to corrections.

[Smokescreen_5]

Secondly, the people who do go to theaters go there to see only a handful of names....Tom Cruise, Julia Roberts, George Clooney...a handful of directors....Steven Spielberg, Michael Bay, George Lucas, John Woo...and a handful of properties....Star Wars, comic books, Transformers....without these handfuls of brand people the movies lose out. How can the actors have any leverage at all?

Actually I think ya hit it on the head there quite a bit. Many of todays moviegoers, go to a movie because the like a certain type of genre of movie, for example the action hero line, or action, or comedy, etc. Those sorts of movies are quite often attended more than others. For this those movies make it bigger. The actors who are cast in movies that are not cared to be seen are pretty much the ones whining about the strikes because they want more money for what they have no control over. At least thats how I view things along those lines.

[Beej]

So, I see the postings went sideways a bit and hit on healthcare, which is a big topic as well as a national one here in the United States, so...

The Dems will propose universal health care as an answer and claim the GOP doesn't care about the millions of uninsured Americans. That's going to be a big thing. Regardless, it's not what will happen in the end.

In Massachusetts Mitt Romney's much criticized but already implemented plan imposes an individual mandate which requires everyone in the state to have health coverage or face significant penalties. Just like state mandated car insurance... have it or else. And I'm hearing by 2009-2010 you can expect more states to sign up for a similar program.

Many states will offer high-deductible health plans (HDHPs), or health savings accounts (HSAs) to fund these programs. Employers will offer employer sponsored health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) instead of the state plan. Expect those to be the "it" thing.

Ask your doctor about HSAs, they already luv those verses dealing with insurance providers. Not saying that's a good answer, but that's the trend, look for it.