WGA/SAGAFTRA Strike Discussion Thread | SAG Ratifies Contract

[tonytr87]

12 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Wow, that is an intelligent comment.

 

You disagree that the AMPTP are greedy fucks? 

[dudalb]

1 minute ago, Plain Old Tele said:

This is the same argument that folks occasionally use against athletes, but the reality is, we live in a market-driven economy (more or less) and there are companies willing to pay because they believe they’ll make even more due to their efforts. 

The actors and atheltes comparasion is  a good one. It comes down to the same thing; Studios or sports teams think they will put fannies in the seats.

Yeah, I think some A listers are probably paid more then they are worth at the box office, but you can say a lot of people are overpaid.

ANyway, trying to set up some scale for who is overpaid is something I would not care to try to set up.

[DAR]

 

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

Alright, so let me get this straight...

The studios should meet the WGA and SAG's demands but also, they need to lower budgets while also paying VFX houses their appropriate due. But we can't start paying major actors less money either because they get butts into seats.

 

So where is this money coming from?

WGA and SAG demands aren’t particularly onerous at all. It would be a minor hit on their profits. 
 

A good chunk of the other answer comes from this insanity of locking in release dates for movies that aren’t even in production; they get rushed thru pre-production, production, and post, which is a costly way to do things. Things like blocking in time for rehearsals (weeks before production begins), prepping and planning VFX shots and then sticking to those plans… it’s not impossible to deliver high-grade entertainment at an affordable price. JOHN WICK 4 is a good current example.

 

 

[dudalb]

1 minute ago, tonytr87 said:

 

You disagree that the AMPTP are greedy fucks? 

Oh, I think they are in the wrong here and I fully support the actors and the writers, but it is a bit more complex then "they are a bunch of greedy fucks". you can say that about people in general, frankly.

[4815162342]

20 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Government funded entertainment has provided all of those awful shows on BBC, PBS, and NPR. Real failures of creativity and programming!

 

I don't believe that all movies or shows should be publicly funded, obviously, but like in all industries, a robust public option provides a baseline of quality and equity. I think it would be great if America had a true BBC-esque programming arm.

 

I feel like here in the US if there's a robust publicly funded entertainment option there's the danger of politics overtly creeping into the content generation, especially if it's the reactionary nihilists who want to turn back the clock in charge of things

Edited July 14, 2023 by 4815162342

[MysteryMovieMogul]

1 minute ago, Plain Old Tele said:

This is the same argument that folks occasionally use against athletes, but the reality is, we live in a market-driven economy (more or less) and there are companies willing to pay because they believe they’ll make even more due to their efforts. 

Ezra miller made $4 million for The Flash. It's going to lose millions.

Harrison Ford made at least $25 million for Dial of Destiny, and it's also going to lose money.

 

There's that market-driven economy at work. Two actors making a ton of money while the films they were in lose millions of dollars.

[dudalb]

A lot of people here are angry because they might have to wait a few more months for their TV shows and Movies and are lashing out blindly.

[DAR]

 

[Dementeleus]

5 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

Ezra miller made $4 million for The Flash. It's going to lose millions.

Harrison Ford made at least $25 million for Dial of Destiny, and it's also going to lose money.

 

There's that market-driven economy at work. Two actors making a ton of money while the films they were in lose millions of dollars.

There’s no variety to studio slates anymore. Stop making nothing but tentpoles. They’re extremely expensive. Bring back mid-budget movies and you have a much better chance of sustaining profits over a longer period of time. That also means you don’t have to spend $25m on Ford, you can hire talented, lesser known actors and make THEM into stars.
 

The basics of how to make money haven’t changed, studios just developed a toxic blend of greed and risk-averseness. 
 

edit: ironically, given the Zaslav FLASH example, he canned BATGIRL, which, given its budget and genre, would’ve likely been a solid money-maker for WB in the long run.

[Speedorito]

Some of these execs need to retake their media training courses…

[Deep Wang]

9 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

This is the same argument that folks occasionally use against athletes, but the reality is, we live in a market-driven economy (more or less) and there are companies willing to pay because they believe they’ll make even more due to their efforts. 

Pro athletes that are, coincidentally, part of unions 😂

 

It’s almost as if unions are really great!

[dudalb]

3 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

WGA and SAG demands aren’t particularly onerous at all. It would be a minor hit on their profits. 
 

A good chunk of the other answer comes from this insanity of locking in release dates for movies that aren’t even in production; they get rushed thru pre-production, production, and post, which is a costly way to do things. Things like blocking in time for rehearsals (weeks before production begins), prepping and planning VFX shots and then sticking to those plans… it’s not impossible to deliver high-grade entertainment at an affordable price. JOHN WICK 4 is a good current example.

 

 

It is no secret quite a few business experts have been saying that the current Hollywood mode of doing business is  not going to last and will end up crashing.

And yes, Hollywood has become very wasteful and careless about making movies. When I lived in LA, I had freinds who worked in 'The BUsiness" and they would tell  horror stories about how much time and money was just wasted through sheer incompetence. how crew member would just stand around doing nothing because the people in charge of the set or locations could not get their acts together.

There are execptions, of course. Speilberg is notorious for insisting on an efficent operation on his films, with as little wasted as possible. I maintain that if he had directed, Indy 5 would not have cost what it did.

And, yes, a lot of directors have gotten lazy when it comes to running an well working set.

[AniNate]

No actor is as overpaid as the studio CEOs. You cannot convince me that Zaslav earned that $200 million payout he got last year. 

Edited July 14, 2023 by AniNate

[DAR]

3 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

There’s no variety to studio slates anymore. Stop making nothing but tentpoles. They’re extremely expensive. Bring back mid-budget movies and you have a much better chance of sustaining profits over a longer period of time. That also means you don’t have to spend $25m on Ford, you can hire talented, lesser known actors and make THEM into stars.
 

The basics of how to make money haven’t changed, studios just developed a toxic blend of greed and risk-averseness. 
 

edit: ironically, given the Zaslav FLASH example, he canned BATGIRL, which, given its budget and genre, would’ve likely been a solid money-maker for WB in the long run.

 

The Rewatchables this month is doing courtroom movies.  Remember when that genre dominated the box office.  They weren’t expensive and always made a profit.

[ZattMurdock]

3 minutes ago, Deep Wang said:

Pro athletes that are, coincidentally, part of unions 😂

 

It’s almost as if unions are really great!

Unionize, people. It’s good for you. The day that happens with the gaming industry it’s going to be a beautiful day. It’s also the reason why Sony and Microsoft fight so hard on this, it makes them an absolutely insane amount of money.

[TalismanRing]

2 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

Ezra miller made $4 million for The Flash. It's going to lose millions.

Harrison Ford made at least $25 million for Dial of Destiny, and it's also going to lose money.

 

There's that market-driven economy at work. Two actors making a ton of money while the films they were in lose millions of dollars.

 

They were paid for their work at the rate studios valued.   If they wanted they could have hired other actors in Ezra's case and worked out a lower up front fee and or with a back end based on profits.  They could have decided Ford wasn't worth it and not made the movie.  They also could have realized Mangold wasn't the right director for the film, the script after 15 years of different versions still wasn't up to par and they had all left it all too late. But all those people who made those decisions also got paid A LOT.

[dudalb]

13 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

There’s no variety to studio slates anymore. Stop making nothing but tentpoles. They’re extremely expensive. Bring back mid-budget movies and you have a much better chance of sustaining profits over a longer period of time. That also means you don’t have to spend $25m on Ford, you can hire talented, lesser known actors and make THEM into stars.
 

The basics of how to make money haven’t changed, studios just developed a toxic blend of greed and risk-averseness. 
 

edit: ironically, given the Zaslav FLASH example, he canned BATGIRL, which, given its budget and genre, would’ve likely been a solid money-maker for WB in the long run.

THIS.THIS.THIS.

I am no fan of Michael Eisner in the second half of his career at Disney..his removal was ncessary..but I think he was on to something in the early 2000's when he tried to get away from "Blockbusters Only" and go with a what he called "SIngles and Doubles" strategy makiing smaller budget movies that might not make a lot, but would bring in a modest profit rather then swing for a home run every time at bat. Hr would still do blockbusters but not be totally dependent on them.

I also maintain a real problem is Hollywood has slavishely catered to the male 16 to 35 age group for far too  long, pretty much minimizing all other demos.

 

Edited July 14, 2023 by dudalb

[Cmasterclay]

LeBron James gets paid $50 million a year and he contributes more not just to his team but the entire American economy (people going to games, bars, etc) in one single game than Dan Gilbert ever could in his entire life on Earth. The same exact idea applies to Leo DiCaprio or whoever. Not a single movie theater has ever stayed open, or entertainment district has boomed, because of anything Bob Iger contributed with his endless meetings of talentless notes. I frankly would love to see a more equitable distribution of money from the biggest athletes/actors to the role players, but that injustice pales in comparison to the larger one. 

[MovieMan89]

The A lister actor salaries have been out of control for decades now, that’s nothing new. Why are we acting like that’s even the crux of the issue here? I mean if this whole thing can result in logical and rational rates for the big stars, then great, but don’t hold your breath.