WGA/SAGAFTRA Strike Discussion Thread | SAG Ratifies Contract

[Jonwo]

30 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Some of the points in the negotiation summary scream parody. What in the Disney villain hell.

Looking at it, they've least agreed some things but not others. 

[Cappoedameron]

 

 

Someone should tell ABC that Ms. Marvel likely is not going to draw in a big viewership...just saying. You'd have better luck putting Moon Knight.

 

Edited July 18, 2023 by Cappoedameron

[SpiderByte]

11 minutes ago, Cappoedameron said:

Someone should tell ABC that Ms. Marvel likely is not going to draw in a big viewership...just saying. You'd have better luck putting Moon Knight.

It doesn't matter what the viewership is, it's filler programming. You think when CBS aired ludicrously edited down versions of Dexter they gave a crap about Nielsen ratings? They needed to have programming on air point blank period.

[Cappoedameron]

18 minutes ago, SpiderByte said:

It doesn't matter what the viewership is, it's filler programming. You think when CBS aired ludicrously edited down versions of Dexter they gave a crap about Nielsen ratings? They needed to have programming on air point blank period.

Oh man how edited are we talking? That actually sounds hilarious.

[filmlover]

The Ms. Marvel pivot is clearly because they have a new movie to promote (and can't be delayed without rearranging the marketing deals they have in place launching in less than three months for its November release date).

[ChipDerby]

1 hour ago, Cappoedameron said:

 

 

Someone should tell ABC that Ms. Marvel likely is not going to draw in a big viewership...just saying. You'd have better luck putting Moon Knight.

 

 

Ms Marvel is built in marketing for The Marvels, and is the far superior show.

[SpiderByte]

1 hour ago, Cappoedameron said:

Oh man how edited are we talking? That actually sounds hilarious.

I can't find any actual footage but they did do it. I can only assume it's like 25 minutes long apiece 

[eddyxx]

22 hours ago, Cap said:

I am so close to adding a 🤮 reaction just for this. 
 

Also… How… cause this only ends in one way.  Which is porn. This just ends in porn. 

 

I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking this. 

[Michael Gary Scott]

2 hours ago, Cappoedameron said:

 

 

Someone should tell ABC that Ms. Marvel likely is not going to draw in a big viewership...just saying. You'd have better luck putting Moon Knight.

 

Moon Knight was terrible

[dudalb]

10 hours ago, FunkMiller said:

 

They *think* they can't budge on stuff like this. That's why these strikes are so important, and why I hope that the actors realise that they'll have to suffer greatly now, to be treated far better in the future. Let's face it, the studios have been allowed to get away with more and more shady crap as the years have gone by, and they have now become dominated by people who have absolutely nothing to do with creativity. The rot needs to stop here.

I support the writers and the actors, but let's get real: Studios exist not to be patron of the arts, but to make money for the stockholders.

One of my complaints about the way studios are ran is that often the average stockholder is screwed over by the managment lining their own pockets.

Alos "Cretivity" is a tricky word; means different things to different people; there are plenty of people out there think that CBM's a geek movies in general are the direct opposite of creativity and originality.

[dudalb]

2 hours ago, Michael Gary Scott said:

Moon Knight was terrible

In your opinion. 

[dudalb]

4 hours ago, Cappoedameron said:

Oh man how edited are we talking? That actually sounds hilarious.

"Dexter" not the only premium cable show watered down for general televisin release. "THe Sopranos" watered down versions are unwatchable.

[Jonwo]

Just now, dudalb said:

I support the writers and the actors, but let's get real: Studios exist not to be patron of the arts, but to make money for the stockholders.

One of my complaints about the way studios are ran is that often the average stockholder is screwed over by the managment lining their own pockets.

Alos "Cretivity" is a tricky word; means different things to different people; there are plenty of people out there think that CBM's a geek movies in general are the direct opposite of creativity and originality.

It's called Show Business for a reason!

 

I do think some actors are being a bit OTT like Mark Ruffalo who wants creatives to go full indie and abandon Hollywood. 

 

 

[dudalb]

1 minute ago, Jonwo said:

It's called Show Business for a reason!

 

I do think some actors are being a bit OTT like Mark Ruffalo who wants creatives to go full indie and abandon Hollywood. 

 

 

Has Ruffalo explained where the hell they would get the money to break lose from Hollywood?

If he tries it, he is going to find out that patrons of the arts who don';t care if they get their money back or not  are very few and far between.

[Celedhring]

1 minute ago, Jonwo said:

It's called Show Business for a reason!

 

I do think some actors are being a bit OTT like Mark Ruffalo who wants creatives to go full indie and abandon Hollywood. 

 

 

 

IMHO, they should create and run their own studio. They could call it something like "United Artists".

[dudalb]

5 hours ago, ThePhasmid said:

So many numbers, so few answers. The typical dirge of the victims leftover from greed and power. Those who create and play within the world of films should be equally compensated to the same measure as those who invest in it.

Now go get the stockholders in Studios to agree with you............

[Jonwo]

1 minute ago, Celedhring said:

 

IMHO, they should create and run their own studio. They could call it something like "United Artists".

As long as they don't release a Heaven's Gate.

[dudalb]

5 minutes ago, Celedhring said:

 

IMHO, they should create and run their own studio. They could call it something like "United Artists".

Thing is that the four who statred UA..Chaplin, Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, and DW Griffith..all had a history of solid box office sucess; that is why they were able to get investors. 

Those without such a history would find it very hard to get funding.

Amount of wishful thinking in this thread is ridiculous.

Edited July 18, 2023 by dudalb

[dudalb]

1 minute ago, Jonwo said:

As long as they don't release a Heaven's Gate.

He also ignores that UA was founded by the superstars of their day; not the same an a group of indie filmmakers nowdays trying to get the money to start their own studio.

[Jonwo]

3 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Has Ruffalo explained where the hell they would get the money to break lose from Hollywood?

If he tries it, he is going to find out that patrons of the arts who don';t care if they get their money back or not  are very few and far between.

Some like Wes Anderson do have people who have the money to back them, it's finding distributors to release the finished product that's the issue. 

 

You could in theory go overseas to make movies but you're going to run into the same issues.