Showing posts with label writers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label writers. Show all posts

Friday, November 9, 2007

Crazy like a FOX

Some things for you guys to think about and look at.

-Michael Eisner said that the strike is "stupid" because the writers should take the money that's there now and not some money that might come about with the strike...how stupid does he think these people are? the point of investing is that you assume that the investment you are making might hurt a little now, but in the future will pay off well. Even I know that, and I barely passed Econ in school.

-More people are talking about the chants. Really, is this the best thing you can come up with? Joel Stein said something about it in his column, which if I have finally learned how to translate his columns from neurotic to english, is essentially in support of the strike. And is complaining about them too. I guess she was too busy coming up with clever little bon mots to actually read the script for South Of The Border (that's the talking dog/mexican roadtrip/dogfighting movie she's just getting ready to wrap. I think it's supposed to be the Michael Vick bio-pic)

-The writers are going to be out picketing en masse at Fox today. If you're in the area stop by, honk when you drive by, if you can wear red to show support.

-Variety has a story that is mostly speculation that the studios and networks might turn to British writers to fill the void created by the strike. I guess the founding fathers fought the revolution for nothing!

Also, just in case you're interested in where I'm getting this stuff check out:
Ken Levine's Blog A hilarious blog from one of the writers who is out on the picket line.
Deadline Hollywood Daily Very informative and pretty evenly balanced in reporting.

Thursday, November 8, 2007

Strike While the Iron is HOT

I've spent the last couple days talking about this strike with just about everyone I know. So far I have basically heard two critiques.
The first is a general indictment of unions and strikes in general. If someone is anti-union then there really isn't much that I can write in here to convince them, as I've learned with my own parents.
The second one really pisses me off though. The second is mocking their picket line chants. Really? That's the best you can come up with? The reason you think they don't deserve to be compensated for their work is because they don't write a great CHANT.
Never mind that you watch their shows every week, and get completely wrapped up in the story.
Nevermind that they don't get a cent when you download the show they created, and get less than a dime for every DVD you buy, they make up a bad chant on the line, so they got what they deserved.
If that is the best critique that you can come up with, then I will offer a defense of the writers that befits such a statement:
They're on strike so they aren't allowed to write anything including chants.
Ridiculous? You're right. So is saying that a chant isn't good. If you don't believe in the strike that's fine. It's your right to have your own opinion and if we disagree thats ok. But if you are going to speak out against (or for that matter in favor of) the strike say something of substance.

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Guilding the Lily

To begin, let me tell you something I once did that should make my bleeding liberal heart wilt with shame. In the grocery workers’ strike of 2003 I was a scab. I crossed the line and served people their lattes from the friendly confines of the Starbucks in a local Vons. In defense of this supposedly heinous act, however, let me offer a few points so you know the whole story.
1. A friend had just been hired as the Starbucks department manager at said Vons, and when a strike became imminant he was told that unless he could find a staff willing to cross the line he would have to be let go. I could help a friend, and get paid nearly twice what the Starbucks I already worked at was paying me. What would you do?
2. The traditional definition of a union is a group of skilled laborers who gather together to collectively bargain. It took me less than an hour to learn how to run a cash register. How much skilled labor really goes into this? And if there’s no skill to the labor, can they really be called a union?
3. If it’s not a union, am I really crossing a picket line?

Now that we’ve uncovered this terrible embarrassment from my past, lets look at the present. As I’m sure you may have guessed, today we’re going to be discussing the writers’ strike currently going on in Hollywood.

….I started this blog yesterday. I had about a thousand words. I scrapped all of it but the intro you just read, because I read a few new things last night and this morning. The brief gist of what I wrote originally is this:

-Unlike a grocery union, The Guild is a real union because what they do requires skill.
-The Guild wants to get more money from DVDs and to get any money from shows and content downloaded from iTunes, nbc.com, and other sites.
-DVDs now create the lion’s share of income for both films and television.
-Writers currently make about five cents per DVD. That’s less than 5% of 5% of the income from DVDs.

The first thing that I discovered (I found it here: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com, thanks to loyal reader Max for sending it to me), is that through backchannel discussions, the Guild and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers agreed to an 11th hour negotiation Sunday. The Guild was going to agree to forego ANY income from DVDs, in exchange for the Alliance coming up with a working plan to pay for internet programming and downloads. As the meeting was getting set to begin the Guild, as had been agreed, expressed a willingness to take the DVD issue off the table. The Alliance trashed what they had promised and said there would be no negotiation on the internet issue. At that point the Guild negotiators walked out and the potential strike became an imminant strike. Although this sort of tactic isn’t to be entirely unexpected from EITHER side, it stinks to high heaven. Up until this story was revealed yesterday, it seemed that the Guild had fired the first shot in the war. Now it appears that the Alliance set off a firecracker in order to draw the Guild out.

Next I read in the Los Angeles Times (www.latimes.com) that all the major networks and studios, with the exception of Sony Pictures have begun sending out suspension notices, stating that there will be no more funding given to production companies is going to cease. In essence this means that now even the people who AREN’T striking (the assistants, secretaries, etc) are being locked out. People who aren’t even members of the Guild are now losing their source of income, even if they were going to continue working.

In addition, the studios are telling the show-runners (basically the head writer for a show, who in addition to writing the show also has an executive producer credit) that if they do not continue their duties as producer that there will be legal ramifications. This is forcing the show runners to either defy their guild, which could lead to future issues with the Guild when this is all settled, or face a potential law suit.

Finally, also in the Times I read an opinion piece by Marshall Herskovitz, one of the creators of Thirtysomething and My So-called Life, detailing a tangential issue that I hadn’t even known about. It’s what’s called Finsyn (Financial Independence and Syndication), a ruling issued by the FCC in 1995 that took control of the shows out of the hands of independent production companies, and handed them over to the networks. This ruling took control of shows away from the creators, and handed it over to the networks that broadcast them. This laid the groundwork for the issues that have become so divisive in these negotiations…way to go FCC!

These issues have far reaching ramifications. First and most importantly, if this strike goes on much longer just what the hell am I going to watch Tuesdays at 9 (House), Wednesdays at 8 and 10 (Pushing Daisies, Dirty Sexy Money respectively)? I can’t very well watch Dancing With The Stars every night! Second, how am I going to get a job when I finish school in six weeks if the writers are on strike? And finally, and this looks out for you my readers, as well as myself, how much worse are we going to let the programming we watch get? If we let the studios and networks dictate everything, pretty soon every show is going be a cheap derivitive of Heroes, Lost, ER, or Law & Order.

I encourage all of my readers (all 6 of you!) to support this strike. Write letters to the networks and studios letting them know that you support the strike and you want fair compensation for the people who sweat and toil to create your entertainment. When you drive past the studios honk in support of the picketers. If you’ve got time go down there and walk with them.

Whenever possible I will be updating you daily on what’s going on with the strike, and letting you know how you can help. Get these guys back to work so I can get to work and move out of my parent’s house.

Friday, September 7, 2007

The New American Lexicon (Part 1)

I've been finding new words like a mad man, and so i thought i would start an installment plan to allow all of you, my valued and beloved readers the opprotunity to share in this verdant verbal feast. Each word will have a story about where it came from, a definition, and an example of usage. Each entry will have a few new words that have something in common, which I am going to call Assosciatives, even though I don't think that is really a word. Add it to the lexicon. For instance: In this, installment one of an ongoing series, are words that sound kinda gay, but really, they aren't i swear.

1. Fag Along- While spending some time with a friend, we were commenting on the fact that all his brother's friends were gay men. My friend said that it was like his brother was a fag hag. I pointed out that a fag hag is a straight woman who hangs out with gay men, which is clearly not what the brother was. After a few attempts at a new word for the straight man with a majority of gay friends, I hit upon the term "fag along", which has it's root in the phrase "tag along", or one who follows a group.
Fag Along- (n) A straight man who hangs out mostly with gay men, attending gay functions, parades, clubs etc, but with no interest in a sexual liasion.
"Hi my name is Andy, and this is my friend Eric. I know Eric is cute, but leave him alone guys, he's my fag along."

2. Broner-I can't take credit for creating this one. This one was used in an episode of Californication recently. Hank is talking to his agent about what it's called when a man makes physical contact with another man, and feels a little "tingle" down there. After a while he comes up with broner.
Broner- (n) An unintentional erection caused by another man. Not sexual in nature.
"So my girlfriend got me a massage this weekend, and it was great, but while the guy was working on the knots in my shoulder I got a little bit of a broner. Kinda awkward dude."

3. Bromantic- A couple of weeks ago a friend and I were hanging out at my place, watching movies, drinking wine, shooting pool, and swimming. At one point I turned to him and said, "ya know, if you were a beautiful woman, this would be a totally romantic night....But you're not a girl, so tonight is more.....bromantic."
Bromantic- (Adj) A descriptive term for a night spent with one or more male friends during which typical "date" activities (of a non sexual nature)are partaken. i.e. Dinner, movies, drinks, etc.
"Last night Dan and I went to this really cool little lounge bar and drank martinis. It was totally bromantic until we met these two girls."

I am giving you these words and I hope you use them. Just please, if anyone asks you where you got it, direct them to this blog. I'd like to increase my reader base in the hope that i can turn this into a money making endeavour and stop whoring myself.

Some Upcoming Assosciatives:
Sexual Terms (Things that make the donkey punch look like missionary)
New Drinks
New Drinking Lingo
Business Place double entendres
...
AND MANY MORE!!! STAY TUNED!