« AMPTP to SAG: Benchmark? What benchmark? | Main | Two more interim deals, these with Intermedia and the Film Dept. »

January 31, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfc7553ef00e550069fb08833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Another voice from the WGA: "The DGA deal as it stands today is bad.":

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Stuart Creque

Kid of sounds like a union man to me.

"Do what's right. Don't back down, don't concede, don't give in to fear, pressure, or worst of all, the common wisdom." Good advice.

ed

I'm not sure why everyone is jumping all over the DGA regarding their deal. The DGA members follow a different compensation plan where they are paid more upfront and less on the back-end. The deal probably makes great sense for them. Isn't it great that the two sides were able to come to agreement quickly and evidently to the delight of each? So, enter the WGA. Do what is right for you and stop dumping on the DGA for the deal they've made for their members.

a suit

I agree. The WGA got gains across the board for their members and created opportunities in new media for both their members and the business at large. Isn't that the idea in a guild contract?

And furthermore, Mr. McNamara talks about how the more a studio makes, the more a writer should make. It sounds good but it makes no sense...the writer gets paid upfront, before anyone else. The writer takes the LEAST financial risk of any other part of the creative partnership. If the writers want to share in the possible financial success then they must share in the possible financial disaster (a much more common scenario). If they want genuine back end then they should give up front end. The WGA should create an optional deal where the writer makes a modicum or no money up front but becomes a part owner of the final product.

ray

Um, actually, I believe writers already consistently invest more than anyone else in the process. Doesn't it take months and months and months to write scripts? While doesn't it take weeks to do principal photography? And you're certainly not talking about specs. Did the producer pay for the year of research to create the script for that spec feature? No, the writer invested that entire year of their life on their own dime. But the studios benefit from a system where they only buy the specs they want and don't have to pay a dime for the process involved. Time = Money, so the writers did invest a GREAT deal of capital, with possible risk of NO PAYMENT WHATSOEVER. Writers already more than just about anyone else involved take on the underlying risks in their projects. It seems to me the suits want to have their cake and eat it too.

As long as it takes

Bravo, Ray. In actuality, writers are paid far less than the full value of the script upfront, with an understanding that they'll receive additional, or "residual" payments, along the way as the product is repurposed.

The real Fi Core

I wonder if he's proud of childern losing there health care benefits,my father was a eastern european immigrant who was a factory worker back east,who during his short life, he taught me what a working man was,he was happy with just a job,now back to school,do the striking writers on Leno really make 8000 a week?And don't preach to me about this being for rights of workers,calling this strike,put the real workers out of a job.I wonder what the general public would think of that ?
Prima donnas

The real Fi Core

My schitzo other half keeps talking about the general public, but any poll you take, any person you ask, they all support the WGA! Even right-wing wacko Mike Huckabee supports the WGA. And what's with me saying you should just be happy to have a job, no matter what your employee decides to pay you? Doesn't my crazy other self know how economics work, how certain rare skill-sets are always paid higher wages? It's another form of supply and demand. Jeez, did I even graduate from Elementary School?!

Anyway, again, I'm sorry that this split personality of mine is so freaky! And that my other half is such an ill-informed, bitter ass-wipe blow hard! I hope my next mean post when "Dr. Jeckyll" takes over isn't half as bad as my prior posts. Man, I am a tool!

a suit

to ray - I can't disagree that writers spend a lot of time on their work and we're all grateful for it, but that is what they're paid to do and they're paid well for it (thanks to the WGA's minimum contract).

And you're also right that they write a spec on...well, spec. And if they sell it they will get paid for their services. Their agents and lawyers will do their best to get payment commensurate with the value of the piece. And my point is that if they would like to actually own the project there should be a WGA option to get paid nothing or little upfront in exchange for an actual place at the ownership/producer table. I think it would empower writers and free them from the disgruntled "worker for hire" universe they're stuck in.

a suit

to The Real Fi Core - yes, the writers have a lot of public support, and why wouldn't they? Writers are cool. Picket lines are cool...they are fighting the man. Since very few people, and that includes most of the writers on the picket line, actually know the truth of what they're striking about we can safely assume that most of the horns honked are not supporting any specific contract item.

And as for wages, the WGA (unlike the DGA) is not asking for one raise in any of the Guild minimums. In film, what a writer actually gets paid upfront is the real money that most writers make. The vast majority of commissioned scripts never get made so residuals are moot. If the guild wanted to put money right into writers pockets that's how they could do it. It's why so many writers are calling this a television strike since the issues involved have little or no effect on film writers.

And one final point, there are writers out there who are making unfathomable amounts of money for their writing. How could this be? Each and every writer, by regulation, MUST have an agent or a lawyer negotiating for them and protecting their rights. EVERY WRITER. Keep that in mind....

The real Fi Core

I think you undersestimate the public, but that's not unusual for a suit. Much of the public understands that the writers are simply asking for a small piece of the revenue when the worlds they invent are put on the internet. And though it's true that many screenwriters make their living selling scripts that will never be made, millions of films -- in fact, probably all films ever made -- will soon be available online for direct download or streaming. Each one of those films has a writer or writers. They deserve a small share of that revenue. This is a absolutely a screenwriter's strike as well.

And for the record, the guild IS asking for a small increase in guild minimums, as they do every contract negotiation, in order to keep up with cost of living increases. That's very common knowledge -- what company do you work for, suit? Why don't you know that?

Anyway, while I don't agree with most of your positions, I do appreciate your cordial manner, unlike my jerk-off other half. Thanks.

The comments to this entry are closed.

TIP THE SCRIBE VIBE

WGA Writers strike in-depth analysis

KINDNESS OF STRANGERS DEPT.

Click here to sign up for Variety's Daily Headlines newsletter with daily Strike alerts