Strike 2008: Actor's Edition

All i can say is booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!


So your crying and get back to work.

and if those people don't like it get other young actors looking for a break to do it.
 
All i can say is booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!


So your crying and get back to work.

and if those people don't like it get other young actors looking for a break to do it.

Then we'll get the guy that played corpse #2 on Stargate Atlantis playing Captain America.
 
You mean does it mean he will look like Santa Claus from Santa Claus is Comin' to Town?

We can only hope so.
 
I hope 26% of 120,000 people have more than half a brain.
 
I hate whiney spoiled actors who think they're not getting paid enough.

Give me or anyone in the world the opportunity to make that kind of money and I doubt you'd hear any complaints.
 
Like Electrix mentioned earlier not all of them are paid the vast amounts of money you guys are talking about.Though i don't think many people will be supportive of the action the SAG plan to take especially if said big earners join the picket lines.

The economy is in a real rut right now and the industry is only just recovering from the writer's strike. Look how many movies and tv series were affected by that! They need to avoid this at all costs IMO.:o
 
You know, if I were a baseball player (more so a good one), I'd settle for a salary of at most a million a year, and all travel/accomodations expenses taken care of; no more. Same if I were an actor, give me something that can sustain me for what I'm doing. Considering it may not be frequent work (in terms of films as opposed to doing a series of some sort), I'd take what would make me comfortable.

I only wish more people would have that state of mind when it came to certain jobs. Yet, we also don't want everyone making the same salary, afterall, we don't want to seem like we have a type of Communist system :cwink:
 
I dont know why people keep bringing up the economy.Would that be the same economic climate that made Dark Knight $530 million domestically?
Hollywood has always been recession proof.
 
I dont know why people keep bringing up the economy.Would that be the same economic climate that made Dark Knight $530 million domestically?
Hollywood has always been recession proof.

Think of the film and stage crews and the designers. You really think they've got six 0's on their paychecks?
 
how does this even work? who will strike?
a bad actor who is making bad direct to tv movies with bad directors? and because he is in bad movies that nonone saws he wants more money?
 
Think of the film and stage crews and the designers. You really think they've got six 0's on their paychecks?

So would this strike help get the that??I dont understand your point.But yes, there should be a "gaffers union strike".
 
The point is the economy can effect people in the movie business. If the actors strike, then all productions shut down. The film, stage, and design crews will be out of jobs as a result. Considering they don't make a whole lot, they will be effected by the economy.

The crews shouldn't strike. The actors should just not strike.
 
Like Electrix mentioned earlier not all of them are paid the vast amounts of money you guys are talking about.

Yeah... but the reason the talks broke down was over stuff that doesn't affect the little guy actor. It it all that other stuff that the writer's got and I doubt that Guy #3 in the back will get anything out of a new deal about online revenues... because everyone else would get their cut before him.

This strike wouldn't be about the little guy...
 
The point is the economy can effect people in the movie business. If the actors strike, then all productions shut down. The film, stage, and design crews will be out of jobs as a result. Considering they don't make a whole lot, they will be effected by the economy.

Yeah I feel like a bonehead now.In my defense, I didnt have coffee until like 6pm and my brain was frozen on blue screen all day.
But that makes perfect sense.
I dont know why but I kept thinking,"Why would it be a bad time for them to strike,movies still make money??" :o
I get it now: Im an idiot.
 
If the actors go on strike they can piss off. Better not pull this crap in the current weak economy.
 
Has there been any update about the potential strike?
 
A ton of people lost their jobs because of the writers' strike that WERE NOT writers.

The executives in charge weren't hurt, but 9-5 working class people were.

The South Park strike episode was pretty accurate. I understand that working actors want a piece of residuals and what not, but I don't feel the WGA really got anything out of it, and the industry doesn't need another strike right now.
 
SAG, studios launch PR offensives
Strike threat continues over holiday weekend

By DAVE MCNARY

SAG's strike threat has kicked off a heated holiday season spin battle between for the guild and the majors -- with each side blaming the other for being greedy during the nation's financial crisis.

Both sides launched major PR offensives over the Thanksgiving weekend in the battle over the upcoming strike authorization vote, due to be sent out this month to 120,000 SAG members.

In a letter than went out on Thanksgiving eve, SAG president Alan Rosenberg blasted the corporations for harping on the bad economy.

"Like it's our fault," he added. "As middle-income actors we are the victims of corporate greed. We didn't cause this turmoil."

Eight Hollywood CEOs fired back angrily on Sunday in an open letter to the entertainment industry, accusing SAG of being elitist and stressing that the majors have closed six other master contracts with the town's other major labor unions this year (the DGA, WGA, IATSE, casting directors and two with AFTRA).

The letter is running as an ad in today's L.A. Times.

"SAG is demanding that the entire industry literally throw out all of its hard work because it believes it deserves more than the 230,000 other working people in the business," the letter said. "To comply with SAG's demands would mean SAG merits more than everyone else. Saying yes would jeopardize the trust we have so carefully established with the rest of the industry -- at a time when this industry needs stability to ensure that together, we effectively evolve with shifting consumer demand."

The CEOs included Fox Group's Peter Chernin, Paramount's Brad Grey, Disney's Robert Iger, Sony's Michael Lynton, Warner Bros.' Barry Meyer, CBS' Leslie Moonves, MGM's Harry Sloan and NBC Universal's Jeff Zucker.

SAG hasn't yet disclosed exactly when it will send out the authorization, which will require a 75% approval from those voting to go on strike. SAG will need at least three weeks to conduct the authorization vote so it's still unclear whether SAG could be on strike in time to disrupt the Jan. 11 Golden Globes.

Throughout his letter, Rosenberg portrayed SAG as blameless in causing the contract stalemate, under which SAG members are now in the sixth month of working under an expired deal. The Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers issued their final offer June 30 as the contract ran out; a federal mediator gave up on Nov. 22 after two days of talks bewteen SAG and the AMPTP went nowhere.

"Management continues to apply its one-size-fits-all demands to SAG actors," Rosenberg said. "And we continue to stress that actors have unique, reasonable needs that are different, not better, but different, than writers, directors and crewmembers. So they are telling us to allow the unions who negotiated before SAG to be our proxies. I wonder, would NBC ever let ABC negotiate its license fees for them? Of course not, but they think it's perfectly reasonable to ask us to defer to the needs of other union workers and ignore what is critical to actors and their families."

SAG's also sent a long Q&A message to members that insists that the authorization won't necessarily lead to a strike -- an assertion widely derided by the majors. The guild spent most of the missive reiterating its contention that the final offer amounts to SAG endorsing non-union residual-free work in new media.

Final say over calling a strike would rest with the SAG national board, where control shifted in September to a moderate faction and away from the more assertive Membership First group.

The CEOs warned SAG that a strike would be "self-defeating" with actors losing more in the first several days than they'd ever gain back. They noted in their missive that they've kept the offer to SAG -- with pay gains estimated at $250 million over three years -- on the table despite the "rapid worldwide economic decline" and they stressed that they're committed to the notion of pattern bargaining, particularly in how to pay for work and residuals in new media.

"We are standing firm behind our offer because it represents a pattern of hard fought agreements over the past year and its construct is vital to the future of our industry," the CEOs said. "No single guild or union should be allowed to undermine the hard-won consensus over how our industry can experiment and then prosper in the speedily changing new media marketplace."

But SAG told its members that such experiments in homevideo and basic cable have ended badly for actors.

"The reality is that management is opportunistic and they believe they can force these concessions on us because they believe we are weak and divided," the guild said. "We need your vote to prove them wrong."

How SAG members will vote is difficult to predict. SAG, which shares 40,000 members with AFTRA, campaigned actively this spring against the AFTRA primetime deal but failed when 62% voted to ratify that pact. In September, 87% of the 10,000 SAG members participating in a postcard poll endorsed the strategy of holding out for a better deal but SAG members then voted in a more moderate board a few weeks later.

The CEO letter appears designed to push the rest of the industry to persuade SAG members to vote no. "We hope that every concerned member of our industry will study carefully the terms of our offer -- and then think long and hard about whether, at a time when millions of Americans are facing extreme financial hardship, there is anything about our offer than justifies a debilitating strike," the moguls said.

A week-old No SAG Strike online petition had gathered over 15,000 signatures as of Sunday afternoon. And voice actress Keri Tombazain disclosed recently on her Member 2 Member email list that she plans to launch a website urging a no vote.

SAG concluded its missive on a strident note. "Do not let management intimidate you into accepting less than you deserve," it said. "If we stay united, we will prevail."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117996608.html?categoryId=18&cs=1

Ah yes, the victim card.
 
F**k SAG. Let them strike, and let's bring in new actors that aren't huge babies like the ones that walked out on the deal and those who vote for the strike.
 
Yeah... but the reason the talks broke down was over stuff that doesn't affect the little guy actor. It it all that other stuff that the writer's got and I doubt that Guy #3 in the back will get anything out of a new deal about online revenues... because everyone else would get their cut before him.

This strike wouldn't be about the little guy...

Exactly.
 
Strike authorization ballots will be sent out Jan. 2. SAG could go on strike as early as the end of January.

It's hard to believe that there's 75% support throughout all of SAG's membership for this strike, but there may be 75% support among those who bother to cast a ballot. As with any other election, these are the only votes that count, and apathy amongst the electorate would likely skew results toward a strike okay.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117997167.html?categoryId=18&cs=1
 
Dear God, please don't strike!!! You're going to put the people who make scraps off your **** in the poor house and will interrupt another season of my TV shows.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,237
Members
45,597
Latest member
Netizen95
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"