Isn't this the guild's fault for not having the foresight to think that TV might be distributed on the internet? Just how old IS this contract?

 

This is the most ignorant and fact-free post I've ever read from you. And you've come out with some whoppers before. I guess it's true that the those who speak the most know the least.

 

Also does the Guild pay everyone who isn't Tom Cruise for the time they have to strike? It seems like these people have it hard enough but then someone tells them they AREN'T ALLOWED to work because they are a scab.... but they need to be in the union to work. It seems like such a catch-22.

I know a strike and a union only works if everyone acts as one, but it seems stupid that writers,actors, and studios have no option but to ride every whim of the all mighty union.

 

Why don't the guild require everybody to put their earnings in one pot and agree to divide it up equally? You know like tip sharing? Then they can all shut up about not making enough. Anyway I guess with all the strikes we'll eventually end up with Survivor the Movie or American Idol the Movie

 

Before digital distrobution became common place obviously.

 

It seems like such a huge thing for such a large organization to miss. Could they just wait until their contract is up then re-negotiate? How long do these last?

 

Don't strikers also help the terrorists win?

 

Why, because you're "in the industry" and I'm not? Provide a valid arguement full of unbiased facts to refute it, and then we'll talk. But in the meantime, don't single me out since I'm certainly not the only guy stating this opinion.

You don't have to agree with it, but as far as I'm concerned, actors striking is as comedic as fashion models, rock bands, overpaid athletes or any other person in a limelight 'dream job' thinking they're overworked & underpaid. We're not talking about all the people behind the scenes who do the ACTUAL work here - we're talking about people that want to be famous and/or be paid for ART rather than working like a normal person. How in holy hell can anyone honestly expect us to feel sorry for all these faces we see splattered all over TV & movies? I'm sorry but acting of all things is not a job that people are forced into because there's no other options. No one graduates high school thinking "well, shit, I guess have to become an A, B or C list celebrity if I expect to make a decent living". It is 100% personal choice, and just because it's not working out for some people the way they think it should or they think they should get even more money for doing what 95% of the rest of the world would absolutely kill to be doing instead, nothing can or will ever justify this. And the only reason they're getting away with it is because they're apart of a guild in an industry that has self absorbed tunnel vision.

Bottom line is that actors are a dime, nay, a penny a dozen, and these days you don't even need to know how to act to get on TV or in movies - all you need is a name & pretty face. Why do you think there all these reality shows now? It's not just because they're cheaper to make - it's because there's a neverending stream of people willing to do whatever it takes to get their 15 minutes of fame, no matter how embarrassing or shameful.

This is a complete & utter joke, and the best thing studios could do is call everyone's bluff. Unlike writers, directors, union personnel, etc., Hollywood can most definitely survive because there will ALWAYS be someone ready to act for peanuts if it means getting the moment to shine, and if lucky, become the latest flavor of the month celebrity.

 

False. The guilds and unions protect those jobs. The studios can't dump everyone and start over. It would be a violation of U.S labor law. That's why new writers/directors/actors have to join the guild before working.

It seems clear to me that a number of people don't understand how important and valuable guilds and unions are. I could've sworn that people like myself tried to explain this during the WGA strike. Suffice it to say that unions made the developed world the way it is - pensions, health care, vacation and sick time, the prohibition of child labor, workplace safety, the growth of the middle class, etc, etc. The "horrible" factory jobs that some have cited, like the job my father has held for over thirty years, would suck a hell of a lot more than they do. My father was able to provide for my family because of unions. He's a member of AFL-CIO. And without unions, most of us here likely wouldn't have been able to attend high school, let alone higher education.

Simply put, alone against employers, employees are nearly powerless. Together, they stand a chance. History has repeatedly shown that employers, left unchecked, will use and abuse people without a second thought. (See Carnegie Steel, for example.)

I guess all I'm saying is to think about the issue from all sides before jumping to conclusions. (Maybe I'm asking for too much on the Internets.)

 

So when is the viewers strike?

Really I call foul on both sides since everyone in Hollywood wants our money, but when it's time to sit down and devide the money up like adults they pitch fits about who is getting what.

And do we get better TV and movies out of all these delays in our entertainment, oh no!

Not mention that costumers, stunt people, food services, and the army of workers it takes for movies and TV end up out of work. Sure the guild might pay the actors bills but all the other little people are just out of luck.

 

At this point I could care less about any of this. Let 'em duke it out and the victor (Either one or both) who wins or loses probably won't notice that we have better things to do with our time like producing stuff for ourselves more often.

 

wow this is crazy, So how much do the big actors want to get paid now?

 

The contract that is running out is probably over 10 years old. Mid-late 90's more than likely. Back when wachting an entire TV episode over an internet stream would have been a laughable concept. And this is the same industry that has tried to sue digital distrobution into submission till they could catch up.

 

This sucks fat monkey balls!

 

Unions have done some great things in the past, but they are not as great as you paint them to be. The Auto industry has lost a lot of it's ability to compete not only in the world market, but in our oun country because of the Unions. They have to pay far more than what some workers should be paid for the jobs they do to avoid being shut down by Unions. This leads to the factories being moved to other countries where despite the added cost of shipping, they save money. Also, they spend a great amount of money paying people who no longer even work for them due to pensions and unemployment.

Unions also will support whatever candidate they think will help them by contributing their members money to that candidate. And if you object because you'd like to see another candidate win, well tough shit to you.

I could go on, but I believe I made my point. Yes a union can be helpful when it's needed, but these days, they seem to cause more harm than good. And a strike is suppose to be the last resort for negotiations and yet they allways pull that big stick out at the drop of the hat.

 

Meh. Let 'em get on with it. The writers stike didn't affect me because I watch hardly any television and most movies these days are shart. I have more than enough books and DVDs to keep me occupied for many years to come, and the internet is a constant source of entertainment. Same will be with an actors strike.
So, strike on, I say.

Usually at night, when I'm asleep and the television is off and the cinemas are closed.  

Don't touch that 'ON' button, you scabs!

 

[sarcasm]Oh, those poor, poor people![/sarcasm] If they are making more than minimum wage, I say deal or leave. You let something called the MARKET deal with this, peoples-- if working conditions in a job are too crummy, eventually enough people will leave and the head honchos in that industry will either give their people more benefits/money or the affected companies in the industry will go under. If the working conditions in a job really AREN'T that bad, then nothing will change. Unions were good a century ago, as basic health laws and stuff like that were not in place then, but like many things that started out with good intentions, they're way past being useful now. Laissez faire. (I think I spelled that right...)

Oh, I hope it does. I hate Hollywood with a passion, I could care less about this strike if it wasn't for TF2. Heck, many people on my side of the fence never wanted the strike to end.

I think something like, what, 70% of people said their day-to-day life wasn't affected by the Writers' Strike at all? And I was surprised it was THAT low.

 

Oh, I dunno about that. I haven't worked in a union job in about 14 years, and have done pretty well- all things considered.

As for my union job with the UFCW- I actually made less money while under the union thanks to monthly dues than when I worked for the same pay at the non-union brach.

 

So where is the cameraman and show staff union to help the people who will be put out of work? Does the Guild pay them as part of a deal?

 

Geez, you're dumb. Y'know that whole axiom about how it's better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt? Yeah, take notes on that one, would ya?

As has been stated (though I'm sure facts aren't important to many of you) the reason for the strike is that DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION needs to be negotiated. Back when the contracts were originally signed, digital distribution wasn't a factor. Now it is. New media necessitates new negotiations. Otherwise the studio moguls are all set and fully willing to completely take ALL the money, leaving the actors--and whomever else--with NOTHING. (I'm sure that would be enjoyable to you, because then you could laugh at them for not having money...which would then make your $6.50 an hour job cleaning toilets at the Maxi-Mart seem somewhat better...maybe.)

And again, anyone who thinks acting isn't WORK has obviously never done it. Do me a favor and sign up for a play at your local little theater and see how much work goes into that. I'm sure it looks so very easy on the surface, and it is easy for us to walk past an actor and accuse them of laying around a mansion all day, but that's just not the way it is. If you think it's not work, I should introduce you to some friends who have been hurt on the job before.

And by the way, no one forced you to mop the bathrooms at Wal-Mart either, so just remember that the next time you complain about your job. The difference between YOUR job and theirs is that there is a great deal of skill involved. (I'm saying this as someone who has auditioned and been turned down many more times than I can count.) And yes, I hear about how "oh, so many of these actors are no-talent hacks..." from all the armchair Eberts and Roepers. It's sort of like saying that a NFL player "can't play football." The truth is, said NFL player CAN play football, and can play better than you or anybody they went to school with. They might not stack up as well as another NFL player, but they CAN play, else they would not have made the big leagues.

And sorry, your job doesn't bring millions of dollars of income to your company, so therefore you don't get as big a piece of the pie. Oops. Sucks that you didn't plan your career better than that. Meanwhile, millions upon millions of dollars can ride on a single actor's performance...therefore it's only reasonable for them to have a substantial stake in it. And it's completely unreasonable in the realm of digital downloads to expect them to walk away with nothing.

As for your argument about reality stars... I'm not one, but I've known plenty of them, and let me assure you that they all have previous acting experience for the most part, and they all retain agents and actively search for jobs in showbiz. A great many of them have been trying for years (and this includes your American Idols.) To say nothing of the fact that casting calls and auditions for reality television are insanely hard to get through, as the field of applicants is usually in the thousands. So your average reality star is not just someone who walked in off the street. So, no, television personalities are NOT just a dime a dozen. It takes YEARS of hard work, auditioning, and personal sacrifice to make it in the business.

The bottom line for most of you is that you're the main demographic of TMZ: people who aren't satisfied with their lives, live them vicariously through celebrities (or in this forum, fictional robotic characters) and then can't wait to hammer them when they're down. Because YOU look at the TV, and all you see is a face, and you just assume that whatever you're watching was slapped together yesterday (hell, some people even think TV shows are live) and done with a $25 budget. You've no clue of the economics of the situation, but I'm sure it makes you feel like a million bucks to come on some random forum and spit your bile and venom at the same industry that you wouldn't know how to live without if you had to.

By the way, you missed a spot.