strike city
Well now they've done it. Hollywood, California, film bastion of the western hemisphere, might as well be called "Strike City" now because the powers that be have blown it. Big time.
The Writer's Guild of America, aka the WGA, is in negotiations with studios and networks for a new contract. For those outside the showbiz loop, the WGA is the union that represents film and television writers in the United States. Across the table are the motion picture studios and television networks. Collectively, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), ABC, CBS and NBC. These are the two groups at the table. Or were. Negotiations were suspended March 1st with no agreement in sight. The WGA contract runs out midnight, May 1st. If no one (read studios and networks) will negotiate with writers for new and improved terms in a new contract before that contract runs out, television and motion picture writers are going to stop working.
"Big deal," you say. "Why should I care?"
If you live in a hole and have never seen a television or movie screen in your life, you shouldn't.
If you watch television and movies, you should care. When writers in Hollywood stop working:
•No scripts.
•No movies.
•And no new episodes of your favorite TV show.
You won't feel that in a theater immediately. Studios have been fast tracking production and stockpiling scripts for months. They will have movies. "Good movies" is questionable, but there will be movies. That doesn't work with television. Television is shot week by week. You will see effects there almost immediately. And get ready for lots of reruns and "Survivor" clones. (Reality based television doesn't require writers.) Because --
Nobody wants to negotiate with writers for new and improved contract terms. Early contract negotiations started January 22nd. They were suspended March 1st, indefinitely, with the following results:
The WGA asked for an average annual increase in total compensation to writers of 2.7%.
The studios and networks said no.
Studios and networks did, however, make a counter offer:
•Writers take a 75% cut in residuals for the first rerun on network primetime television.
•Writers take a 75% cut in residuals for the first rerun in syndication.
•Writers take a 75% cut in residuals for the first two reruns on basic cable.
•Writers take a 2.8 million dollar reduction in pension and health benefit payments over the next three years.
•Writers forego any increase in residuals or royalties for DVD and video sales.
•Writers take zero residuals and royalties for existing film and television material re-broadcast over the internet.
That is when everyone got up and went home.
Meanwhile, writers are in a deadlock with Fox Broadcasting. Writers reduced their minimums for Fox during Fox's start up days. Fox was a baby station. Writers cut their pay in the interests of helping "new and developing markets." Fox is all grown up now with hits like "Ally McBeal." The WGA suggested Fox begin paying actual network writing fees. Fox said no. Fox intends to continue paying partial writing fees for the next three years. Probably forever, if Fox can get away with it. I sincerely doubt, however, Fox is charging its advertisers "partial" advertising fees.
Prior to March 1, I did not know a single writer who wanted to strike. I am sure there were writers who wanted to strike. I just didn't know any. Not television writers. Not motion picture writers. We didn't think we would have to.
Writers thought networks and studios understood the purpose of negotiation is to negotiate.
Writers thought networks and studios understood, every three years when writers' contracts are up, writers would like a raise. Not pay cuts. A raise.
Writers thought studios and networks understood, if you re-sell writers' work, part of what you make re-selling that work should go to the writer. For the studio impaired, that's called "a royalty."
Writers thought we were dealing with reasonable, intelligent, business people.
Not five year old children who just want it all.
The reason studios and networks give for not giving writers better residuals, royalties, pay, or health benefits, is the same reason networks and studios give every three years when writers' contracts come up for re-negotiation:
PAYING WRITERS MORE WOULD DESTROY HOLLYWOOD.
Jeffrey Katzenberg (Dreamworks), Barry Meyer (Warner Brothers), and Robert Iger (Disney) make a fine case for this in the press. (See Hollywood Reporter article January 5th.) They have numbers. They have charts. They have graphs. It all makes sense. Except for one small item: studio math has nothing to do with what writers are paid or what writers are asking to be paid.
Studio figures are based on mythic extrapolations of what would, according to studios, happen if studios gave writers raises and other unions asked for raises too. Actors' contracts expire June 30th. According to Katzenberg, Meyer, and Iger, if studios give writers a raise, actors might follow the writers' lead.
Fat chance.
Star actors and actresses pull down twenty million per picture. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Jim Carrey. Julia Roberts. All the big names? Twenty million per picture.
To date, the highest paid screenwriter in the history of Hollywood was paid four million dollars. That's our star. Shane Black. One screenwriter who got paid really, really well. One time. And fell short of what star actors and actresses get paid by sixteen million dollars. (That was for the original spec script "The Long Kiss Goodnight.") Hell will freeze over before actors and actresses follow a writer's lead. Actors and actresses can't afford the pay cut.
Writers get four cents per DVD sale. The Guild asked for a penny more. That would bring it up to a whole nickel. Definitely, that would destroy Hollywood. And topple an industry that produces the U.S. of A.'s bar none number one export and has thrived for 100 years. Albeit probably by stomping on writers.
Myself, I would like to see tax returns for Katzenberg, Meyer, and Iger. They are the boys in front each time the cameras come out. They are the ones explaining how "unreasonable" WGA contract suggestions are. They are the ones explaining how giving writers royalties and residuals would DESTROY HOLLYWOOD. Let's see what Katzenberg, Meyer, and Iger get paid. Then we can decide whether giving a writer a penny more per DVD sale is actually what's breaking Hollywood's back.
At the same time, "separation of rights" is under studio attack. "Separation of rights" means the studio buys film rights to a script, but the writer retains the right to publish the script. Nobody saw any value in publishing scripts in the old days. Studios and networks said, "Go ahead, give the writer right to publish. Like that will happen." It happened. Screenplays are being published. Screenplays are being sold. Now studios and networks want to eliminate "separation of rights" and have told writers to give that up too.
Meanwhile, agents are circling muttering it's high time they get commissioned on whatever royalties and residuals writers have left after studios and networks finish gutting them. And in the midst of all this --
Writers are taking fire from directors too.
Directors take two credits on movies these days: "Directed By" and "A Film By." Personally, I blame the French. Post World War II, the French came up with the "auteur theory." The "auteur theory" is the theory the director is the only "real and true authentic author" of a film. This is because the French really, really dig Hitchcock. Hitchcock, granted, did some interesting things. But let's face it, the French had just come out of a war. They were shell shocked. They were hungry. They were under dressed. They hadn't seen any movies in a very long time. The first thing they saw, post liberation, was Hitchcock. They watched all Hitchcock's movies right away. They got excited. They came up with the "auteur theory." We've been stuck with it ever since.
Directors bought into the "auteur theory" hard. What director wouldn't? It must be fabulous being the only "real and true authentic author" of a film.
There was a problem.
It is hard to pretend you are the only "real and true authentic author" of a film if the person who actually wrote the film is standing next to you eating popcorn. To get rid of the embarrassing discrepancy, directors snuffed the writer. Barring writers from film sets. Leaving writers off press panels. Neglecting to invite writers to premiere and cast events. That became status quo. Directors hid the writer. They did a good job too. You can probably name ten film directors. You probably can't name ten film writers.
Hiding the writer was not enough. Audiences were STILL noticing that "written by" credit on screen. Directors added a new credit. The Alfred Hitchcock credit: "A Film By." To make it clear once and for all who the "real and true authentic author" of a film was. Now directors get two credits. "Directed By" and "A Film By."
Writers sat through being barred from their own movie sets. They sat through being left off press junkets. They sat through being left off the invite list for cast and crew events. They put up with being seated in the worst possible seats at the premiere. When they were invited to the premiere at all. Then directors hit us with the "A Film By" credit. At first, it was only given to truly famous directors. Steven Spielberg. We could see that. Woody Allen. Woody writes his own material. That worked. Now "A Film By" credit is handed out like Pez. It is not reserved for the Hitchcocks and Spielbergs and Allens. Any bozo coming off a commercial can get "A Film By" credit on his first Hollywood effort.
No writer I know would have gone on strike over the "A Film By" credit. We did include it on our list of "things we have a problem with" to take to the negotiating table, however.
The Director's Guild of America, aka the DGA, went insane. There were press conferences. There were accusations. The DGA raised hell it was not invited to participate in writers' contract negotiations. (Hello, director people, are you planning on asking writers to make helpful suggestions during your contract negotiations? I thought not.) It was so out of hand, Steve Martin wrote a satirical essay about it for Written By. Now the battle rages on.
There are more creative rights issues on the WGA table upsetting directors. All of them have to do with one thing: writers being acknowledged for writing movies and included in filmmaking. Guess why the DGA objects? Go ahead. I dare you.
Acknowledging writers' creative participation in filmmaking WOULD DESTROY HOLLYWOOD. Sound familiar?
Let's run through items the DGA believes WOULD DESTROY HOLLYWOOD. According to Daily Variety (11/27/2000) the big issues are:
•Requiring writers be employed for the duration of principal photography in order to make any necessary changes to the screenplay or teleplay.
Wow. That is bad. Having a writer on the set to make needed script changes instead of handing the script to a production assistant with a Crayola? Yep. That would DESTROY HOLYWOOD.
•Guaranteeing writers access to the set, cast readings, dailies, research screenings, meetings to discuss research results, cast and crew events, premieres, press junkets, festivals and trade shows.
Let's get the cast and crew events, premieres, press junkets, festivals and trade shows out of the way first. Those are parties. Definitely, inviting writers to parties would DESTROY HOLLYWOOD.
Cast readings, dailies, research screenings, and meetings to discuss research results? I'm thinking yes, having the person writing the film actually aware of research, casting, how scenes are playing, and how readings are going would definitely damage a film and DESTROY HOLLYWOOD.
•Elimination of the possessory credit, aka "A Film By." That has directors especially upset. The director is the only "real and true authentic author" of the film. The director should get that additional credit, right?
Answer me this. Can you really direct 120 blank pages? Can I watch?
According to the Variety article, DGA reps said the WGA's creative proposals would "damage the entire film industry." (Who says writers don't have the power?) "Impairing creative collaboration." (Till now I thought writers were one of the creative collaborators.) "Lengthening production time." (How one more body at pre-scheduled events will slow down production escapes me still.) And eliminating the "A Film By" credit would "deprive the film artists that drive the creative process of moviemaking from the recognition they deserve."
I am betting, when they say "the film artists that drive the creative process of movie making," they do not mean the people who write the scripts nobody in Hollywood can make a movie without. Ahem.
The entertainment industry has survived 100 years. It was barreling along before directors even got a "Directed By" credit. It will survive if they stop tossing around an extra "A Film By" credit now. Nobody will drop dead if, just once, a reporter glimpses a film writer. And as for benefits and pay? Peter Bart put it best: "Management's shrill cries of poverty are wearing thin." Giving writers a penny more per DVD sale will not break the industry's back. Fox is a real television network and should pay actual network writing fees. Asking writers to give up separation of rights is absurd. It's the one thing writers actually have of value these days. Suggest to your CEOs they take health benefit cuts before suggesting it again to writers. And paying royalties for films and television shows re-sold to cable and the internet will not topple an industry that is the strongest U.S. exporter in existence. A U.S. industry that, by the way, does not function without writers. If it did, Hollywood would not be in chaos right now over the mere suggestion writers might stop working. Put an "A Film By" credit on that.
Love and Kisses,
Max Adams
*originally
published on G21.net
