UNFINISHED BUSINESS: The Projects James Gandolfini Left …
R.I.P. James Gandolfini
Photos: James Gandolfini, 1961-2013
Masterpiece To Co-Produce ITV Medical Drama …
Sony To Consider Proposal To Spin Off Entertainment Assets, …
Warner Bros Sets Morten Tyldum To Helm …
Zac Efron Thriller ‘The Falling’ Gets Jeremy …
Why Was Ex-Soft Porn Filmmaker Recently Hired As Movie …
ReelzChannel Cancels ‘The Big Picture’ After …
Cillian Murphy Boards ‘In The Heart Of The Sea’
John Legend To Produce Comedy Project About Music Managers …
Hot Trailer: ‘Crystal Fairy’
Sam Taylor-Johnson To Direct ‘Fifty Shades Of …
Inside AMPAS Board Of Governors’ Meeting: Conflict Of …
Hot Trailer: ‘The Spectacular Now’
Glenn Geller To Run Current Programming For CBS & CBS …
Shailene Woodley’s Mary Jane Role Cut From ‘The …
New ‘Star Wars’ Film Cast Breakdown Unveiled
CAA Signs Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck, Oscar-Winning …
UPDATE: Dan Abrams Named New ‘Nightline’ Anchor …
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘The Voice’ Finale On Par …
I’ll post starting tomorrow but in the meantime express yourselves intelligently here. Given that the writers may have just enough pre-Oscars leverage over the next three weeks to quickly hammer out something less excremental, that is if the moguls can stop punishing them for striking in the first place, what should that be realistically using the DGA deal as a framework? As always comments are monitored.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ... Loading ...
Still, there’s something to be said for never completely shutting this town down.
And to get a deal AT ALL is a HUGE accomplishment in these union busting times.
I have missed you, Nikki, as I’m sure most of this town has, and I hope you are taking care of yourself in these stressful times.
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
I still believe the deal the writers placed on the table was fair, though I wouldn’t expect producers to sanction sympathy strikes against them. That said, using the DGA deal as a framework, the WGA shouldn’t settle for anything less than a flat fee of, say, 2.5 percent of distributors gross across all non-broadcast distribution platforms, including internet and DVD, with a window no greater than seven days.
Jurisdiction over animation and reality shows should be in this contract.
Is it shitty? It’s wise to get as much opinion as possible. There are some good links over at United Hollywood under the heading “Dissecting the Deal.” Jonathon Handelman’s essay over at HuffPo is pretty good. And of course you can get a little John Wells slavering thanks to Artful Writer.
I suspect the truth is that it ain’t good, it ain’t terrible, and the only real question is how much more we can get as everyone nears the drop/deadline. Which is about two days before the Oscars.
Tough to tell others to “express themselves intelligently” when you have already stirred them up by labelling the DGA deal as “shitty.” Enough muckraking. Let’s act like grown ups… There are alot of very good things in the DGA deal. Granted, there are spots that need work and improvement, but that’s no reason to fan the flames by calling it “shitty” right off the bat. Shame, shame, shame…
Oh, and welcome back, Nikki. Good to know the AMPTP didn’t make you an offer you couldn’t refuse (my favorite picket line rumor).
You probably won’t post this and that’s a shame. But I’ll comment anyway, futile as it may be. I come from a family of instigators, where someone will say to someone else that so-and-so said this awful thing about them, fueling anger and resentment on both sides. Most of the time, these gossiping family members think they’re “doing a good deed for the greater good of the family”, when in fact, they’re simply creating an atagonistic environment. What they really must do instead is: let people resolve issues amongst themselves. And that’s what you need to do with the strike. By posting your “shitty DGA deal” comment, you’re again fanning of the fires of radicalism. Which is what this strike has become. A radical, irrational shit-throwing war. Rational people in the WGA are muzzled by louder, angrier and bitter people in the WGA. Notice how progress was made in your absence, without your snarky editorials. Bottom line: you’re not really in the movie and TV biz, Nikki, you just report on it, yet inexplicably your comments can arguably iffluence the position of many people who are actually WORKERS in this town. Look, you do some very good reporting, but right now, you’re getting involved in something you shouldn’t be getting involved in by fanning the flames. So use your power wisely. I know you try to, but at times, like today, you do nothing but make a bad situation worse. Just like people in my family do. I see it all the time and believe me, people like you do no one any good.
I thought what Paul Haggis wrote (posted on UnitedHollywood.com) was wise and well timed. I was grateful to read it. It headline here on DHD suggests the DGA deal isn’t all so great. I’m a writer who is not yet in the guild – I’m one of those guys who has been hired before but is not yet in the guild but is close. I’ve been following the politics and bs like so many of you, weighing in on the bs and trying to learn what I can. But, I don’t know why the DGA deal is bad – and frankly, I don’t know why it’s good either. The UH site had some smart analysis, but I’d like to hear more about the negatives of this deal and where we need to AMPTP to go to make writers happy. Looking forward to your posts and to Nikki’s POV on the DGA deal. She’s obviously not impressed.
Writer – outside the gates with you but not yet in the guild.
Just wanted to welcome you back. I had no idea how dependent I was on this site until it went down. I hope you’re feeling better.
Two things the WGA negotiating committee should go for, that would build on the DGA agreement and tailer it to address writers’ needs:
1. Accept the DGA framework for digital revenues, but for only the first two years of the new contract. Have the 3rd year increase the %/$ – even if nominally – setting that precedent for the year leading up to the next negotiation. That might help preempt today’s %/$ rates settling in “as is” for the next 20 years. (As it did for video.)
2. Develop some kind of automatic 10% “gross tax,” on the % cuts of distributor’s gross currently being liberally given to actors, directors and producers (i.e., to everyone EXCEPT the people who write the script that make their cuts possible). So if 30% of distributor’s gross is being given to a project’s lead actor(s), director and producers(s), then automatically apply another 3% for the writer (10% of the 30%). This probably won’t wind up costing the congloms anything anyway, because that’ll be factored into their negotiations from the start, to cap the total at 30% (or whatever). The other participants shouldn’t have a prob – it’s imminently fair, and we’ll still wind up with the smallest %. Ask Spielberg, Hanks and Cruise about this one – bet they’d get in front of the parade.
Glad to have you back. Cautiously optimistic on the deal. At least they’re talking! Got to get that seventeen day window out and need a better definition of what they mean by disclosing finances. I still think the guild will be patient and wait for a deal that fits us, not a deal that fits the other unions.
oh how i’ve missed you Nikki
– T
You go, Nikki. Thank God you’re back.
Those “breakpoints” are a pretty shitty mark to meet right now. But in the next decade, as streaming slowly replaces syndication, that 100,000 breakpoint won’t seem so unreachable.
There has always been a potential deal on the Internet (Reality and Animation are a different, but complicating story) that would guarantee fairness and stability and easier future contract renewals: adopt an enforcible agreement (i.e. auditing and arbitration provisions) that migrates minimums and residuals to the Internet as the audience migrates to the Internet (i.e. a percentage or step-payment structure that all sides agree is meant to preserve the same ratio of initial and residual compensation to budget, revenue and, perhaps, audience size). These principles would work for both film and TV – which will soon become harder to distinguish as digital production and distribution subsume both.
The DGA appears to have gotten only a start on this. Most notably, in three years they’ll still either have to wage a new fight to increase their pay structure by several magnitudes to reflect the displacement of broadcast TV distribution by Internet distribution – or they’ll have to tell their TV directors that the rest of the DGA doesn’t care about what is probably something like a quarter or a third of the TV directors’ incomes.
Of course, as of this writing, no one – perhaps not even the DGA – really knows what their agreement provides. They seem only to have negotiated a press release with the real, possibly tricky agreement yet to come.
Hope you are feeling better.
A rolling percentage of distributor’s gross on streaming. Maybe it’s not the number we want, but without that structure as part of the deal this strike will be remembered as this generation’s 1988.
WGA needs to stand strong and not cave. This is a terrible deal, and if they take it then strike was for naught. Members need to read Paul Haggis posting on United Hollywood.. Don’t fall for the studios PR about the guild fracturing…
Yeah, the DGA deal is a start, but little more than that. If we accept it–or anything remotely close–it would be another example of the WGA taking the crumbs and leaving the pie. That’s what we did with home video, and again with DVDs. But egregious as those failures were, this would be far worse–because a loss here will inevitably lead to the withering of our livelihoods and the gutting of our guild. Yes, I want to get back to work. Neville Chamberlain wanted peace. Not every deal is a good one.
There have to be bandwidth limits to this ad-supported “promotional” streaming. It doesn’t matter what it’s called–if the studios are allowed any way to stream enough data to play on TV without paying residuals, then residuals are gone forever.
What things are called doesn’t matter any more. The only thing that matters is what they can be used for. So *any signal* that’s streamed with enough bandwidth to be broadcast quality or near broadcast quality MUST be paid a fair residual. ‘Cause that’s the only residuals there will be in a couple of years.
Glad you’re beginning to feel better. We miss you! Just curious – new look for the site? Kinda miss the old logo…
Nicki,
Make sure to take good care of yourself, you were missed last week and I don’t want you to get so run down you have to take a long break.
What about the DGA contract is bad? Since you were gone I had to depend on Variety’s coverage and they seem to like it.
Well, shitty or not, it’s hard to tell. Lots of opinion on both sides. United Hollywood has some good links, including a good split/the/difference piece by Jonathan Handelman over at HuffPo. United H has a new link to a Forbes article that has some interesting comment. And of course John Wells is slavering all over the DGA deal thanks to a link/post at Artful Writer.
The truth is probably somewhere between. Let’s see what we can get in the coming weeks. Then decide if it’s worth taking, or worth striking until June. Because those seem to be the choices.
I think the WGA should take the DGA as a framework and push for bumps in streaming residuals per 100,000 streams per quarter, expressed as a fraction of script fee (this was the WGA’s retooled proposal before the December AMPTP walkout.) BUT (and this is a big but, which is why it’s ALL CAPS)– these increases will only be tenable if broadcast residuals are creditable against them. So, if you do get that 20K first rerun check, you only get the $1200. But if you don’t, you get $1200 + some reasonable figure like (hypothetically) $1000 per 100,000 streams per quarter. And if the episode gets a broadcast rerun sometime down the line, (like when Lost syndicates in five years, for instance), whatever traffic bonus $ the writer recieved previously gets applied against the $20K.
This saves a lot of money for the companies (and also, importantly, it REMOVES THE INCENTIVE NOT TO RUN BROADCAST RERUNS) and also guards against writers having to trade 20K for 1.2K across the board. I think everyone could live with it.
The DGA deal as a framework? Get serious. Jurisdiction is not enough as far as streaming content and the Internet goes; if the WGA accepts this, then they’re accepting the same shitty wait-and-see deal they struck years previous for DVD/HV.
Of course the DGA deal was easier to hammer out. As a union, they’ve never struck – they’re too cozy with producers for that – and what do they care about the WGA’s need to finally unionize animation and reality? I’ll be bitterly disappointed if – after all this – the WGA caves to the DGA deal.
Nice change in DHD format; easier to read and pleasant on the eyes.
As always, your comments are the most insightful, honest and interesting
(not to mention always accurate and well in advance of anybody else).
If I had only one point of view to read, it would be YOURS!