Action Comedy TV: Showrunner Matt Nix 
SAG National Board Approves Joint Bargaining … 
BBC Drama Unfreezes Development Money; … 
Lionsgate Board Rejects Icahn's $6/Share 
Is Betting On Box Office Good For Films? 
Marvel Still Looking For Captain America 
'Sopranos' Creator To Film Rock Drama 
LIVE-SNARKING THE 82ND OSCARS... 
'ALICE' IS A MONSTER! $116.3M Blows Past … 
Oscar Not-So-Thriller: Diller Mogul Picnic 
'Precious' Sweeps 25th Indie Spirit Awards 
Howard Stern Won't Be Next 'Idol' Judge 
Justin Theroux Readying 'Zoolander 2' For … 
Mickey Rourke Wooed For Two Big Roles, … 
CBS Reups Les Moonves Through 2015 
Oh, I can't wait to see the comments reacting to this Op-Ed. Meanwhile, the clueless Los Angeles Times chalks up yet another anti-WGA screed in its opinion pages while the anti-AMPTP rants are very few and far between. Get this -- an editorial pages editor there was under the mistaken belief that Variety editor Peter Bart was "neutral" in this negotiations. Yeah, maybe on Mars.
(By the way, I never called Ridley an A-lister and I can't imagine anyone who would. When I broke the news,I said WGA Member John Ridley Goes Fi-Core and that "he has brought attention to himself during the writers strike with his blogging on The Huffington Post very critical of the union's leadership." That's his claim to infamy.
Loading ...
Good for him. Read his article. We are all self-serving and he is doing what’s best for him. GL to the writers and GL to Ridley.
I love this whole thing about Verrone and Young not having the experience to make a deal in Hollywood.
You mean like the past negotiators did who have gotten the writers into this very predicament? You mean the ones over that the DGA who first took the rotten DVD residual deal?
Or the ones the AMPTP also prefer to deal with who would have laid down and taken a bad deal?
I’m sorry, if the pro-studio forces have a problem with the WGA negotiators, that means they are competent, tough, and prepared.
Which is the last thing that would make them likable to their adversaries.
Good ridley-ence to bad rubbish. Another douche who wants to say “everyone look at me!”
When he returns all residuals, health care and pension money then I’ll think he has some “character.” Until then he’s a glory hound, d-lister looking for attention.
residuals, health care and pension are issues WGA members struck for in the past. Ridely isn’t fit to carry their pencil boxes.
I love John Ridley. Real writers speak their minds. Period. He’s a true artist. You can simply tell by his voice: distinct, rhythmic, heartfelt. Cheers to his courage!
I find him embarrassing. I’m not sure what else to say. Reading his letter, it makes me want to go over to his house and take away all his Ayn Rand books.
I’m not sure you can categorize Mr. Ridley’s defense of his going Fi-Core as “weak.” You can disagree with his point of view, but his opinion is, if anything, quite strong.
To call his defense “weak” is like when Bush called Al Queda “cowards.” We may hate what they stand for, but they weren’t cowards, by any definition. And Mr. Ridley isn’t “weak.”
It’s another attempt to demonize anyone who disagrees with you. And I thought that was the opposite of what America was about.
Some people’s need for attention is so great that they would rather be hated than ignored.
Ridley’s Op-Ed seems fairly even handed, and I think he makes a lot of valid points. I want the writers to get everything they’re asking for and deserve, but I think a lot of them, based on comments Ridley addresses and comments I read here, need to learn to recognize their organization isn’t flawless itself.
Also, the witch hunts and the name calling could definitely stand to be toned down. It’s really off putting and really doesn’t inspire the sympathy that the facts themselves do. You’re in the right, be comfortable with that.
Actually… I didn’t think that was weak at all.
I think Ridley is a bit of a blowhard (and a better comic book writer than a feature one, for sure) and yeah, he deserves crap for his constant pot-shots, some of which are genuinely cheap ones, at the Guild. But frankly, I can’t say I don’t disagree with many of his concerns, particularly the lack of any sort of end-game strategy on the part of the WGA. As this thing plods on without any end in sight, more of Ridley’s arguments are going to ultimately seem more prescient than not. And Jesus, that’s depressing. He’s the first, but he’s not going to be the last, I fear, to do this
Nikki PLEASE.
It is a strong strong defense.
He is sick of the WGA
So is Hollywood
Do YOU have any objectivity left, Nikki? You shouldn’t throw stones about anyone’s pro-AMPTP agenda when your website is all pro-WGA. Ridley’s argument is not weak, I think it’s a reasoned and thoughtful argument. It’s probably not what I would have done in his situation, because for all their faults, Unions do more good than bad. For what its worth though, joining a Union should not be compulsory.
You have to give John credit, at least he’s consistent. From day one, he never understood the power or the reason for the Guild and by going fi core, he had the courage to flaunt his own “self-determination.” I imagine it must have been hard for him to look in the mirror, and occasionally imagine that there were writers before him that sacrificed their time and effort so he could make his millions. I can only speculate that it bothered John to think of those long-ago union members, who in their folly, set up pension and health benefits as well as those unimportant minimum schedules that keep others (not John, of course) alive. It must have singed him, every time a green envelope (residuals) arrived at his house, prompting lengthy diatribes on how stupid the union was to demand fair compensation for creative work. Knowing that John is a man of conviction, I’m sure he just ripped up those bothersome checks and threw them in the trash. I’m also sure that from this day forward, he will also renounce his WGA health and pension benefits.
As for me, I’m actually happy John is now “done with the whole thing.” He is now free to do what he pleases and I certainly hope that when the strike is over, all of us who continue to walk the line can make sure he gets his ultimate wish — to finally and forever be on his own.
You ever think that maybe you’re not seeing anti-amptp rants is because the amount of people who have drank the kool-aid and are blindly following the wga leaders is few. You sound like someone defending the war in iraq…dumbass.
I don’t agree with what Ridley did and I’ve never really liked the guy, but I thought this op-ed was balanced and fair and, frankly, is expressing the frustration of a lot of us out here. I didn’t find it weak. I found it pretty compelling. I would never go fi-core, but I can’t disagree with much of what he says in there.
Jay Leno is a de facto fi-core member right now. He won’t be disciplined at all. The Guild is afraid of doing anything to Leno. At least Ridley is doing it by the rules declaring himself fi-core. Two or three months from now when a thousand other members declare themselves fi-core nobody will criticize them at all.
John Ridley was some good points and I think he took the right direction for himself. If the WGA does not respect you, why respect them. He makes a point of saying that the WGA believes if you are aganist the strike you should then just shut up. Not true. Everyone can have there own view. Sometimes those of us responding on this website need to remember this.
This was not a ‘weak’ argument. It’s just an argument that WGA members don’t want to hear. He doesn’t work for the minimum and the things they are fighting over that prevent him from working have little to no bearing on his life.
You can argue that he should care about his other ‘union brothers’ but since when has anyone in Hollywood not thought for themselves first and foremost?
It’s just another sign that this strike is, sadly, no where near resolution because the 2 sides have let things become acrimonious. Yes, it’s both sides who’ve let it get acrimonious. You can talk about the WGA sitting at the table waiting but when one side, ya know the side with the money, says ‘we aren’t paying that EVER; there isn’t that much more to say until you are willing to go lower or make concessions in other areas. I know it sounds harsh, but welcome to reality.
A list?! Ha ha ha! OMG, I can’t stop laughing. Undercover Brother!!
“I’m sorry, if the pro-studio forces have a problem with the WGA negotiators, that means they are competent, tough, and prepared.”
REALLY? Competent would mean they are able to hold a negotiation and not make stupid requests to prove how strong you are. This would be over if they were competent. Prepared? Like so prepared they’ve been out of work for three months? I mean if this is the leadership writers hope for I can take a shit in a box and it will get you the same results – literally! No one would want to talk to that shit! Please is right, this holier than thou routine is getting old… Someone please have sex with these writers so they can feel adequate enough.
“ripping me a new orifice,” “If you shake the tree, you can’t get upset when the apples fall,” “the first rule of Strike Club: Never talk about Strike Club,” …
Ridley’s not a writer, he’s a chiche blender set to puree.
Going by the trajectory of his resume, this may be the only circumstance left under which anyone in Hollywood would consider hiring him.
I disagree with his decision to go Fi-Core, but I don’t think his characterization of the political climate within the WGA right now is inaccurate.
And re: Jimmy above, there are other options for negoitiators besides inexperience and kowtowing. I don’t agree with you that Verrone and Young are ‘competent, tough, and prepared.’ Maybe one out of three. But in any case it’s a false dichotomy to assume that the only alternative to their strategy is strategy of capitulation, so that anyone who thinks they’re screwing up is de facto a capitulator.
john, love how you go fi-core: meaning you want to reap the benefits of a guild that has fought in the past to get you those benefits and not support it. Why don’t you shun the guild completely and not reap the benefits of its minimums, you jackass
I suppose my problem is, having attended the same meeting in Santa Monica, I don’t know what he’s talking about with the “frenzied” environment. The first guy who got up for the Q&A questioned the ability of the board and negotiating committee to negotiate a contract. The board and Dave Young addressed his concerns. Then the questioner repeated his concern…five times. At that point, the audience got fed up with listening to the same question and he was jeered. The next person up happened to be Mike Scully of “Simpsons” fame, who did what amounted to an improv stand-up routine, poking fun at the first guy, and some of us laughed. It’s not that we were squashing descent, we were squashing redundancy. It seems to me that Mr. Ridley may have a skewed perception of the WGA and its members. Sort of like Mel Gibson and the Jews.
Let’s have some sympathy for all the trolls who’ve gathered here today to kiss John Ridley’s sorry ass. It’s been a tough week for their side.
I support the strike and found nothing weak about his reasoning.
Interesting… Ridley’s upcoming writer/director project is “Positively Fifth Street,” produced in part by John Wells’s company. Is Wells going to want to be in business with Ridley now?
Wow, that was well written and honest too. So he makes a choice that is offered under union rules and the mob screams the usual scab, traitor! Sounds like he is just sick of all the BS and took the option offered by the Guild – more power to him.
He makes a hell of a lot more sense than the mindless droning of the “stay strong, stay united” sheep. My UNION (399) does not offer this kind of deal so I am taking it in the rear along with my friends and co-workers as the WGA “LEADERS” continue to stay the course right into the lighthouse rocks.
As I talk to my fellow Teamsters I sure don’t hear the kind of support claimed by the WGA – really the opposite and growing more bitter each week.
To call his defense “weak” is like when Bush called Al Queda “cowards.” We may hate what they stand for, but they weren’t cowards, by any definition. And Mr. Ridley isn’t “weak.”
Comment by Matt — January 8, 2008 @ 1:13 pm
uh matt, whereas Ridley may not be weak, he is a master of hackery who succeeds based on shear volume and therefore garners no respect which is really at the end of the day what he’s so pissy about.
regardless, i’m pretty sure you CAN call al quaeda intentionally killing innocent men, women and children cowardice and i’m pretty sure you can do it by every definition. so please either get a better dictionary or an analogy that makes sense. or maybe go fi-core with Ridley.
Actually this made me realize that I’m weak. I’ve felt many of the same frustrations but have been too afraid to speak up.
You mean the WGA doesn’t have a great negotiator like Nick Counter who’s been so marvelously effective in this strike, and in keeping an entire industry out of work?
Meanwhile, the AMPTP hide like cowards behind their lawyers, PR agents, and Counter.
Look at how bullying the AMPTP are to anyone on their team who disagrees with the company line, look at how they pressured Harry Sloan to distance himself from the UA deal.
Ridley’s pathetic.
I don’t agree with John but he has every right to his opinion and to voice it.
I have been a member of SAG for nearly ten years now. When I called recently to ask a question about SAG’s jurisdiction over the internet they demanded to know who I was before they would answer anything and informed me that they are now logging and keeping track of everyone who calls, which made me feel like, just by asking, I was somehow being put into a black book.
I know (to a small degree) how Ridley feels, and I have been frustrated for some time now about how it feels to be a member of one of Hollywoods “labor” unions and to have (even the perception) of a somewhat dissenting opinion.
It seems to me, that he was out and out attacked for his dissenting opinion and now that he has chosen to go “FI-Core” he is being ostracized.
Since I’m an actor, not a writer, I apologize if there is a bit of a stream of consciousness to this post. But, this past Saturday (1/5/08) there was a WGA picket on N. Beachwood Drive — they were meeting to, actually, picket an individual producers private home somewhere in the Hollywood Hills. Did this producer have children? Did he or she have a family? Was this part of their strategy?
It seems to me the WGA is fighting a good cause, but the leadership and the way this strike is being orchestrated both at the negotiating table and in the field is a disaster.
I don’t blame Ridley at all, and I applaud him for having the courage to take the stand he has.
Nikki, you’re wrong on this one. He raises some incredibly valid points, and brings up issues that are on a lot of the writers’ minds. He’s the only one with the balls to actually say it, but he’s not a alone. A ton of people are sick of the witch hunts, and the teenage name-calling, and the “mindless glee” of shutting down productions. And many writers feel the WGA has not allowed for even the smallest dissenting opinions from its membership, which is really embarrassing and unfortunate.
Good for Ridley for having the guts to take a stand.
This begs the question: On which planet are YOU “neutral,” Nikki?
Wasn’t a weak defense at all. He seemed very sure of what he was doing and why. He hasn’t agreed with the guild for a long time, voiced his concerns, many guild people let him know he wasn’t welcome, so he left. Seems pretty simple. Agree with him or not, explanation was pretty reasoned…and he even joked about him not being a-list at the top. But feel free to keep taking pot shots at anybody not spouting the WGA party line while screaming about how impartial you are, Nikki.
I have no problem with someone exercising a perfectly legal right to go financial core. But how does he reconcile taking all the benefits that have been won through the sacrifice of members who stayed in the union and fought when they were going broke. For him. It musty be nice not to have a conscience.
I briefly met John Ridley 18 years ago when he was doing standup in NYC. His stuff was brilliant and I’ve been a fan ever since. Having read his ope-ed, I get his rationale regarding the WGA. But no organization is perfect or ever will be. What I don’t read in that article is what he has constructivly done over the years to address his complaints. Has he ever run for a WGA office? Did he actually speak up at that meeting? (His description was far too intimidating – these are writers, not longshoremen.) What he also fails to mention is that his career has never been hotter than it is right now. His decision is totally self-serving and by publicly writing about it his primary purpose is to propagate the John Ridley brand.
I haven’t read any of John Ridley’s peices, nor do I know his work, so I can’t and won’t comment on him as a person. However, I will say there are a lot of valid points in his article and screaming about what an asshole he is just helps prove them. He made a choice, and he explained why he did you. If people can’t accept that, they shouldn’t expect the public and BTL-ers to accept the choice they made that, even if it is the AMPTP’s fault, is taking shows and jobs and away from those that had no vote in the matter.
I support the WGA, save for a couple freakouts, and despite what some of my comments here may make it seem. But in no universe will I pretend they are perfect, and while writers- the writers I would someday love to be- may deny that they think they are faultless, it’s hard to get a word in edgewise without being bashed. It’s as those nobody has a right to be angry with the WGA, which simply isn’t true, no matter how justified the guild is in it’s actions.
And then there are the comments like “But everyone depends on us! It starts with us!” Guess what? You depend on them, too. It starts with you, but without directors and actors to make it real and everyone else to finish it, you wouldn’t be anywhere either. And the condesending sympathy with a heavy dose of telling people they need to deal. Not very good at getting people to support you. And then there’s that “as long as it takes” badge that’s worn with such pride. Never mind that it’ll screw thousands of people out of their lives and millions out of their shows- we’re right, so letting this thing drag on is justifed.
Yes, the strike is the fault of the AMPTP. They’re the ones who won’t come back to the table. But that doesn’t excuse the WGA’s handling of some aspects of this or their attitude towards anyone who expresses any disagreement with them. Nor doesn’t it entitle them to the automatic approval of everyone in the world. Recently, in the WGA supporters community on LJ, a poll showing slightly less people supporting the writers than a while ago automatically had to be a set-up, no other explanation. People getting pissed with everyone? Impossible. Because the writers are right.
And the writers are right. Not even the best producer can spin a story to change that fact. But there are many things in their attitudes and methods that have turned people off. Denying that is going to do nothing but harm. Acknowledge your faults and move on. Believe me, it’ll help more than you think.
He is a S-C-A-B and the like of him are WEAK.
He is doing what is best for him, but is what he is doing best for his now former fellow WGA writers? NO!
He can do what he wants to do but we don’t have to accept that, he is not just a blowhard, but an apologist for AMPTP. If he was tired of the WGA before the strike, then leave, go back to whatever frack’in flyover state you slithered from.
You call yourself a liberal? A progressive?? Go explain your to your NPR listeners what you have done and compare your explaination to what is a SCAB!!!
I give you a Spartan cheer: May you live a long and uneventful life.
It would be a mistake to dismiss Ridley’s concerns as weak; I highly doubt that he’s the only one who has them. Wasn’t it just reported that several major screenwriters were pushing for the WGA to take whatever deal the DGA accepts? Aren’t most of Ridley’s points the same problems that these actual A-list writers have? Ridley’s points are also similar to those of most working directors, which is why the DGA seems to “roll over” in negotiations.
I’m not saying Ridley is right for breaking from the Guild and going Fi-Core but I’m also not about to say that he’s wrong for being frustrated and even abandoned by his Guild.
(Although, trashed or not, his odds of working on Pinkville are nil. It isn’t a Fi-Core cash grab anymore since UA made their deal. They can hire full members now)
I love the argument that the guild doesn’t allow dissent. Wrong. Ridley can stand up at any meeting and say whatever he wants. But if you say stupid, nit-picking things that don’t have any principle behind them, you’ll get a reaction to that. Allowing dissent doesn’t mean accepting it. His criticism of the guild amounts to only content-free complaint. He doesn’t have a constructive alternative. He just wants to complain and, despite his claim that he can take it, he gets huffy when people oppose him.
And how does his depiction of the guild being “mandatory” and “conscripting” him jibe with the fact that he can so easily go fi-core? Doesn’t seem like such an oppressive monolith to me. Whatever. God speed, John Ridley.
Even if you honestly disagree with the union, and I certainly do not, as a WGA member you’re own best, enlightened, self-interest rests with sticking with your brother and sister writers. After all, all the benefits you do enjoy now as a guild member are because of hard fought battles the union has waged in the past.
This guy is really hurting career and may not have a future after this thing is settled. A lot of those future producers will be coming from the ranks of the writers.
I will agree with Ridley on one thing: “Written By” is a horrible magazine, written by Junior College Bolsheviks. Whenever somebody posts, “Hey, let’s create WGA TV,” all I can envision is that God awful WGA rag. It does concern me that my fate is in the hands of the guys who churn out that ridiculous piece of shit.
I don’t think it’s a weak defense. At all.
And as noted by other comments, it will look stronger every day this thing drags on.
I don’t think Ridley’s column is weak in the least. He has some very valid points. Nikki, your reaction is far from un-biased and actually validates Ridley’s point to some degree.
He’s more than just sick of the WGA he’s sick of the AMPTP and Hollywood.
It appears he is sick of everything that stops him from picking up a paycheck.
The saddest part is that he says he wrote one screenplay in two years. So I can’t see why he is suddenly is such a rush to get back to work other than to get some media attention.
I agree with some of his points. The arbitration process for credits is extremely arbitrary, to put it mildly.
Going Fi-Core is something I wouldn’t consider…but ask me six months from now when I have no money left…and my answer might change.
Talk about passive aggressive! Mr Ridley keeps talking shit about making a stand, but when he’s told by these people that he supposedly doesn’t even respect to shut up, he does as he’s told? John, if you’re touting self determination, how do you justify adhering to mandates? Suddenly this strike makes you grow a pair? Please. If you stand by your decision, why do you feel compelled to explain it, let alone complain about those who don’t agree w/ it? Sounds like you’re afraid– the obvious hallmark of all of your decisions– you might have to work w/ someone who took a stand when you couldn’t. Your attempt to sound like an individual in a collective fear klatch is hollow to say the least. When you’re without the protections that guild membership affords you and the studios offer you a fraction for your services (if they hire you at all), I’d like to know how you as “an individual” will fare.
Ayn Rand? HA! The tagline for Atlas Shrugged–
“What If The World’s Greatest Minds Went On Strike?”
You know it is entirely possible that JR was not referring to this blog when he wrote A-lister. While I do realize that the really important issues in the strike are that you got a shout out from DL and that JR might have been referring to you in his op piece, hey, there are other blogs and there are other issues.
And, for you to bray about neutrality or being clueless, just shows how out of it you really are.
I’m sorry — I’ve read Ridley’s essay twice now, and while I can understand why he’s dissatisfied with the Guild, I still can’t figure out why, exactly, he felt the need to go fi-core. Because some fellow members were mean to him? Cry me a river. Because he disagrees with the Guild’s negotiating strategy? There are plenty of people who’ve disagreed with the Guild’s strategy who haven’t gone fi-core.
It seems to me that Ridley’s complaints are just a fig leaf — they may be his excuse for leaving the Guild, but they’re not really the reason. Even if the Guild leadership had done everything his way, he’d still be going fi-core right now — he’d just have a different list of complaints.
Thank you, Ridley. I find it funny that people accuse him of being a coward. What is he afraid of? He’s not one of the many lemmings afraid to disagree, afraid to express dissent, afraid to be called names like “scab”, afraid of appearing to be politically incorrect, afraid to stand up to your so-called leaders, afraid to admit when something does not work or is downright silly. He’s not sitting around waiting for Verrone to tell him when to jump or stand still, speak or shut up.
Whatever. You Ridley-attackers know the real deal. And for those who question his body of work – he was WGA so whatever his skills are is indicative of who’s in the Guild – like it or not. Besides, if he’s such a non-significant writer why would you care if he goes fi-core or not?
Folks high-fiving over the GG or trash-talking Leno need to open their eyes to what’s really at stake. Last night America watched American Gladiators, Dance Wars, and college football in significant numbers. ABC is bringing back The Mole. The networks might lose a bit of revenue here and there, but they’ll gain or maintain it elsewhere. “$10 million” might sound like a lot to someone making $101,000 a year, but to a network or studio it’s the cost of 1 failed drama pilot.
Not all writers can seek work with WWP projects or submit to UA, or the trickle of other companies that’ll decide in upcoming months they can’t weather the strike anymore. All writers don’t have the alternative sources of income and revenue streams that Big Media has. Who do you think is aching the most financially?
Lastly, it’s ironic that some guild members acted as if Ridley should just shut up and feel happy and privileged to have whatever he had. Isn’t that the same attitude the AMPTP is being accused of? Hypocritical much?
He’s right on at least one count — we should all be entitled to voice our opinion. Suppressing dissent doesn’t make us stronger, only weaker, and I don’t want to hear one word from anybody who disagrees with that.
Going fi core is like the special favored nations deal the WGA gave Letterman. It doesn’t set final terms. It just ends the strike for the individual.
I wish I were that brave.
But wouldn’t fi core screw up health benefits?
Right now we are denied health claims because Guild workers are lazy, incompetent and probably willfully devious. If you go fi core, I bet you couldn’t get health claims just because they hate you.
I think he’s incredibly short-sighted at best. This is exactly the kind of writer the creators of the guild weren’t fighting for — a self-serving, knee-jerk contrarian with no concept of what matters beyond the minute, solipsistic circle he lives in.
WGA negotiators LOL you mean the ones hired from the Textile industry?
We should all look at where the Textile industry is today under there leadership! Oh ya its over seas in third world country’s that pay kids 25 cents a day to make there good.
WGA needs to get there heads out of there butts and get back to the table and get a deal and get everyone in this town back to work once and for all.
From: Joe Gillis
fareside@pacbell.net
The writers who fought the 1960 strike (which established residuals for the whole town) will tell you they heard all the same criticisms and endured the same kinds of attacks that the WGA now has to hear from Ridley and his defenders.
Briefly, becuz it doesn’t warrant much else, Ridley’s decision is a political one. His previous political decisions were to support the Prez and the war in Iraq. This one is no more informed than the others. All of which were offered in order to garner attention, and in that, and only that, I suppose he’s been successful. People are talking about John Ridley. This is as he likes it.
Lastly, may we dispense with the thinwitted notion that the WGA has no end-game strategy? Making your end-game strategy public seems counterproductive at the least, particularly in mid-strike. That’s why, you know, it’s called an end-game strategy.
Okay, one more? Only a writer could whinge that a strike is ‘plodding along with no end in sight’ after two whole months. Seems to me that shaping the future of the entertainment business is worth, gosh, I dunno, two and a half?
Please. If Mr. Ridley is so “done” with the guild, why must he still plead to make his case, and then add two extra paragraphs just to say he’s done? If you are so finished with us, Mr. Ridley, then just walk away like a man. Don’t back away whining about nobody loving you. And if you think your 1 1/2 % of gross only pays for your subscription to Written By, you may be even more stupid than you appear. Why don’t you keep your dues and negotiate with each future employer to pay for your pension and health benefits. I’m sure they’d happily pony up. By the way, membership in the Guild is as mandatory as the minimums you were no doubt paid when you first joined… oh, boo-hoo, you were forced to join the Guild. I doubt anyone’s crying now that you’ve left. There. Is that “pilloried” enough for you?
Couldn’t he just go into therapy and bore just the one person to death with this self absorbed BS?
Spare me. Dissent is one thing, but this is clearly just more of the same from him – rampant self regard and egoism. How boring.
John Ridley is a great writer. But I no longer respect him as a man.
Though I haven’t considered going fi-core and have been out picketing, I agree with those who say that this is hardly a “weak” defense. I am somewhere in the middle-of-the-pack in features – a handful of credits, a bunch of stuff in the pipeline, a script raced in under the wire on Nov. 4th, generally consistent studio work – but am one of the many who don’t feel as “militant” when everyone starts cheering at the various rallies, which is why I stopped going to them.
Would I consider going fi-core? No, I actually see it as a slap in the face to the WGA (particularly when making such a move is a real political statement) and its long history of advances in the business of which I benefit. No “sunshine patriot” here.
Do I find Ridley’s statement compelling with a number of points well-expressed? Yes, I do. His words resonated with a number of points I didn’t realize I felt myself and am glad someone had what it takes to say them aloud as I am not that guy.
We disagree on a few things, Mr. Ridley, but all in all, well-said. Kudos for not only voicing your beliefs, but acting on them which is more than can be said for a lot of people.
That was a terrific piece. Have no idea why anyone would call that a weak defense of a position.
It wasn’t spiteful.
it was honest. accurate… even tame!
I suspect we’ll see many more WGA members file for financial core status as the strike continues.
Good for you, John Ridley!
Matt: So now the writers who don’t toe your line are unpatriotic?
I gotta say, that’s certainly not a weak defense. It’s the only argument I’ve read for going fi-core that makes any sense at all.
Ridley, if he’s being sincere, clearly never wanted to be in the guild in the first place. I think everyone just needs to leave him alone and stay focused on the goal: A fair deal.
I actually kind of agree with the points he makes. The water is starting to boil in all the pots, and where Cruise and Wagner are going against AMPTP grain making their own deal for UA, Ridley is going against WGA grain by saying that their tactics are also to be questioned. Though unity on every front is a must, sometimes that UNITY can be overbearing and strong-armed.
What Ridley’s op-ed really needs is a rewrite by David O. Russell.
John Ridley going fi-Core, the ethical questioning of Jay Leno Monologues, United Artist interim deals, the lionization of Worldwide Pants, the ghettoization of The Golden Globes, reality TV jurisdication — it’s all blaring white noise, especially when your jo,b and others with families, have been and are on the chopping block. The only thing that should be front, center, and hyper-focused and exclusively on all our minds is “somehow” (whether by the DGA sessions or some other realistically legitimate and timely strategy) getting a new media residual plan and everyone getting back to work ASAP.
It’s hard to know where to start with this muddled letter, but a couple of things: Ridley was not supposed to come to the meeting in Santa Monica because he had gone Fi Core and lost his status as a voting guild member. That is why he felt “unwelcome.” Also, the guy who expressed a dissenting opinion wasn’t told to sit down because of the opinion itself, it was because he kept repeating the same thing over and over again without moving the discussion forward, no matter what was said to him. He kept saying something like “only a fool has himself for a lawyer” and even after hearing that we “fools” actually had a bunch of lawyers, and that many on the negotiating committee were lawyers, he just said it again. And if Ridley wanted the union to be more diverse and somebody was dumb enough to tell him not to say anything, then why didn’t he take it to the diversity committee, whose whole purpose is trying to make the guild more diverse? There are plenty of complaints to be made about the guild. The next step is acting to improve it. And, to be honest, Ridley quitting, at this point, seems to be an action that will be nothing but an improvement.
Hey, Ridley: It’s the internet, stupid. Put it in writing that you don’t want any residuals or minimums from work done for the internet, just like the companies want us to do (oh, okay, fine, take the $250. for a year of unlimited play). And drop the health insurance while you’re at it. That’s just one of those things included in the Minimum Basic Agreement that just doesn’t apply to you.
Whatever. I don’t think Ridley’s argument is completely weak. Just a bit naive – he comes across as ignorant of the whole point of collective action, which is not that everyone needs to agree on every point, but that when you’re fighting power, your strength comes from standing together.
Ridley, though he agrees with the cause (he says), has chosen NOT to stand with us. If he had any concern for other writers – many of whom, unlike him, ARE subject to the Minimum Basic Agreement – he’d stand with us. Those writers are apparently not as important to Ridley as his own wounded feelings.
That’s his choice. When all is said and done, his union is on strike, people are suffering because of it, and he has chosen not merely to walk away, but to do a fair amount of auxiliary damage by writing about his departure and denigrating the union in one of the nation’s largest newspapers.
The truly weak part of the argument is his attempt to muddle the issue of whether his actions are self-serving or selfish. They are, of course. And the idea that the strike itself is selfish… well, there are plenty of guild members who will not benefit directly from the strike-related issues, plenty of us who are beyond the MBA or work for the kinds of projects that don’t have significant residual value in ANY format (like most of the late-night writers)… but we’ve stayed. Ridley hasn’t, and yet would like to have the “self-determination” that he brags about getting be somehow NOT “self-serving.”
Nuh-uh. It is what it is. Ridley staying with the strike could benefit a lot of people (though infinitesimally – again, that’s what collective action is about). His walking away, and the way he’s chosen to do it, has only one possible beneficiary.
I’m a bit confused by him saying that he doesn’t operate under the MBA. That whole paragraph makes no sense to me. Is he saying that he’ll forego any advances that striking WGA members achieve? Because that’s what should happen. Why should he benefit from the future internet deal that striking writers are fighting to get?
He’s perfectly welcome to his opinion about the Guild, but to go back to work during a strike and then enjoy the gains made by that strike… well, is there anything good that can be said about someone who does that?
I have no problem with Ridley’s piece. It’s well-written, it’s his opinion, who cares whether he’s an “A list” writer or not — is that a prerequisite for being represented by the WGA?? — and everything he said seemed fair. What happened to free speech? Assuming this man was paying his dues to the Guild, he has every right to have a point of view. This thing has dragged on a LONG time and despite the VERY valid points of the members of the WGA to get what’s due to them — no one can argue that the landscape has changed and these people should be paid for their work — the fact is, a lot of people are tired — a lot of people have lost their jobs — LOTS — and they’re not people who were making a lot of money. Despite the funds being set up to “help”, the point is, they’re adults. They want to WORK and pay their OWN bills. Both sides should shut up and get back to the table and get this thing worked out. I’m ready to get back to the fun old Nikki Finke stuff that started my day. Ready to laugh again.
Yes, matt, it is the opposite of what America is about. When John Ridley speaks, everyone should either laud him or shut up. Stating contrary opinions like suggesting an op-ed piece is “weak” is demonizing, silencing, and depriving him of his free speech. Because the reality is, his piece is strong, because you, without elaboration, said so, therefore it must be true. As a result, it stands to reason that calling his opinion weak, without elaboration, is not only untrue, but equivalent to calling him a terrorist, he’s practically in Gitmo already. Celebrate America: remember, there is only one opinion, the true opinion as determined by the person currently speaking, and if you can’t agree, don’t disagree, shut your pie hole!
Ridley is more than happy to lap up all the benefits he gets from being in the WGA, residuals, pensions, health care, but when it comes down to it, it’s I’ve got mine now you get me more while I’ll be off making it harder for you–and make sure any larger residual cheque I’ll receive because you guys kept fighting isn’t late. If Ridley wants, he’s more than welcome to go back to the pay scale and lack of benefits writers received before we unionized, since just about every gain we’ve made since has been as a result of that. If he wants respect, he needs to show some consistency, otherwise we’ll have to conclude that what America is really all about is being a freeloader.
As a WGA member and supporter of the union and the strike, I also have to agree that his defense is not weak. Makes perfect sense to me, although I’m going to tough it out a bit longer because ideologically it’s what seems right and makes sense TO ME.
But anyone who thinks the WGA is faultless and not working out of some sense of inflated ego has debilitating tunnel vision. They are in the right, but acting in the wrong at times.
Hey Go John,
Your “Hollywood is sick of the WGA” comment is obnoxious. The writers are the victims, you shitbag. So sorry if the strike has provided some sort of annoyance for you, but I’m gonna lose my house over this. Not because of the Guild or the Guild leadership, but because the conglomerates forced this strike and are maliciously prolonging it.
Well, there’s his justification. I kept trying to find something other than self-serving whining, but I could not. Sometimes the world isn’t what you want. You can fight against it, or accept it. John has chosen to fight against. I would say this is nothing more than a man following his beliefs as a writer if he had never been a stand up, but he has and that changes everything.
A long time ago, I had a conversation with John Ridley, at a table in New York’s Comic Strip. He was a torn man, having achieved some success as a writer, yet nothing as a stand up. I engaged him in conversation because I respected him as a stand up. I had a soft spot for decent joke writers who had no stage presence. Ridley was still hungry for the stage and fame, but deep down knew it was not going to happen. He went on to have a nice career in writing.
So, fame alluded John Ridley, until now. Here he is, in the lights, having his say in the LA Times and appearing on NPR, as well as other shows as a conservative commentator. One way to fame is to be a contrarian, and that is something comedians know all too well. This path he has chosen is obvious. Soon, he will be popping up on Fox News to expose his anti-Hollywood views and attack the liberal horde known as writers.
And John will have his fame. The hateful glances and remarks from fellow scribes will mean little compared to the attention he receives from the right wing. And then the books will follow.
This is a path. A chosen path. One we handed to John Ridley on a silver platter by going on strike.
Too bad that is a world of unhappiness, John.
RIdley’s entitled to his opinion. No big deal. But his complaints about WGA negotiators not being experienced enough is a dated, dead issue. And it was discussed at the meeting in December. Which he should know since he was there. Verrone answered it directly and without any malice to the writer who asked it. And that crack he made about someone at the meeting commenting that: “Anyone who didn’t have anything good to say about the strike should shut up.” — That was a member who stepped up to the mike and simply felt that way following the previous speaker. I’m sorry, but isn’t that what he said we should all be okay with – speaking your mind? The leaders never cheered. The membership did. That’s what happens in membership meetings like that. No leader on stage went into a ‘frenzied’ state and declared that this would now be the theme of the night. Here’s the truth: John Ridley is a sensitive guy. That’s cool. But what he also is is a selfish member of this creative community by blasting the very guild that is trying to protect his and everyone else’s future. The leaders aren’t perfect – none of us are. So run for one of the WGA board or leadership positions if you’re not happy. But don’t shit on the sacrifices they and all writers are making by posting an LA Times Op-Ed piece with things like: “Bargaining chips moved on and off the table in the haphazard manner of a first-time gambler at a roulette wheel; interim agreements arbitrarily granted, without the necessary vote by membership.”
Arrogant. Selfish. Mis-leading. And incredibly self-serving. I have no problem with John Ridley disagreeing with WGA tactics and policies. What I have a problem with is him giving up after hitting a few roadblocks. Being intimidated by a few writers who said you shouldn’t go into the wga’s Santa Monica meeting in December. Then throwing his hands up like a spoiled, angry child and going by way of the LA Times Op-Ed route. Independent thinker: Maybe. A guy who really stands for something: Absolutely not. Cowardly: Without question. YES!
Throw this guy out on the union so he can start his own club of one.
That wasn’t strong at all. He said he was forced to join the union; that he’s “over” both sides spinning; and he was packing his toys and going home. Not getting the strength there at all. I’m not sure I even get what he believes in. . .
Wait. I’ve watched Undercover Brother. He’s no writer.
Ridley is wrong about one thing, come to think of it. He does owe something to the WGA. He makes it very plain that he doesn’t want to be a member and wishes he never was. So he can pay back every cent of residuals he’s ever earned because without the WGA, there would be no residuals. And he can give back his “Story By” credit on “THREE KINGS,” because if it weren’t for the Guild, he probably wouldn’t have his name on that movie at all. Not to mention all of the health and pension benefits he’s accrued as a result of his membership in the Guild.
When he’s paid all that back and rejects all future residuals, including internet payments, then I’ll believe he doesn’t really want to belong to the Guild. Until then, he’s just not very credible.
Nikki at what point did you become a WGA mouthpiece? I understand being frustrated with the AMPTP for their behavior, but that of the WGA and its members is equally reprehensible. I applaud Ridley for standing up for what he believes, consequences be damned. I find it interesting that writers, of all people, are calling for him to “never work again.” Blacklisting. For your beliefs. What an interesting idea. I’m surprised no one has ever done this to a writer before…oh wait. How positively extremist of the writers to call for this guy’s head for voicing his optimism. Nothing like group think.
I’ve known John a long time and have always found him to be an intelligent, reasonable guy. I think this article is in keeping with that experience so I am not sure why people would get so agitated over an individual exercising his rights. He’s not telling anyone else to follow his lead, he is merely expressing a point of view and backing it up with his actions. Frankly, we would all be a lot better off if Verrone, Bowman et alia took some of the criticism to heart and examined their strategy, or the lack thereof, to date.
Ridley was brave enough to speak his mind. And he’s right. There appears to be no place for dissention in the WGA. And I love Nikki’s disengenous diss of this guy. It got people to defend him. Is Nikki trying to say something here? I wonder.
I applaud this individual for his courage.
You mean the writer of “Undercover Brother” is in it for the money and has no concern for sociological struggles? There’s a shocker.
Once again, the AMPTP has no money for writers but all the money in the world to pay shills to come in here and pretend to be disinterested parties who JUST HAPPEN to completely agree with all the AMPTP’s positions.
But there is one good thing about still seeing them here; it means that the WGA, Patric Verrone and David Young are doing EXACTLY the right things to fight back.
Because you can be sure of one thing. The AMPTP will never give us a fair deal…
WE HAVE TO TAKE IT.
That was a persuasive and well-written defense of his actions. Your snide headline was “weak.”
Nikki I started reading DHD for it’s largely /unbiased/ strike coverage, and now I will be stopping since apparently I can’t get that here anymore.
He doesn’t agree with his leadership. That’s ok. Not everyone is going to. He’s allowed to have his pov. Plus, now that he’s fi-core, we’ll hopefully get Undercover Brother 2 by late fall! Cross your fingers!
A weasel of the first order….
Yeah, at first blush Ridley’s op-ed seems even-handed and fair (and it some ways it is)…but Nikki got it right overall. Weak. And by “weak” I mean BLATANTLY hypocritical, irrational and full of hyperbole.
Why?
The main premise for his complaints about the Guild are it’s “compulsory” and “mandatory” nature. John writes:
“Since I was conscripted into the Writers Guild…”
“…membership in the guild is mandatory…”
“That would be fine for an organization whose membership joins voluntarily. But when membership is compulsory…”
Conscripted? Membership is compulsory? That is COMPLETELY false. You know how I know it’s completely false?
Because John Ridley tells me so in this very article.”
Read it for yourself:
JOHN RIDLEY: “I decided I did not belong in the guild. The guild has a way to option out. I took the option.”
So..according to John, we have a Guild in which membership is mandatory and that he can’t reconcile that with its other behaviors…yet he is also free to leave at any time?
Hello? Bueller?
There goes Rationale #1 for his compaints about the Guild. But complain he still does – as does he continue to spread disinformation about how this is a “closed” town – though fi-core means, de facto, it isn’t.
As for his other accusations…
“Outside the Civic Center, before the meeting, guild members told me that I was not welcome and that if I went inside, I should prepare to be pilloried.”
Really? How many Guild members are we talking about? Two? Three? I’m sorry for the moron who used WHAT WAS PROBABLY A FIGURE OF SPEECH with you (though an unfortunate one – if that’s even what they really said). Either way, everyone I know would have welcomed you and physically defended you (even though they think your arguments are horrible) had there been any pillorying. This would be but one example of the hyperbole.
John claims we should tolerate a variety of views, yet he has no problem attacking and distorting views that contradict his:
JOHN RIDLEY: “During the meeting, one high-profile television writer announced to the membership that anyone who didn’t have anything good to say about the strike should shut up.”
John may disagree with that viewpoint – but the content is sound. No one had a problem with dissent – it was PUBLIC dissent that is at issue (a crucial point John leaves out of his op-ed and, perhaps, his own brain). The point was, tactically, let’s not help the AMPTP by airing our dirty laundry in public. People reading this can decide if they agree with that tactic…but it is surely not an unreasonable sentiment.
What IS unreasonable – is the way John Ridley erroneously describes that’s sentiment. Making it sound like a Nazi-esque stifling-of-dissent. I was there. That high-profile writer was cracking jokes left and right. The way he phrased his opinion was not threatening – it was at both humorous and struck a nerve – hence the wild applause. But apparently that applause made John uncomfortable. Apparently what John wanted was a public repudiation of that sentiment from our leaders:
JOHN RIDLEY: “Did the president or the executive director who sat onstage rise up and announce — even if just for show — that their tent is large enough to accept dissent?”
Uh…blood fervor? I’m just gonna skip that one. And move on to the fact that our leaders are also our members and:
A) have a right to their opinions, too
B) it wouldn’t necessarily been appropriate for them to condemn others viewpoints — their job was to listen
And they didn’t condemn. As John writes: “They sat. They let the threat carry the day. I got the message.”
I hope you got the message! It was pretty clear. Our leaders (and the membership) don’t think we should be airing our dirty laundry in public for the AMPTP to use to strategize so they can defeat us. And the problem with that is…what again?
Dissent is fine. I mean, why does John think we were at that venue in the first place? If our leaders wanted to talk to US, they can e-mail us or hang out on the line. We were all there to commune. To share opinions (including dissent)…and the members – which includes our leaders – weigh in with their feelings.
My favorite example: Anyone remember that yahoo at the beginning of the meeting (yeesh, now I’m thinking maybe that was John?) who suggested that the WGA were “fools” for having actual writers on the negotiating committee (remember that “lawyers; fools; clients statement?). When he said that, we all kinda boo’d.
That’s how the system works.
People stand up and say things. If we like it, we applaud. If we don’t, we boo. Booing is good. It doesn’t mean dissent is not welcome, it means the membership is weighing in with how it feels with that particular point of view!
Which brings me to yet another faulty conclusion John has reached: since others do not agree with his other faulty conclusions…well, then it must just be dissent that we all hate! Yeah, that’s it! It’s not that we hear his arguments and think they’re bunk…we just don’t like people who disagree with us! It’s groupthink if you disagree with John!
Hello? Bueller?
I could go on…but I’ll end with my favorite contradiction.
JOHN RIDLEY: “I’m done with the strike. I’m done with the two unreasonable sides”
So the WGA is unreasonable? Or maybe he actually meant to say…
“I don’t blame the union for the direction the strike has taken. It was the Assn. of Motion Picture and Television Producers that walked away from the bargaining table.”
…which, actually, he DID say – three paragraphs up.
Go John PLEASE!!!
It is a weak self-serving defense, like most of his diatribes.
And if Hollywood is so sick of the WGA, Hollywood should get the AMPTP to come back to the table and give them a fair deal.
Until then, speak for yourself, and not for Hollywood…
How many of these Comments have been paid for by the AMPTP.
John Ridley… if you look at his HuffPost bio, it lists him (as does his NPR bio, and every other bio I’ve ever seen of the man), it claims that he wrote “Three Kings,” despite the fact that a WGA arbitration panel of his peers ruled that David O. Russell would get sole screenwriting credit. THAT is the real reason that Ridley hates the WGA. And if he’s such an in-demand writer that he can’t wait until the strike is over to work, what’s he doing writing comic books for $80/page?
This brother acts like he just came out of the closet. Like he huddled everyone around the dinner table and revealed to his parents and his wife that he is a homosexual. That we should care that he could be spreading a disease to his loved ones through heterosexual sexual contact with his wife and open sores all over his body that could come into contact with his parents. Remember, JR, DON’T ASK DON’T TELL.
NOTE to other writers thinking about going fi-core -Keep the shit to yourself especially during a strike action against the studios.
Butt instead John Ridley wants to urinate in every writers’ coffee cup on the strike linbe and make a grand public exit. Good luck on your scab rewrite for Pinkville. I am sure you will do a fine job.
On playing the race card: John Ridley wrote: I wrote an Op-Ed about the woeful lack of diversity in Hollywood and what little the guild was doing to rectify the situation. I got a personal call from then-WGA President Frank Pierson ripping me a new orifice for daring to take my disappointment public. The gist of his argument: If you haven’t anything nice to say about the union, then shut up. But, hey, what did I expect? If you shake the tree, you can’t get upset when the apples fall.
Hey, I am also a black writer and diversity in this business is lacking especially in the area of black writers. I want to bitch about that too but instead of just bitching I have decided to write better scripts. Plus of my activist work I can now use the documents I have within my possession called the Memorandum of Understanding that the NAACP, Latino Action Committee and the Native American Film In Television, Asian In Media Coalition signed with all the networks and most of the big 8 in 2001 to help level the playing field for minorities. The Memorandum of Understanding gives qualified minorities a contract to use to help get jobs as writers, directors, show runners, executives and even actors etc. So, using the lack of diversity as one of John Ridley’s excuses to go fi-Core is over playing the race card against his fellow black writers and to the detriment said blacks writers who are out on the picket lines.
John Ridley stated in the LA Times Opinion he wrote: “In December, I attended the general guild meeting in Santa Monica. Outside the Civic Center, before the meeting, guild members told me that I was not welcome and that if I went inside, I should prepare to be pilloried. During the meeting, one high-profile television writer announced to the membership that anyone who didn’t have anything good to say about the strike should shut up.”
John Ridley does seem to understand all strikes are emotional and painful by nature. The last thing anyone in pain wants to hear is a loud mouth saying the sky is falling! The sky is falling! We know the sky is fucking falling – tell us something that we didn’t know. But, what he should have come to the Santa Monica meeting with is solutions for change… Like how can writer remain united like a family and not start in-fighting with each other.
We do this by walking the picket line together – the million dollar writer and the 22 thousand dollar a year writer walking side-by-side. A true brother hood of unity. Not showrunner vs. staff writer or spec vs. term deal writer or director/writer vs. writer/producer.
Just think if an army soldier decided one day in Iraqi to go Fi-Core and start trading secrets with the enemy because they are paying better wages for sell-outs. This is called treason.
When you are in a War Zone – the hint of abandoning your troops is cowardly. But actually abandoning the troops on war time like John Ridley has done is an act of treason to every writer on strike.
The Golden Globes weren’t canceled because John Ridley decided he want to punish the Writers Guild for forcing him to join a union in the first place. It was canceled because SAG, the WGA, the fans were willing to stand for something much greater than their own needs – something bigger than themselves. THE FUTURE!
That wasn’t a weak defense at all. I completly understand him now. I don’t agree with him, but I understand his move more.
I have to be honest, ever since I saw how our union and the people here treated Leno, I’ve been disapointed. I am still for the strike, I will do what I am supposed to do, but I don’t like how we’re starting to handle ourselves.
I’m WGA, and I’m saddened to see that Mr. Ridley thinks of this only in terms of how it affects him. We’re fighting for ourselves, of course, but also future generations of writers. He seems to think that since he got his, he has no responsibility to the writers of tomorrow.
He can go fi-core. It’s sad, but he can do it. I hope he doesn’t write for struck companies while his fellow writers are on strike.
John seems pretty good with words, and there’s a word for that:
Scab.
I’m glad one writer of this opinion (and I’m sure there are many others without the same courage or conviction)who are sick of the WGA and all the time it has wasted (not to mention the money and jobs lost in the “crossfire”) has stood up and made himself and his dissent known. The strike is childish and ridiculous and John Ridley, like the rest of Hollywood, is done and over it already.