Cannes: J.C. Chandor Sets Next Project ‘A Most …
Hannibal Classics Sets Cast For Nic Cage Pic …
Hammond On Cannes: Robert Redford’s Brave New Role …
Hot Trailer: Jennifer Aniston And Jason Sudeikis’ …
Warner Bros Tells Space Story, From The Bra Designers Who …
Brad Pitt’s Plan B Banner Promotes Jeremy Kleiner To …
Hot Trailer: ‘Don Jon’
Billy Crystal-Starring Comedy From Matt Nix & Larry …
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Dancing With The Stars’ …
Hammond On Cannes: A New Day Comes To The Fest As HBO and …
Cannes: Fleming Reflects And Finds Talented Trio A Breath …
Hot Trailer: ‘Man Of Steel’
Former Digital Domain CEO & Auditors Sued For Fraud By …
ABC’s ‘Nashville’ Undergoes Production …
CBS Wins Season & Ties Sweep In Demo; ABC Tops Adults …
Alki David Agrees To End Name Games With Aereo And Barry …
Next-Gen Xbox One Unveiled With Content Including …
Cannes: Weinstein Co Acquires Keanu-Reese Sci-Fi Pic …
Hot Trailer: ‘The Wolverine’
Ang Lee Departs FX Pilot ‘Tyrant’
How Many Times Does Seth MacFarlane Have To Say No To The …
This “No Strike” video featuring actors James Cromwell, Kaley Cuoco and former SAG Foundation president Mitch Ryan was made with an all-volunteer cast and crew. David Pringle and Eric Golden, owners of lighting manufacturer Luminys Systems Corp, organized the effort and served as executive producers:
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ... Loading ...
Great ad. Way to highlight the people who stand to get hurt of SAG goes through with its insane strike.
Why not just get a bunch of actors to crawl naked in the mud toward a corporate CEO lighting his cigar with a hundred-dollar bill? Pathetic ad. If these union members have a problem it should be taken up with their union leadership, not aired publicly. These quislings have no idea what solidarity and communal action is all about. Disgraceful, yes, but unintelligent more than disgraceful.
Hope this helps get the point across.
Well done Mr. Cromwell et al. We all would certainly like to see our workers compensated fairly. This is NOT the time to strike. Be patient. The time WILL come to negotiate for all of us. Now is most definitely NOT the time to do it.
Now can we show the film of the actor getting evicted from their home 3 years after a series run because they no longer profit from their art. Then split screen to the producer floating in their pool in the Hills laughing to a friend how they outsmarted those dumb actors and got to finally stop SHARING WITH them a few pennies of their profits!!!
The Screen Actors Guild is not a union of the film industry, it is a union of actors. The question any actor should be asking is, “If you accept the last and final offer of the AMPTP, what would be left of your union when it’s over?”
The wild card remains that the percentage needed to pass a strike vote is EASILY met by people who do not, and have not, made their living acting. These people have NOTHING to lose by voting yes (well, unless fewer people come to their restaurants) – the do not bear the negative incidence of their actions.
That this continues to brew, amidst the depression, and over an agreement which one guild already struck over, is only a testament to the intransigence of unions.
Bye bye residuals. It was a nice 50 year run while it lasted. The AMPTP wins again.
That’s nice. Great, long take, etc. And it illustrates what might/could happen – if we were to be forced to strike. And as a ‘Vote Yes’ supporter, I could agree with almost everything Jamie said – even though the wording was a little bleak to suit their position. Fair enough.
What it fails to address is what the outcome of voting ‘No’ is. Just saying “vote no or else… blackout” isn’t going to sway me. Tell me what voting ‘No’ means with regards to the current contract offer. Give me some “Vote no, and then we can…”, or “Vote no so that…” Because this video sounds like most of the ‘Vote No’ arguments, which sound like “vote no on the SAV and sign the contract offer from the AMPTP”.
Is that what this video means to say – “Sign the shitty contract”? Because for whatever reason, they didn’t say that, did they?
Fitting that they volunteered, as that will be the effective pay rate they’ll be working at if they achieve their goals.
Powerful stuff. Made me cry like when that mom got a call from her son in that old AT&T commercial. He called just to tell her he loved her, don’t you know.
Seems like they spent a lot of money to sell the idea that if SAG demands fair compensation from the record profits of the AMPTP the movie industry will crumble-which of course is true just like the middle class workers collapsed the stock market and the economy. Curses to that middle class!!
Or wait, no, that collapse was..wait who caused that? Oh, no I think that was mismanagement, greed of the rich and the crooked CEOs. Maybe if we all are willing to accept no money the CEOs will be OK. Let’s pull together and give the greedy corporations our salaries as garnish for their $700 billion.
Ppppppppplease. Better get used to “all-volunteer work”.
I will say the lighting was GREAT!
Luminys (who financed this anti-fair-wage commercial) parent company is Imagility–a corporation so worker and American friendly they just bought a factory in China to build their lighting equipment.
Seems like they may have their own plan for doing away with American industries that favors them paying workers merely a fair compensation.
As they say on their website:”…we empower management to realize its growth potential utilizing the resources of the entire Imagility group.” And so they do.
Was this shot under a SAG contract?
A shitty contract only will last 3 years. Many below-the-line/other industry jobs will never come back…
I think it’s interesting that Jason Bateman is apparently against an authorization to strike (http://www.nosagstrike.com/), and his sister supports the authorization (http://www.sag.org/solidarity-list). In that case, it’s not just a guild divided. It’s siblings divided.
Cromwell and Ryan and two of the most politically astute people in the business, and what they say is important. BTW, what they say isn’t “strike” or “no-strike,” it’s “keep working on it,” which is sensible and realistic. Besides, if there is a strike, can you imagine 10,00 actors auditioning to say “do you want fries with that?” or “paper or plastic?”
Like SAG cares. If they did, something would of gotten done in the last 6 months. It is 100% obvious to me that all they care about is dead presidents. SAG has had ample time to negociate a new deal or to of authorized a strike, yet as of today still nothing new. I honestly have no clue what has taken so long but the longer it takes, more poeple who need work to survive are going broke.
If I were in SAG, I would be thrilled with $759 minimum a day. Apparently that is enough for all these professional lairs with no talent. I guess they need to make more so when their shitty movies comes out that prevents them from obtaining new work, they would of already made enough off their bad performance that it wouldn’t matter. I know LA is expensive but when I have a job, even I can live off $500 A WEEK.
To all those who need residuals to surive or for whatever reason. Do a better job managing your money. Haven’t you ever heard of saving or investing? Based off perfomances, none of you liars deserve residuals. Maybe if you had talent then it could be justified.
I’m afraid the strife among actors has gone too far to make any solution possible, but is there anyone who can tell me why, from the beginning of these negotiations, SAG has undercut every, single thing its negotiating committee has tried to do? You don’t make a deal by telling your employer how much you want everybody to be friends and how much you want to help “the industry.” Do you think GE loves “The Industry” or you?? You don’t make strides forward against huge corporations by weeping about their fate if you stand up for fair contract terms. Do you really think the film business would “go away” if you gave yourselves some leverage by saying that you’d strike if you had to? Nobody wants a strike. Nobody. But because members of SAG undermined the negotiations from the start, the corporations can just stand back and watch the union self-destruct. TNT is now doing all of its pilots with the lily-livered AFTRA. The benefits and residuals are poor – every working actor knows this. Is this what you want? Well, you got it. Good work. Oh, and thanks a bunch from the rest of us, too, for making it harder for everyone down the road.
I love the fact that the writers go on strike and the entire town is behind them. To hell with “the man!” “FIGHT!” But the actors talk about doing the same thing (during a difficult economic time that they didn’t cause, have nothing to do with) and it’s “these damn actors are gonna strike and hurt everyone!” I guess being one industry means you support everyone until it’s not convenient for you to do so. We are one “industry”… one part goes down, we all go down. So we might as well band together and support all parts of that one industry as if we were one union.
At least there are SOME actors out there (you know, the real ones) who actually give a flying fuck about the people around them. Meanwhile, the strike mongers with nothing better to do are jerking off to the thought of destroying California more than it already is. I guess that beats actually, you know, landing a job. Wait until people start hoarding toilet paper. It won’t be long.
do any of you know the particulars of the freaking contract? all you knuckleheads who say shit like “bye bye residuals” do not understand this contract is up again in THREE YEARS. and it comes up at the SAME TIME as the wga and the dga. how about deciding NOW and PREPARING to band together and HAVE SOME POWER?
but this is too complicated because sag is full of self centered little whiners who don’t know how to think LONG TERM.
I personally didn’t know of anyone who approved of the writers strike and definitely not of the actors strike. If actors don’t feel like they make enough between gigs, then here’s an idea. If there isn’t enough work for actors then SAG and AFTRA need to reduce membership numbers. It’s difficult to break into a film Union in most cases. The reason for this is so membership remains low enough for the members to find work. Crazy concept, huh. The Unions aren’t here to find you work, make sure your house payment can be made or even that you have food to put on your table. It’s our job as independent contractors to find our own work based on our skill and work ethic. The Union’s simply is there to make sure we don’t get screwed when we land the job.
Where the hell are my residuals when my show goes down? It’s my blood on the back of all those set walls your acting in. Its my sweat steaming of the hot lamps lighting your precious faces.
On the bright side, after this is all over, I’ll start tipping extra for my waiter to dance to the kitchen to put my order in.
As a working actor for over 20 years, everytime I get a job I do this crazy thing….I save money. I know, a crazy concept but I save my money. How these people create this myth that there will never be more residuals, or even worse destroying other peoples ability to make money so you can get a check 4 years from now for $1.31 from the 2 lines you did on desperate housewives is beyond horrible. SAVE YOUR MONEY! And once again I want to see how voting yes is going to acheive anything. It is the same lies the brought about the commercial strike that completely destroyed commercial work in this town.
Infamous posted: “If I were in SAG, I would be thrilled with $759 minimum a day. Apparently that is enough for all these professional lairs with no talent… I know LA is expensive but when I have a job, even I can live off $500 A WEEK.”
I’ve made my living as an actor now for over a decade. This success has allowed me the ability to buy a house. So I have a mortgage. Pretty tough to find a budget that allows you to live on $500 a week when you’ve got a mortgage.
Maybe you shouldn’t be so harsh on other people’s talent or lack thereof. If you’re living on $500 a week (WHEN you have a job)… we might want to question yours.
So, that’s all you’ve got? Fear? That ad could have been straight from the AMPTP, or worse, the Bush Administration. It contained nothing that gives me, as an actor, any information. It was completely without content. It was only intended to scare – and that makes me believe you are standing on very weak ground.
What is it about the contract you like? What will we gained by voting “no?” What about his contract makes you believe it is okay?
Those are the questions that should be answered.
Oh, and next time your agent is negotiating with a studio, be sure to throw up a video online about how you would take any scraps the studio has – it’s the best way to go about things.
There are no unions in the town.