MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

SAG Tragedy

I don’t have a whole lot to add to what I wrote almost 4 months ago (below).
Expect the threat of am industry shut down forced by an AMPTP lock-out to leak out over the weekend, probably on a blog. The threat will be intended to scare SAG voters to ratify, but may become real, as if a shutdown is coming, it will be before the fall TV season would normally start production for the fall. The AMPTP could deal with a May/June shutdown if it becomes necessary.
This contract is a disaster for middle-class actors and I am going to be disgusted when the anti-Rosenberg forces try, as they already have with some success, to pin it on him. This contract was function of an AMPTP that committed to a strategy that worked brilliantly with all the unions – divide and conquer – and the internal drama at SAG that took the focus off the very real problems with this deal.
As one radical in the union said today, “Now it’s up to the membership to take their union back!”
Good luck with that.
===========
Dec 22, 2008
The

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Responses to “SAG Tragedy”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    “I told you so” redux x5.

  2. doug r says:

    I don’t think there was a SAG back in 1008. No movies, no film emulsion, no electricity either. I believe women weren’t allowed to be actors then either.

  3. doug r says:

    Julian calendar, even.

  4. David Poland says:

    “Nothing of value to add” redux x3000.

  5. doug r says:

    Ok, now that the nitpicking is out of the way, I can see a future of many media outlets with smaller budgets giving everyone their 15 seconds of fame. Maybe SAG will morf into a performers rights union that guarantees certain minimums for performances vs times viewed. More like Equity, with far less stringent membership rules. You know, a real union.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon