By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Unions & Guilds Applaud Extension Of California Film & Television Tax Credit Program

Posted Saturday, September 1st, 2012 - Comments Off on Unions & Guilds Applaud Extension Of California Film & Television Tax Credit Program
Be Sociable, Share!

For Immediate Release

August 31, 2012, Los Angeles – As a broad coalition of unions and guilds representing labor and the entertainment industry, we join together to welcome today’s passage of the two-year extension of the California Film & Television Tax Credit Program by both houses of the California State Legislature.

On the eve of this Labor Day weekend, we are profoundly thankful that our elected state representatives, led by Felipe Fuentes in the Assembly and Ron Calderon in the Senate, demonstrated their commitment to keeping jobs in California for the tens of thousands of men and women working hard to make a living in the entertainment community.  Their recognition of the critical importance of this industry to California’s economy through this vote, coupled with the substantial success of the tax credit program, will go a long way toward giving California the opportunity to compete on a more level playing field with the many other states and foreign territories that already offer generous incentive programs of their own.

We thank Assembly Member Fuentes and State Senator Ron Calderon once again for their leadership.  We encourage Governor Brown to sign the extension into law and look forward with great anticipation to a more stable environment for all the films and television shows that would prefer to shoot here in California.

  • California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
  • Directors Guild of America
  • International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees
  • International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 399
  • Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local 724
  • Professional Musicians Local 47
  • Recording Musicians Association
  • SAG-AFTRA

 – 30 –

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in Movie City News, Press Releases | Comments Off on Unions & Guilds Applaud Extension Of California Film & Television Tax Credit Program

Comments are closed.

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