No soup for elaine, Kramer, and George on Seinfeld DVD
12-24-03, 01:43 AM
#52
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
The New York Times is now reporting that Kramer will be participating but he feels that the studio is treating him unethically.
Last edited by g; 12-24-03 at 01:51 AM.
12-24-03, 01:49 AM
#53
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
A 'Seinfeld' Star Will Do the DVD but Asks for Pay
By SHARON WAXMAN
Published: December 24, 2003
OS ANGELES, Dec. 23 — Michael Richards, a star of the hit television comedy "Seinfeld," says he will take part in the making of a DVD of the series, but he says he ought to be paid for it.
People close to Mr. Richards and his co-stars Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Jason Alexander said on Monday that the actors had decided not to grant interviews for the DVD because they were unhappy with the financial deals they have had with the show over the years.
"I'm not boycotting," Mr. Richards, who played Kramer in the series, said in a telephone interview late Monday night. "I'm involved. I was never called to do an interview. I am so for the DVD coming out that I'll go on the `Tonight' show."
But Mr. Richards said he thought he ought to be paid for taking part in the DVD project, in part because the show has been such a windfall for its creators, producers and distributors: Jerry Seinfeld, Larry David, Castle Rock Television and Columbia TriStar Home Entertainment. They will all share profits from the DVD.
Actors do not typically receive residual payments for DVD's, but this is quickly becoming a major issue in Hollywood, as DVD sales now bring in millions of dollars to those who control the rights to hit television shows and movies, far more than revenue from videocassettes.
Mr. Richards said: "I innocently asked a question. Is there some compensation? I don't believe there is. There isn't anything."
He added, "I think everyone wants to get paid," referring to his co-stars. "Is it honorable for those on the inside to make compensation? That's an ethical question they have to deal with. But I never heard back from anybody."
Mr. Seinfeld and Mr. Richards spoke together yesterday to mend fences. A spokeswoman for Mr. Seinfeld said: "Jerry and the other producers are profit participants of the `Seinfeld' show and do not control the ancillary stream of revenue. The owner is Warner Brothers, and Sony controls the syndication rights, which includes DVD sales."
Ms. Louis-Dreyfus and Mr. Alexander could not be reached for comment, their representatives said.
Mr. Richards said that he had spoken to Ms. Louis-Dreyfus on Monday and that she was noncommittal about taking part in the DVD.
To some degree the dispute may be about a lack of communication. Mr. Richards said he asked Mr. Seinfeld why he did not call when Mr. Seinfeld first heard that his co-stars had declined to take part in the DVD.
"I said, `Why didn't you call me?' " Mr. Richards said. "He said, `I should have.' "
By SHARON WAXMAN
Published: December 24, 2003
OS ANGELES, Dec. 23 — Michael Richards, a star of the hit television comedy "Seinfeld," says he will take part in the making of a DVD of the series, but he says he ought to be paid for it.
People close to Mr. Richards and his co-stars Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Jason Alexander said on Monday that the actors had decided not to grant interviews for the DVD because they were unhappy with the financial deals they have had with the show over the years.
"I'm not boycotting," Mr. Richards, who played Kramer in the series, said in a telephone interview late Monday night. "I'm involved. I was never called to do an interview. I am so for the DVD coming out that I'll go on the `Tonight' show."
But Mr. Richards said he thought he ought to be paid for taking part in the DVD project, in part because the show has been such a windfall for its creators, producers and distributors: Jerry Seinfeld, Larry David, Castle Rock Television and Columbia TriStar Home Entertainment. They will all share profits from the DVD.
Actors do not typically receive residual payments for DVD's, but this is quickly becoming a major issue in Hollywood, as DVD sales now bring in millions of dollars to those who control the rights to hit television shows and movies, far more than revenue from videocassettes.
Mr. Richards said: "I innocently asked a question. Is there some compensation? I don't believe there is. There isn't anything."
He added, "I think everyone wants to get paid," referring to his co-stars. "Is it honorable for those on the inside to make compensation? That's an ethical question they have to deal with. But I never heard back from anybody."
Mr. Seinfeld and Mr. Richards spoke together yesterday to mend fences. A spokeswoman for Mr. Seinfeld said: "Jerry and the other producers are profit participants of the `Seinfeld' show and do not control the ancillary stream of revenue. The owner is Warner Brothers, and Sony controls the syndication rights, which includes DVD sales."
Ms. Louis-Dreyfus and Mr. Alexander could not be reached for comment, their representatives said.
Mr. Richards said that he had spoken to Ms. Louis-Dreyfus on Monday and that she was noncommittal about taking part in the DVD.
To some degree the dispute may be about a lack of communication. Mr. Richards said he asked Mr. Seinfeld why he did not call when Mr. Seinfeld first heard that his co-stars had declined to take part in the DVD.
"I said, `Why didn't you call me?' " Mr. Richards said. "He said, `I should have.' "
12-24-03, 02:23 AM
#54
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Woodbridge, Virginia
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"All 4 actors entertained me for over 10 years. Not some executive that bought another company who owns the show. I'm the consumer, I think my money should be going to the people who have entertained, not the businessmen."
Wrong. These four actors would never have been sen by anyone had not those executives you disdain put up the money to produce the show and air it. The cast risked nothing. They are workers who were paid, and paid well, for their labors. They deserve nothing more. I am sick and tired of people forgetting that actors are nothing without investors who put up the money for their projects. Jerry and pals would be nobodies if someone had not financed their careers. So, stop demonizing the people who write the checks.
Wrong. These four actors would never have been sen by anyone had not those executives you disdain put up the money to produce the show and air it. The cast risked nothing. They are workers who were paid, and paid well, for their labors. They deserve nothing more. I am sick and tired of people forgetting that actors are nothing without investors who put up the money for their projects. Jerry and pals would be nobodies if someone had not financed their careers. So, stop demonizing the people who write the checks.
12-24-03, 02:24 AM
#55
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Woodbridge, Virginia
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think that those 3 actors are right. They DO deserve a piece of the action. I don't understand the hostility directed towards them when they are the ones who acted in the show, and they are the ones who would be doing the interviews. Why people think that the corporate "suits" deserve a piece of the action but the principles deserve a flat-fee is beyond me."
Because it was those "suits" who actually risked money, not the actors. Anymore stupid questions?
Because it was those "suits" who actually risked money, not the actors. Anymore stupid questions?
12-24-03, 02:26 AM
#56
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Woodbridge, Virginia
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I have no doubt that if ANYONE in here saw their boss get rich over THIER hard work, while collecting a small percentage of what their boss was making, they would bitch about it too."
Your boss pays your salary and has a right to profit from your hard work. If you don't like it, start your own business or move to a socialist country.
Your boss pays your salary and has a right to profit from your hard work. If you don't like it, start your own business or move to a socialist country.
12-24-03, 08:53 AM
#57
DVD Talk Legend
Also consider that that when these come to DVD, there may be less showings on TV, and therefore their syndication money may be decreasing.
I think it is funny that alot of people think that these 3 should just do it out of the goodness of their heart or because they owe something to the show. That's laughable to me. They are NOT under contract to do any of this and if they want to negotiate for more money, so be it.
There has been a lot of talk about suits putting up the money and taking the risk, so they should get most of the dough. That may be true at the beginning and the early stages of the show, when the popularity was not determined, but this is a whole different situation. The popularity of the show has been determined, and the popularity has everything to do with the writers and actors, not the executives. The executives made plenty of money on the front end, throughout the show, and on syndication, and I have no problem with those who actually made this show what it is getting a little on the back end.
I think it is funny that alot of people think that these 3 should just do it out of the goodness of their heart or because they owe something to the show. That's laughable to me. They are NOT under contract to do any of this and if they want to negotiate for more money, so be it.
There has been a lot of talk about suits putting up the money and taking the risk, so they should get most of the dough. That may be true at the beginning and the early stages of the show, when the popularity was not determined, but this is a whole different situation. The popularity of the show has been determined, and the popularity has everything to do with the writers and actors, not the executives. The executives made plenty of money on the front end, throughout the show, and on syndication, and I have no problem with those who actually made this show what it is getting a little on the back end.
12-24-03, 09:23 AM
#58
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cdollaz
The executives made plenty of money on the front end, throughout the show, and on syndication, and I have no problem with those who actually made this show what it is getting a little on the back end.
The executives made plenty of money on the front end, throughout the show, and on syndication, and I have no problem with those who actually made this show what it is getting a little on the back end.
12-24-03, 09:24 AM
#59
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally posted by Suprmallet
Yes, all four cast members were essential to the success of the show, but why complain now?
Do you also think every grip and boom operator on the show should get a piece of the pie? No? Why not? They were just as important, weren't they? A show without lights or running cameras or sound isn't much of a show.
Yes, all four cast members were essential to the success of the show, but why complain now?
Do you also think every grip and boom operator on the show should get a piece of the pie? No? Why not? They were just as important, weren't they? A show without lights or running cameras or sound isn't much of a show.
Analogy time: if a band records a CD, the execs and record company front the cost, and in return make 95% of the profit. But the band STILL gets some of the sales. It may not be much but they get something.
12-24-03, 09:58 AM
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by brizz
Except that syndicated reruns are always 1 or 2 minutes shorter due to longer commercial breaks and therefore incomplete. ... Besides, I remember Jerry saying in an interview that they were trying to locate outtake reals and stuff for the main bulk of the extras, that's about the only thing I'd really like to have anyway.....those are always hilarious.
Except that syndicated reruns are always 1 or 2 minutes shorter due to longer commercial breaks and therefore incomplete. ... Besides, I remember Jerry saying in an interview that they were trying to locate outtake reals and stuff for the main bulk of the extras, that's about the only thing I'd really like to have anyway.....those are always hilarious.
For example, in "The Slicer" episode, where we don't get to see Kramer freaking out because Elaine brings up clowns - which he is completely terrified of. It cuts to commercial right before he starts to react, even though that is one of the biggest laughs in a very funny episode.
I love the outtakes too, especially when people start to laugh after struggling to hold it in, it is so infectious.
12-24-03, 10:04 AM
#61
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by lucasorion
Those shortened episodes really cut out some good stuff, too.
For example, in "The Slicer" episode, where we don't get to see Kramer freaking out because Elaine brings up clowns - which he is completely terrified of. It cuts to commercial right before he starts to react, even though that is one of the biggest laughs in a very funny episode.
I love the outtakes too, especially when people start to laugh after struggling to hold it in, it is so infectious.
Those shortened episodes really cut out some good stuff, too.
For example, in "The Slicer" episode, where we don't get to see Kramer freaking out because Elaine brings up clowns - which he is completely terrified of. It cuts to commercial right before he starts to react, even though that is one of the biggest laughs in a very funny episode.
I love the outtakes too, especially when people start to laugh after struggling to hold it in, it is so infectious.
12-24-03, 02:35 PM
#63
Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by nightwing82
The actors deserve their fair share. All their characters were more fun than Jerry anyway.
The actors deserve their fair share. All their characters were more fun than Jerry anyway.
I'll be disappointed if this isn't worked out, but I'll still buy the disks. This is the only TV on DVD set I will ever buy.
12-24-03, 04:34 PM
#64
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Jason, Julia and Michael are doing what anyone else in their shoes would do; make a living. I would personally put my pride aside and do the interview and rake in a few grand, but that's from the perspective of a poor, broke joe schmoe, so take it for what it's worth.
On a side note, how did the cast of Friends manage to get 1mil per episode? Was that show really neck and neck with Seinfeld? I also read NBC offered Seinfeld 25million or some insane number, per episode to come back for another season, any truth to this?
wow
On a side note, how did the cast of Friends manage to get 1mil per episode? Was that show really neck and neck with Seinfeld? I also read NBC offered Seinfeld 25million or some insane number, per episode to come back for another season, any truth to this?
wow
12-24-03, 06:50 PM
#65
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actors do not typically receive residual payments for DVD's...
Quite certain this isn't true. Actors receive residuals based on a formula created in the mid-1980s for home videocassettes. It's the same regardless of whether its film or television and regardless of the format of the home video.
Personally, I agree with the actors that if they're wanted to contribute more to the project than what is already there, there's nothing wrong with being asked to be paid. Would it be nice if they went in and contributed just because they loved the show that made them multi-millionaires, etc. and wanted to be a part of something for the fans of the show? Sure.
But this is something completely new, new content that's being created, and there's nothing wrong with an actor requesting compensation for their participation in this new content. The shows can still go to DVD without this new content and will likely sell just as well as they otherwise would have with new content.
Quite certain this isn't true. Actors receive residuals based on a formula created in the mid-1980s for home videocassettes. It's the same regardless of whether its film or television and regardless of the format of the home video.
Personally, I agree with the actors that if they're wanted to contribute more to the project than what is already there, there's nothing wrong with being asked to be paid. Would it be nice if they went in and contributed just because they loved the show that made them multi-millionaires, etc. and wanted to be a part of something for the fans of the show? Sure.
But this is something completely new, new content that's being created, and there's nothing wrong with an actor requesting compensation for their participation in this new content. The shows can still go to DVD without this new content and will likely sell just as well as they otherwise would have with new content.
12-24-03, 07:27 PM
#66
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by cdollaz
Business also works like this...
These 3 can choose to be involved in this project or not as they are not under contract to do so. Therefore they can ask any price they want and they studio can accept or refuse. The producers and suits owe them nothing, but they in return are also owed nothing by these 3 actors.
Business also works like this...
These 3 can choose to be involved in this project or not as they are not under contract to do so. Therefore they can ask any price they want and they studio can accept or refuse. The producers and suits owe them nothing, but they in return are also owed nothing by these 3 actors.
12-24-03, 10:52 PM
#67
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Home of the Maize & Blue (Ann Arbor, Michigan)
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by vegasbaby
With or without those 3, I'm in.
With or without those 3, I'm in.
12-24-03, 11:21 PM
#68
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 2,278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cdollaz
There has been a lot of talk about suits putting up the money and taking the risk, so they should get most of the dough. That may be true at the beginning and the early stages of the show, when the popularity was not determined, but this is a whole different situation. The popularity of the show has been determined, and the popularity has everything to do with the writers and actors, not the executives. The executives made plenty of money on the front end, throughout the show, and on syndication, and I have no problem with those who actually made this show what it is getting a little on the back end.
There has been a lot of talk about suits putting up the money and taking the risk, so they should get most of the dough. That may be true at the beginning and the early stages of the show, when the popularity was not determined, but this is a whole different situation. The popularity of the show has been determined, and the popularity has everything to do with the writers and actors, not the executives. The executives made plenty of money on the front end, throughout the show, and on syndication, and I have no problem with those who actually made this show what it is getting a little on the back end.
IMO, the real "star" of Seinfeld was always the writing, specifically the contributions of Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld. The other principle castmembers were certainly better actors than Seinfeld, but any one of them could have been replaced and the show would have been fine as long as the creative core remained.
I don't think there's any question as to why Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David have been significantly more successful in their post-Seinfeld endeavors compared to the other three...
12-25-03, 05:45 AM
#70
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by EPKJ
"I have no doubt that if ANYONE in here saw their boss get rich over THIER hard work, while collecting a small percentage of what their boss was making, they would bitch about it too."
Your boss pays your salary and has a right to profit from your hard work. If you don't like it, start your own business or move to a socialist country.
"I have no doubt that if ANYONE in here saw their boss get rich over THIER hard work, while collecting a small percentage of what their boss was making, they would bitch about it too."
Your boss pays your salary and has a right to profit from your hard work. If you don't like it, start your own business or move to a socialist country.
And you have the right to be fairly compensated for your work right? So these three folks want to be fairly compensated for their contribution to this DVD set. The problem is that both parties don't agree on what "fair" is. So half of the people on this board have dumped on them for not taking part in this.What I was saying, if you could read, is that the average person would be annoyed in a similar situation. Anyone who doesn't agree with this statement is a damn liar.
12-25-03, 07:19 AM
#71
DVD Talk Godfather
what is the harm in charging $4 more dollars per set and making good with the cast. Give them a dollar a set. I mean really, this thing is gonna sell millions, they all know this. I'm betting just making a $1 per set sold for 9 seasons would be fair. Then everyone is happy.
Or hell even $8 more. $8 will not break me. But then again, I am used to buying the X-Files sets.
Or hell even $8 more. $8 will not break me. But then again, I am used to buying the X-Files sets.
12-25-03, 12:50 PM
#74
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's my question: How much was they offered for the commentary? It doesn't say. It just says that it wasn't enough.
As for this whole thing. Yes, Jerry got paid more. Producer? "Star"? Come on, of course he got paid more. Just like I'm sure Steve Harvey gets paid more on the 'Steve Harvey Show'.
As for this whole thing. Yes, Jerry got paid more. Producer? "Star"? Come on, of course he got paid more. Just like I'm sure Steve Harvey gets paid more on the 'Steve Harvey Show'.
