|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
OK, I don't know who Page Kennedy is, but I watched a little bit of that video. I'm kind of torn by his presentation ... "Oh, here's a respectable one for $120 ... this one was a whole entire show, $60. Here is one for a popular show, $40. I guess that's gas money or some popcorn ... "
OK. However, he has been sitting on those checks unopened for four months. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Robert Carradine recently shared that he got a $0.00 residual check from Lizzie McGuire 4 years ago.
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
The recent episode of The Doughboys podcast has a pretty good opening about some of the other issues that are major concerns.
One is the studios wanting to pay an "extra" actor for a half day of work while the studio "scans" them to save their image to use in perpetuity without any further payment. The studio wants to use these scans for extras in the future. Actors also want to have control over the studios using AI or computers to change their performances or add dialogue they didn't say. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by DJariya
(Post 14303197)
Robert Carradine recently shared that he got a $0.00 residual check from Lizzie McGuire 4 years ago.
https://twitter.com/discussingfilm/s...ROaaX6I5S_8l2Q
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Stephen Amell made a lot of enemies and will probably kill his career
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
He's just really deep into his wrestling persona for heels.
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Understandably, there has been a lot of reaction to the comments I made this weekend about our strike. To ensure there is no misunderstanding about my thoughts and intentions I’m providing what I actually said and clarity/context to ensure my feelings aren’t unintentionally misinterpreted. We all know soundbites can be taken out of context and I have too much respect for my fellow union members to not clarify the record. What I actually said: 1 "I support my union, I do, and I stand with them." This doesn’t need much clarity: My support is unconditional and I stand with them. What I actually said: 2 "I do not support striking, I don’t.” What this means in full context: I understand fundamentally why we’re here. My off the cuff use of the word “support” is clearly contradictory to my true feelings and my emphatic statement that I stand with my union. Of course I don’t like striking. Nobody does. But we have to do what we have to do. What I said 3 “I think that it is a reductive negotiating tactic and I find the entire thing incredibly frustrating.” In full context: I’m an actor and I was speaking extemporaneously for over an hour. I emote, but I certainly don’t think these issues are simple. Our leadership has an incredibly complicated job and I am grateful for all that they do. Despite some of my terrible early acting work, I assure you, I’m not a robot. From an intellectual perspective, I understand why we are striking, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t emotionally frustrating on many levels for all involved. What I said 4 “I think that thinking as it pertains to shows like the show that I am on that that premiered last night, I think it is myopic” What I meant: Nothing about the strike is funny but if I may self deprecate for a moment. I have no clue what I was trying to say here and who says, “I think that thinking...?” Perhaps it was an inarticulate shoutout to our crew and cast, who mean the world to me. I’m simply sad that we don’t have a chance to celebrate a show that all of us figuratively and I literally, broke my back for. As I said from the jump, I want to ensure that my thoughts and intentions are not misconstrued. This situation reminds of the proverb, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions,” which apparently, after reading a limited amount of the commentary, is a place many of you would like me to visit. However, at least for the foreseeable future, I choose to stand with my union. When you see me on a picket line please don’t whip any hard fruit. - Stephen |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Reductive negotiating tactic? What does that even mean?
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Lots of people pissed at him on his Instagram calling him a scab. Granted, he hasn't crossed a picket line.
Of course I haven't seen anyone really high profile call him out yet. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Got a phone call from the Nanny, probably.
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by Decker
(Post 14303873)
Reductive negotiating tactic? What does that even mean?
Example: A person is on strike for six months. Loses six months income. The dollar value of the benefits obtained in the new contract fall short of equaling six months income in the long term. You make $100K a year. On strike six months you lose $50K. You negotiate a 10% raise ($10K). It takes five years to break even, earn back what you lost in the strike. Even longer with inflation. You didn't really get anywhere. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by rw2516
(Post 14303925)
The loss from a strike is greater than the gain.
Example: A person is on strike for six months. Loses six months income. The dollar value of the benefits obtained in the new contract fall short of equaling six months income in the long term. Yeah I saw an interview were Ice-T was talking about how the strike shut down SVU and that it's "messin' with his papers" * But that he supports the writers. He also talked about how when you see him on SVU on TV he gets paid and it's easy to figure out residuals out based on the shows airing, but it's running on Peacock Streaming and figuring out residuals is a mess because there's no transparency with streamers and their algorithms. (*costing him money) translated for you "non-urban*" folks. :p (*Urban = Code for Black People) :p |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by Giantrobo
(Post 14303932)
(*Urban = Code for Black People) :p
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
I understand Amell's frustration. His mistake is just saying it out loud.
For example, I am a straight, white male. I am active in the theater and improv scenes here in the Cities and have lost out on several opportunities because the production or show already had too many straight, white males (especially in the improv world). One of the directors is a friend of mine and candidly told me (when I asked about it) that was the reason I wasn't cast. I'm not super upset about it - I have gotten plenty of opportunities in my life that people of color or of other sexual orientations did not. But I can still be frustrated and disappointed that I don't get to perform as much as I like. I just don't post it in public where I'd be skinned alive. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by DJariya
(Post 14303876)
Lots of people pissed at him on his Instagram calling him a scab. Granted, he hasn't crossed a picket line.
Of course I haven't seen anyone really high profile call him out yet. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by Draven
(Post 14303946)
because the production or show already had too many straight, white males (especially in the improv world).
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by rw2516
(Post 14303925)
The loss from a strike is greater than the gain.
Example: A person is on strike for six months. Loses six months income. The dollar value of the benefits obtained in the new contract fall short of equaling six months income in the long term. You make $100K a year. On strike six months you lose $50K. You negotiate a 10% raise ($10K). It takes five years to break even, earn back what you lost in the strike. Even longer with inflation. You didn't really get anywhere. I really don't understand why every worker doesn't want to unionize. Management is not your friend. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by windom
(Post 14303965)
How can they possibly know which performers are straight or not? I would think that would be illegal to ask about in a job interview.
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Stephen Amell can forget ever auditioning for a David Simon show. ;)
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by DeFan
(Post 14303983)
You're assuming strikes are only about money. I worked at a salaried white collar job where we unionized (in Canada, never happen in the US). I used to get late night calls several times a week. After the contract was negotiated I got paid for those calls and suddenly they stopped. It was worth the money I lost in the strike.
I really don't understand why every worker doesn't want to unionize. Management is not your friend. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Does Stephen Amell want to be the most hated man among his peers? He needs to STFU
He says in the 2nd clip that he was one of the 2% that voted against the strike. |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
"I support my union, I do, and I stand with them." "I do not support striking, I don’t.” “I think that it is a reductive negotiating tactic and I find the entire thing incredibly frustrating.” |
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
How did this guy portray Oliver Queen for all those years... I guess that's good acting.
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Ha, damn. I was at that con all 4 days, but I did not go to his panel. I could have seen history :lol:
|
Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
Originally Posted by rw2516
(Post 14303925)
The loss from a strike is greater than the gain.
Example: A person is on strike for six months. Loses six months income. The dollar value of the benefits obtained in the new contract fall short of equaling six months income in the long term. You make $100K a year. On strike six months you lose $50K. You negotiate a 10% raise ($10K). It takes five years to break even, earn back what you lost in the strike. Even longer with inflation. You didn't really get anywhere. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:21 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.