Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Mandy Moore can tell the world that she received less than $1 in residuals for This Is Us streaming in Hulu, and everyone can see that amount is nothing, but where is the context to make us understand that she deserves anything?

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Is Mandy Moore part of the reason the show is successful? That’s why the Friends got $1M an ep.

It’s interesting that if “Friends” continues to generate money for Max, they now don’t deserve anything.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

$1mil per episode was their salary for Friends. Mandy Moore (and other leads) on This Is Us was eventually making $250k per episode salary.

When This Is Us streaming rights were sold to Hulu in a "massive deal" that money should've trickled down to pay residuals. If anyone has a contract on being based on streaming data, they should be paid for that in addition. So like Dooku is asking... what is the context. Was she not paid from that sale? Is she expecting even more from streaming?

Let's use Friends for example again. When WarnerMedia bought the streaming rights for 5 years for the show to be on HBO Max for $425 million ($85mil/year) shouldn't part of that money be go to paying cast and creatives? Let's say $15mil/year is set aside to pay out people from that sale money... $10mil divided up for main cast and creators...$5mil divided for writers and other actors. What should they be getting in addition? If Friends is the most popular streaming show on Max are the entitled to be paid based on streaming metrics? And if so, are they expecting it to be huge payday even if they've been paid from streaming rights sale? Now that these streamers have ads, does a more popular show only show ads that bring in the highest revenue? Is this being factored in to a streaming residual payment? There are a lot of factors and moving parts in the streaming space... and these companies don't seem to want to be transparent about it.


Here is David Denman (Roy from The Office) explaining that he just is paid in a "buyout" and not based on per views. He even says it isn't "Netflix's fault" but that they (the guild) doesn't have a current negotiated contract that works for them.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

One of the sticking points is that the streaming services do not want to be transparent. They have data on views and whatnot but then they can't "cook the books" when they claim 10 billion people watched the premiere of something. I don't think any streaming service really reveals their numbers besides number of subscribers, which is also seemingly the only metric that they base residuals off of.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Exactly. I mentioned this earlier. Once they are required to report actual stream numbers and their stock prices drop the whole streaming model implodes.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

I think that's where we're headed regardless. Streaming has ballooned beyond its means. Eventually they will have to consolidate or just shut down, with a few remaining.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

I agree with the guilds that creatives should be paid for residuals on products that are "evergreen." However, to play devil's advocate ... aren't they being treated just like most of the rest of us? They were paid to create a product or provide a service, like most of us. Most of us don't see any back-end income based on the performance or future values of the labor we provide no matter how much the firm profits down the road. Should auto-workers get a piece of used car sales? Should video game programmers get a piece of used video-game sales? Should cashiers get a piece of record company profits? Should healthcare workers get a piece of the billions of dollars of revenue generated from their every day work? Should a factory worker get a piece of record chip sales when a global pandemic boosts laptop sales? Should an oil-field worker see a piece when oil commodity prices rise? They were all already paid for the job they agreed to.

That said, I believe the answer to all that (and more) should be yes. Profit sharing and long-term compensation should be a much larger focus of labor unions and government requirements than base hourly wage levels. "Fuck you, I'm getting mine" is not a sustainable economic model.

On another topic being discussed ... I am OK with the streaming model imploding. It is a house of cards and is not tenable anyway. Total control from production to distribution does not generate enough revenue to justify spending billions on production to sell it for unlimited use at $10/month. We are seeing this with the recent moves to pull content so it can once again be licensed to other services. They need external sources of revenue. The methods to maintaining something similar to the existing model are: splitting production from distribution, limiting/reducing offerings on the service, and generating ad revenues.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

When movies started showing up as content on the new medium of television, the Guilds moved to create residual payments for film actors based on TV showings. It was not until the 1970s that residuals in perpetuity were instituted for the syndicated reruns of shows that originally aired on Network Primetime.

So, the idea or system that Abob Teff is wondering about is something that had to be made up. Why is this different than everything else in life, as Teff points out? It might have to do with the fact that the continuing value of a TV series as a commodity is dependent on the actors' presence and likeness in the work.

It would be interesting to hear from Ron Howard on this subject. He's might be one of the few living and working individuals who had a substantial body of primetime TV work being rerun for which he was not paid residuals. But if you are working today, you have never known any other way. Residuals for your work would be as common and normal to you as stop signs at intersections.

Now there is a new paradigm for content delivery, and people have figured out that the old rules don't fit anymore. As an interested outsider looking in, I just wish there was more information because I don't understand why the guy who played Kirk on Gilmore Girls thinks he should be able to pay his mortgage off work he did 15 years ago, but I am certainly more sympathetic to his plight than any CEO making $50 million a year.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

It sucks that Gladiator 2 was shut down. Ridley Scott is 85 so who knows how much time he has left to make movies. Maybe he's using the time to prep another project. Hopefully he'll be like Clint Eastwood who is still directing at 93.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

I'm using Friends as an example because it is a show that everyone can unquestionably understand still has value decades after it ended. So what are they getting? And what do they think they deserve? Provide actual numbers and information to help the public understand the issues at hand.

I'm old enough to remember when the cast of Gilligan's Island was talking about how they were all broke because they were so identified with those characters that they couldn't get other acting roles. But everyone thought they were millionaires because they were on TV everyday all over the world. However, their 1960s TV contracts did not include residuals fro syndication.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

The problem as I see it is they were paid for a job with the expectation that residuals would be similar to what came before. It's like if you suddenly outlawed tipping across the US without changing the base pay of servers, they would rightfully complain. Now whether they can agree to change that model for more upfront is the question, but it doesn't seem like either side is broaching that topic.

As far as "well why do they have nice things that I can't have" I know you're not doing this but a lot of others have mentioned that, like why is the union fighting for this and why can't they be more like us schmucks, which brings us back to the three guys eating cookies. It's how (for instance) pensions have pretty much disappeared from the private sector in lieu of the 401k, with that being used as an argument against public unions (why should they get a pension, I don't get a pension) and it's just more war between the peons while the rich eat cake.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

I have a side photography business. You can set up a lot of different scenarios with those photos. For the purposes of this discussion, I can either set it up so I get paid every time the photo is used (what the creatives want) or give all of the rights to the person or business I took the photo for to do whatever they want with it (what the studios want). There is also a middle ground that you see with a lot of wedding photographers - they give you the photos but you technically aren't allowed to take them to Walgreens to print off copies.

But going off the two main examples, it really comes down to the contracts and what the creatives want. If I take an incredible photo, I want to get paid for it for the rest of my life. If I take your headshots, I'm fine with just getting paid the one time. So while I understand the "why don't the janitors make money for every episode of 'Friends' then?" response, there is something unique and "owned" about your creative output that just isn't the same as the other jobs many people have.

The flipside is, of course, that those creatives are working in an industry that requires a great deal of personal sacrifice and uncertainty vs someone who is in a more stable position with a steady paycheck.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Eastwood's alleged "last" film Juror #2 was also shut down, it had a few weeks of shooting remaining.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Super-shitty thing to do, but since when is aggressively trimming trees on ones own property illegal?

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Using auto workers and cars is a bad comparison to be a contrarian. When you get tired of your car and sell it, you make all the money, not the car manufacturer or the worker who built it.

We’re talking about a pipeline of copyrighted visual entertainment that’s viewed either through linear or through the distributor’s app.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

They're the property of the town or county (I don't remember which) on public land.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Sean Gunn is not a good example to illustrate the plight of the common working actor. I really loved the character of Kirk on the Gilmore Girls, but I think the strike movement needs a "face" that isn't also the brother of a famous director who puts him in everything he does. And now he's also in charge of the DC movie universe. Sean Gunn and Jennifer Holland do not have to worry about their future acting roles.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

The public is used to seeing actors living in multimillion dollar mansions and such. How about showing the ones who can’t afford to live like that? “Lifestyles of the scraping to get by and slightly known”?

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

You can't get somebody nobody recognizes, so someone like Sean Gunn who is not like exceedingly rich and famous but is still recognizable for a few roles is as decent as anyone. Who would you suggest?

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Here you go.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Damn. Warner might delay Dune, Aquaman 2, and Color Purple until next year. I guess they don't expect the strike to be over by the time they need the casts to promote those movies. That will really suck for me for if Dune moves.
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/d...ke-1235676007/

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Anything to avoid paying people fairly, I suppose.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Yes, the much more sensible thing to do is decimate the fall theatrical exhibition, delaying hundreds of millions of revenue and costing more on revamped marketing campaigns. Not to mention all the films that were in production that are now halted... some of which now costing studios $600k a week.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

Scott Patterson.

Re: Screen Actors Strike 2023
 

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/dvdtalk...0e7556ffc0.png