Reported for WGA picket duty today outside Fox at 47th and Sixth Avenue. I’ve never walked a picket line in my life, so circling a half block radius for four straight hours (minus ten minutes when the sainted Margaret Clark, one of my Pocket Book editors across the street, provided bathroom relief for me) was a new experience to put it mildly.
A ton of celebrities such as Robin Williams and Alec Baldwin showed up to express solidarity…on previous days. No one turned out for us today, so that kinda sucked.
At one point a guy with a microphone, identifying himself as being from Sirius Satellite radio, pulled myself and another writer, a distinguished looking older fellow named Michael St. Germain, aside and asked if he could interview us. We shrugged and said sure. He had a list of questions and the first couple seemed straightforward enough. But St. Germain was looking at him suspiciously and suddenly said, “You’re from Howard Stern, aren’t you.” The guy nodded. That immediately flipped a switch in my mind, so that–moments later–when the questions turned skewed (“If UPS makes a delivery to your home, are you forbidden from signing for it since you’re not allowed to write?”) I was able to roll with it rather than say, “Huh?” So that was lucky.
Met several staffers from the Colbert Report, which was also cool.
Will be back at it next week. I hope this doesn’t drag on, but suspect it will.
PAD
• 
Obviously, he doesn’t; by the same reasoning, PAD shouldn’t get royalties from his next Ðámņëd World novel—it belongs to the publisher. And sales of his next X Factor trade should all go to Marvel, and not to him.
This type of reasoning rests on three flawed assumptions: a) that writes are interchangeable parts, b) that writers bring nothing to the table, that the source of creative talent that viewers/readers want to see/read lies in the company or ownership and c) that the owner/writer is inherently adversarial.
While the latter is a common mistake (one that is shared by the studios), the first two is surprising to see here, on the blog of a comics writer, whose income is inextricably linked to being recognized as a major contributor to a title’s success and in field where it’s crystal clear that a writer or artist does indeed make a difference to the bottom line and are recompensed both before initial publication and afterwards.
(It also betrays a lack of knowledge of the legal niceties that ALL writers [prose, graphic, film stage etc.] face when dealing with shared properties, in that contracts are often written so that while companies own the characters used in a piece of material, the exact script or story is owned by the writer, and that neither gets any usefulness out of a piece until they both get that work out together).
And the studios lose ownership as well as the cut to writers they are fighting for. If the studios could have made the same money from the import approach they get from the absolute control they are fighting for now, they would have a long time ago.
The studios have made a fortune from importing just British TV show ideas. Examples include All in the Family, American Idol, Three’s Company, Trading Spaces, Cosby, The Weakest Link, Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, Whose Line Is It Anyway?, Dancing with the Stars, The Office, Queer as Folk, and Sanford and Son.
Should the strike go on for long, Joe’s scenario seems likely. I don’t know how much money they are losing from not having come up with the idea for American Idol on their own but does anyone seriously believe they aren’t thrilled with the truckloads of money they are making from it?
Bill, the examples you gave were all of shows where the ideas were imported, but the shows were still remade by American crews, including American writers.
And importing stuff isn’t a guarantee of sucess. There are a lot of other British imports that failed. The same people who turned “Steptoe and Son” into “Sanford and Son” also brought over “Coupling”. Coupling was a terrific show on the BBC, but the American version did terribly even though it had virtually the same scripts.
Somebody get me a picture of a cat so I can LOL CAT it with:
BLADESTAR FIZED MY COMPUTER!
(yes, I know it was a typo, but comedy, inadvertent or not, demands proper presentation)
PAD –
I don’t listen to Howard Stern (I find nothing appealing or entertaining at all about him) so will never see/hear the interview with you.
But I’m curious. What was did your answer to the UPS question?
– Sean
PAD –
I don’t listen to Howard Stern (I find nothing appealing or entertaining at all about him) so will never see/hear the interview with you.
But I’m curious. What was your answer to the UPS question?
– Sean
Jason, I agree–I was just pointing out that the idea that Hollywood would resist bringing over foreign shows for financial reasons seems dicey at best, given the track record.
And if they bring over British shows and british writers…especially “reality” shows that are supposedly non-scripted (although we all know that’s a lie)…
I mean, is American Idol really in any danger of being canceled due to the strike?
…but not with the money the studios are withholding from the writers, otherwise there wouldn’t be a strike. English scabs aren’t going to solve things for the studios any better than American scabs.
Bill, sadly none of the ‘reality’ shows are in any danger because of the strike. The writers on reality TV are not part of the union, and so aren’t part of the strike.
I’m not sure how they get away with using non-union writers, though I expect the why has something to do with onscreen writing credits. Though, I have very little love for reality TV, and so don’t really pay much attention to it, to know more. Anyone out there have a clearer picture?
“Jason, I agree–I was just pointing out that the idea that Hollywood would resist bringing over foreign shows for financial reasons seems dicey at best, given the track record”
That’s just the thing, Bill. The track record clearly shows that the studios *don’t* consider it a good idea, financially.
All the shows you listed earlier could have been broadcast on American TV. They would have had to pay licencing fees, but they would not have had to pay for sets, actors, crews, or anything else. So it would have been much cheaper for them to bring shows over than to make new shows.
But they haven’t, because they don’t think they can make money off of that.
The belief is that Americans are very reluctant to watch anything from another country, even one that speaks the same language. For years the only place to watch Doctor Who was on PBS, and that was the most successful direct import. Now we have “BBC America” on cable, but how many cable stations even run it? And Doctor Who is on Sci-Fi, but far less people watch it in this 300,000,000 person country than watch it in 60,000,000 person Britain.
Plus, it’s not something that can be done super fast or super short term. BBC America and Sci-Fi channel had to work out contracts with the BBC for all those shows. I’ve read BBC producer interviews talking about that, and it isn’t an especially long process, but it definitely isn’t an overnight solution. It would take a few weeks or months. Then the BBC producers would want contracts for a decent commitment of runs, meaning that if the strike ended the next day, the American stations would still have to run the BBC shows they signed up for.
There could have been an influx of British shows in the last strike, but there weren’t. They could have used those shows directly even without the strikes, but they haven’t. If they’ve never done it before, I doubt they’ll start now.
It was Sal Governale who asked you the Questions. They played the recording of it on Howard Stern this morning, then Howard interviewed the writer/producer of The Illusionaist about the Strike. I can’t believe that was you!
I went back and looked up the news item I referenced earlier, which was posted Thursday:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117975626.html?categoryid=2821&cs=1
The article actually starts out talking about how studios could turn to top-tier British screenwriters to work on their projects, but by the end, it’s also discussing television as well:
“The London grapevine is abuzz with gossip that marquee American producers have been scouting for non-WGA writers for film or TV projects they would funnel through British production companies. Hollywood’s majors have lodged discreet inquiries with agents and lawyers about the availability of their clients.”
But as it applies more directly to television, the article goes on to say:
‘In the U.S., it’s clear that WGA members shouldn’t take non-union work. In the U.K., it’s far from clear where to draw the line. A British writer, whether a WGA member or not, is surely free to write a local TV drama for the BBC or Channel 4. But what if that drama is sold to a U.S. network to fill a gap left by strike action? Or what if it’s co-produced by HBO?”
Now that I read this piece again, it actually raises more questions than it answers, some of which have already been brought up on this site by previous posters. Even if the US networks ended up in London with a blank checkbook, it seems unlikely that we would see any British product on our screens very quickly. And by the time those deals were finally signed, the strike could well be over, which means the studio is suddenly stuck with product that they didn’t really want.
All of that being said, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Variety (who haven’t exactly been pro-writers in their coverage) could have been fed the whole British Invasion story by one or more studio heads who wanted to get that veiled threat in print. Only time will tell if any of it proves to be true.
> the writers are owners of valuable property
In point of fact, the most valuable property is the original concept for the show/film. Yes, the writers can then make or break it depending on their skill in bringing the characters and story to life, but without the original creator, they’d all be out of work. Yes, there are writers who, as with JMS come up with the concept, flesh it out, and then write for it, but just as often, if not more so, someone else does the first and others then work in their playground.
>It’s really not the same thing. *Somebody* is going to get paid every time a DVD is sold.
And the cab driver keeps getting paid every time he gets a fare which he wouldn’t if the cab hadn’t been fixed. Should the mechanic get a cut of the fare?
> If more people buy the DVD, then those people pay more money.
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know. Of course should a writer demonstratably aid in seeing a series’ popularity go through the roof, they’re free to negotiate for more money when their contract is up for renewal. Why should it be any different for DVDs?
>Plus, it’s not something that can be done super fast or super short term. BBC America and Sci-Fi channel had to work out contracts with the BBC for all those shows.
One has to wonder. These strikes aren’t something which comes up literally overnight. The potential is there some time in advance. You’d think the studios would have contingency plans in place. Of course, if they don’t then they deserve what the strikers can do to them, if only for stupidity compounding their greed.
And the cab driver keeps getting paid every time he gets a fare which he wouldn’t if the cab hadn’t been fixed. Should the mechanic get a cut of the fare?
I’m not sure I understand the analogy. The mechanic does not create–he fixes something that has been created. That he does so helps the cab driver make his or her living but that’s why they can charge what they do–when your car breaks and the mechanic gives you the estimate you have to decide whether or not the benefit of the fixed car is worth the price. I don’t see any valid argument that the mechanic deserves anything above and beyond that compensation.
The writer creates. The actors–who often get residuals–are mouthing the words the writer creates. The directors–who sometimes get residuals–are visualizing what the writer created. Etc etc.
I don’t think it’s wrong that the producers get the lion’s share of the booty. They took the risk. But the writers have every right to ask for as much as they are willing to fight for.The strike is unfortunate and the fact that so many are losing their livelihood because of it is even more unfortunate–but isn’t the fact that so many people, big and small, are in trouble because the writers are refusing to write just proof of their value?
And the one thing I have no doubt about is that the producers are lying through their teeth when they say that there is no point in asking for a cut of money from the internet because there IS no money being made from the internet–if that were true then they must be stupid–this has already cost them a fortune. Why would they take that hit over something that would not cost them money? If I were a boss and my workers threatened to strike unless I guaranteed that they would get a cut of any future dirigible movie showings I’d gladly agree in exchange for some small concession on their part. We’d shake hands and I’d think “Idiots…”
No, their are fighting any concession on this “money losing” medium because they have a pretty good idea of where things are heading and there’s a load of money to be made.
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know. Of course should a writer demonstratably aid in seeing a series’ popularity go through the roof, they’re free to negotiate for more money when their contract is up for renewal. Why should it be any different for DVDs?
Actually, There was a time when writers did get paid a good bonus for books that sold over a certain number. Don’t know if it’s still in place or if any books even sell enough to trigger it any more.
Also, you can argue that the comic writers–at Marvel and DC at least–are creating an addition to an already created Universe. If I create the next great Spiderman villain and it becomes as popular as Venom is the credit all mine or do I have to admit that in large part he’s popular because he fights Spiderman?
At any rate, the writers ARE negotiating for more money now that their contract is up for renewal. Increased residuals seems as good a expectation as any, given how many others participates get them.
Heard the Howard Stern interview this morning and was not impressed by the writer who was actually responding to those questions (pretty sure it wasn’t PAD). Yes, I realize that this is very serious to those involved in the situation–and that a goofy question can sometimes throw somebody for a momentary loop–but to simply repeat over and over again in an annoyed tone of voice that the questions were “frivilous” isn’t exactly a first-rate, writerly response.
The creative solution of navigating the laws of mechanics to propel a car to deliver people does not belong to the mechanic who fixed the cab. The rights of the car-configuration belongs to the patent-holder for the life of the patent, and patents don’t obstruct the application of the car in harvesting revenue by delivering people. Therefore patent-holders have no leverage in taking a cut of cab fees.
And no patent-holder operates without teams of engineers, and no engineer works for a patent-holder for free. They all get paid as writers get paid for their creative contributions. car manufacturers take care of their creative contributors with merit-based compensation in ways the studios seek to deny their writers. Your analogy does not apply.
Sorry, what you know is not what is happening.
Titles above a certain level do get royalties (not as many as in past years, true, but still). Titles below a certain level do not get royalties, but I’m pretty sure when they get reprinted in trade, writers/artists get a cut of that.
Now, for a philosophical point…
THis is soooooo wrong. The writers and actors DO make or break a concept. Thee is no concept that is so powerful that it can exist in isolation; it is ENTIRELY in the execution of the idea where a series lives or breathes. Ideas are dime a dozen—the real key is when an artist (writer, artist, actor) breathes life into it and makes it live for an audience. And THAT’S what makes an idea or concept valuable–how it is brought to life
Any fool can have an idea. A studio doesn’t pay for that. Nobody buys DVDs for ideas. Studios pay and consumers buy because the way the ideas are brought to life and resonate with an audience.
Or, to put it another way….
The studio owns the characters, and they make money on that—nobody disagrees on that. But a script is usually copyrighted by the writer (he/she are expressing a non-unique situation in a unique way, after all–basic copyright law), and the studio CAN’T use it without permission of the writer. Reissuing those shows in DVD form is like reprinting the script—and it’s long established that writers can and should get reprint fees if their articles get used again or is reprinted. So why is there such a resistance to writers getting their deserved reprint fees?
Posted by The StarWolf
In point of fact, the most valuable property is the original concept for the show/film. Yes, the writers can then make or break it depending on their skill in bringing the characters and story to life, but without the original creator, they’d all be out of work. Yes, there are writers who, as with JMS come up with the concept, flesh it out, and then write for it, but just as often, if not more so, someone else does the first and others then work in their playground.
Uh huh.
Producers – even if they have good ideas – would be pretty well out-of-luck without writers. As Willie Nelson’s song “Write Yur Own Songs” (from the film “Sonwriter”, which, despite being Very Funny, is almost a thoroughly-depressing textbook documentary on how the creative people get screwed): “If you think that’s easy, Mr Music Producer, why don’t you wite your own songs?”
And, speaking as someone who *is* a computer tech and also knows something about writing (both as a sometimes-practitioner-without-the-personal-discipline-to-actually-succeed and as the brother of one of the top-selling writers in the SF field and the friend/acquaintance of several others) – and about the music indusrty, for that matter – i can tell you that the reason mechanics and computer techs don’t generally get royalties and writerd and other creative types *do* is that there are a *hëll* of a lot more acceptably-competent mechanics and techs than there are writer, musicians and artists.
And have you looked at what unionised mechanics – especially in the airline industry – make as straight pay?
The same can be said of comic books. Yet, whether the book sells 5, or 500,000, the writer still gets paid the same, agree-upon-in-advance sum as far as I know.
Guess what? Comics creators have had royalty contracts for years. And then there’s creator-owned properties like, oh, “Fallen Angel”.
And writer whose books actually *sell* make most of their money off royalties – i forget what book it was that Stephen King took a one-cent advance on to make the contract binding; he knew he was going to make millions on royalties anyway and the tax picture was better if the whole thing came in in royalties over time instead of in a huge lumpadvance and somewhat lesser royalties…
Except on work-made-for-hire, generally what an author gets paid for a book on delivery is an advance against anticipated royalties.
Yeesh, Mike Weber, your brother isn’t David Weber, or the Honor Harrington and other series, is he? I love those books.
This WGA strike, and the idea of writers getting larger residuals, is a complex issue. I’ve probably gone back and forth as for being for it or against it at least half a dozen times.
Most of us being comic fans, we should be somewhat familiar with the idea of a creator getting credit…and money…for the continued success of their works. While on the contract side, we understand that creators like Kirby, Kane, Lee, and others in some cases “signed away” or sold their rights to their creations, fairness seems to dictate that they get more than an acknowledgement in the form of a credit when those creations go on to make hundreds of millions of $ over years and decades of publication. That sense of fairness leads to today’s greater acceptance and understanding of the retained ownership a creator has over a character.
Balance this against the workshop rules that developed legally, where the product of an employee while engaged in his job, using the tools provided by his employer, are at best jointly held, but in most cases the sole property of the employer.
Granted, WGA members are contractors, usually, and a different set of rules applies there, but it highlights how even the law shows this contrast when it comes to who can own an idea.
I’ll say I’m unhappy that this strike is causing non-union members to lose work. But I can’t say that the strike is totally unnecessary. Ideas are a dime-a-dozen…but good ideas are more rare. Unfortunately, the fickly American TV audience has shown that they aren’t necessarily interested in watching shows based on good ideas. And since the point of mainstream entertainment is to sell adds/make money, the studios aren’t interested in good ideas…they are interested in shows that sell air time.
I think it’s pointless to try and decide which creative person is most responsible for the success of a show. True, without the writer, there’s no idea to work on. But wihtout the actors, there’s no person to deliver the lines…without a director, nothing gets done. Wihtout the producer and studio, there’s nothing at all, because there’s no money to finance the thing. Without the set, costume, makeup, and sound people, there’s nothing to support the others into creating the illusion of reality, just actors up on a blank stage. It ALL has to come together in a seamless way.
And then, the audience has to like it.
I just don’t think the strike will be all that effective. My wife watches many of the so-called Reality shows of MTV. I joked with her last night that she’s the reason the strike won’t work, because it’s too easy for the studio to put on some garbage reality show…or even a good reality show…and people will watch. All the studios need are shows that pull in their 8-14 ratings share to maintain their current ad rate, and at least CBS could get that showing re-runs of CSI. The WGA needs to get the TV audience invested on their side, and I don’t think they’ve done enough to do that.
It was Sal Governale who asked you the Questions. They played the recording of it on Howard Stern this morning, then Howard interviewed the writer/producer of The Illusionaist about the Strike. I can’t believe that was you!
Aw God. Did I come across as a total moron?
PAD
The clip they played from the picket line was with a really uptight guy who was clearly not amused by the line of questioning. He used the word frivolous like a dozen times. Based on your description, I’m guessing the clip they used was from the first interviewee, not you.
Marvel just announced they’re charging $5 subscriptions for access to their comics they’ve started digitally archiving: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139548-c,onlineentertainment/article.html
Posted by bobb alfred
Yeesh, Mike Weber, your brother isn’t David Weber, or the Honor Harrington and other series, is he? I love those books.
Yup, that’s Rotten Kid Brother. Back in the late 80’s when his first book was languishing as other publishers (which ones deponent sayeth not at this time) either just sat on it for months without saying anything, or kept saying “Well, if you just made a *few* little changes … and shortened it by about 50%…”, and someone recommended trying it at Baen, i encountered Toni Weisskopf (who, as a regular at SF cons in the South for years, i’d known since she was 18) and she mentioned that Baen was actively looking for unpublished authors, and i said “My brother has this manuscript…”
(BTW – that first book, “Insurrection” – a collaboration with Steve White – paid out its advance, a rather unusual circumstance for first novels, and did it *fast*, too.)
Hmmm Well as a big David Weber fan, all I can think of is when will we see the next Honor novel.
Sigh. I always thought that Claudia Christensen would have made a great Honor years back.
The clip they played from the picket line was with a really uptight guy who was clearly not amused by the line of questioning. He used the word frivolous like a dozen times. Based on your description, I’m guessing the clip they used was from the first interviewee, not you.
Oh lord, no, that wasn’t me. Not remotely. I think the only time I use the word “frivolous” is in conjunction with the word “lawsuit.” Nor was that St. Germain. Must have been someone else altogether.
PAD
Well, Mike, if you don’t mind, let Rotten Kid Brother know I’m grateful that he and Baen met up, as I’ve really enjoyed the Honor Harrington books a ton.
Are you really a professional writer? Howso? “I WAlk THE LINE…” is horribly written. It’s loaded with sentence fragments and crappy grammar. “You’re from Howard Stern, aren’t you?” is an interrogative, and as such should be punctuated with a question mark, not a period. Que basura.
Posted by bob
Are you really a professional writer? Howso? “I WAlk THE LINE…” is horribly written. It’s loaded with sentence fragments and crappy grammar.
It’s informal writing that reflects speech. And even if it *were* formal writing, if it were intended to reflect actual speech, your creebing would still not be valid.
“You’re from Howard Stern, aren’t you?” is an interrogative, and as such should be punctuated with a question mark, not a period.
Actually, it’s a declarative statement couched in the verbal form of an itnterrogative. I.e. – “I know who you are.”
As Heinlein says in The Mon is a Harsh Mistress, people with a grammar/syntax fetish are annoying to those of us who actually *use* the language, but harmless – “Like dead yeast in beer.”
Posted by J. Alexander
Sigh. I always thought that Claudia Christensen would have made a great Honor years back.
I don’t see her as tall enough. Also, i visualise Honor as slimmer – more a young-Diana-Rigg type.
Now, Angelina Jolie, complete with eye patch, in Sky Captain was just about perfect – but that ain’t gonna happen, no matter what.
Ah yes, The Mon is a Harsh Mistress, that great Rastafarian masterpiece.
🙂
The writers and actors DO make or break a concept. Thee is no concept that is so powerful that it can exist in isolation …Ideas are dime a dozen— …Any fool can have an idea.
Sure, and many do. Good ones? That’s a whole other story. Also one forgets another element: the studio. Ever see the original pilot for LOST IN SPACE? MUCH better than what eventually made it on screen. Blame the studio execs screwing things up. The writers had nothing to do with that execution. Or the otherwise superb MURDER ONE which got fiddled with so much by the studio that it did the crash-and-burn by the second season. Since the studio heads had that much input, shouldn’t they also be getting royalties?
Acts of destruction are much easier than acts of creation. Just because someone is capable of messing up a show doesn’t mean he is as important to the good shows as the writers or the actors.
Jason-
I thought it was The Mon is a Hash Mistress….ducks and runs
Since the studio heads had that much input, shouldn’t they also be getting royalties?
In my not so humble opinion, all the studio execs should get is a smack upside the head for making the product worse.
Actually, isn’t it studio and actor “changes to the writer’s script” that made Star Wars 4-6 great, and then when Lucas was virtually “untouchable” that episodes 1-3 sucked?
Bladestar-
Sort of sideways on the Star Wars.
The Studio had jack all to do with any of the scripts no matter which one you are talking about.
There were a few adlibs yes but that was pretty minimal and typical for the time.
He had other people write (yes writers) the scripts for New Hope;Empire;Return and a good set of actors that could pull off the dialogue (Like Alec Guinness who made some really crappy lines sing like Shakespeare). Remember Harrison Ford threatened to strap Lucus to a chair and make him listen to his own script.
For 1-3 he wrote it and didn’t have a writer come in and clean it up for him. So the director/producer wrote the script and the Studio did have some say in the final product.
They played the clip on the Stern show this morning. Was that you talking PAD? “typist strike” that was pretty funny. After the fact were you amused by the questions?
Many people on this board have mentioned the prospect of scab writers coming in and either taking over the writing work on shows or creating new shows.
Although that is a possibility, i think that it is a remote one. Many production companies have to work within the union system as part of their rules and regulations and also writers know that there will be repercussions to their strike breaking. I remember hearing stories in the past of writers, actors or other unionized entertainers working as scabs. The unions found out and banned them from ever being part of the union.
If their not a part of the union once the strike is over and the union workers go back to work they’ll be put out of a job and will never have a chance to work again.
They played the clip on the Stern show this morning. Was that you talking PAD? “typist strike” that was pretty funny. After the fact were you amused by the questions?
I have no idea if it was me because I don’t have Satellite and even if I did I don’t listen to Howard Stern. I found the questions amusing at the time, although I was aware that they were designed to elicit confusion or fumferawing or otherwise make the person being interviewed sound like a jerk. So that shades one’s opinion.
Yeah, he tried to frame it as a “typist’s strike” when talking to me. My response was that you could refer to writers as “typists” in the same sense that you could refer to highly-trained and skilled surgeons as “cutters,” but it wasn’t a terribly comprehensive description, to which the guy responded–much to my surprise–“Okay, that’s a fair point.”
PAD
Also, as much as I think this might be a really good time for me to finish my screenplay and truck on up to say “Hey, I’m a writer, I’m not on strike, buy this!” I don’t think that I’d be looked on very kindly by, well, anyone. If people are going to hate me and say nasty things, I’d want it to be for the USUAL reasons.
Remember Harrison Ford threatened to strap Lucas to a chair and make him listen to his own script.
Did he really? LOL! I knew I liked Harrison Ford for a reason. 🙂
Bladestar – I’ll give you that the studio execs changes sometimes have a positive effect. But I have heard more examples of negative than positive. I cannot give specific examples at the moment (I’m at work), but I can say based on some interviews with Joss Whedon, that a studio’s influence is not always for the good.
Well, you know what they say about an army of monkeys and typewriters….
I think that’s an understatement. Almost all of the time, changes done for marketing reasons will weaken a script. And almost all of the studio changes for “artistic” reasons don’t work out either.
How about the studio insisting that the devil-like “Spock” character had to be dropped? How about any number of studio executives, from before Trek to today, who have clamped down on a show or a creator because the writing was “too smart” or “too clever” for the dim bulb fans? How about the editor telling Chris that, despite how it was written and despite the plans he had laid out, Jean had to die/be executed at the end of the Dark Phoenix Saga? How about JMS fighting with Turner executives because they thought the plot resolution for an episode of Crusade was too subtle for the average viewer and wanted it substituted with the Captain baiting a trap with the attempted rape of one of his crew? How about TV execs at Fox deciding that they didn’t like what they already couldn’t change, so they screwed Firefly up by running the shows out of order/in the order they felt was best for the narrative of the story? How about Marvel derailing writer’s story arcs for the latest pointless crossover?
Hey, what about all those TV and movie trainwrecks created by studio or executive committees to cash in on a popular movie, TV show or book that was birthed by a genuine creator?
I could add more and add lots more detail, but I have to get ready for work myself.
Later.
Even if the studios find replacement writers, I doubt many SAG or union directors would work with them.
Kath, you’re thinking of The Mon is a Hash Minstrel, the musical!
Re: All the examples Jerry gave
Thanks! My mind was drawing a blank on specifics aside from the Joss Whedon ones (must’ve been due to all these people at work who want me to do stuff on my breaks… What do they say? No rest for the weary.)
Roger wrote: Well, you know what they say about an army of monkeys and typewriters….
Yeah, and the monkeys tend to be more gifted.
How about the studio insisting that the devil-like “Spock” character had to be dropped?
Oh, and don’t forget the fight the studio won. That a female first officer wasn’t acceptable. Bah!
Okay . . . while I understand and admire the fact that you writers are standing up for yourselves and trying to get what’s rightfully yours, part of me would really just like you to get back to work and write stuff to entertain me.
Okay . . . while I understand and admire the fact that you writers are standing up for yourselves and trying to get what’s rightfully yours, part of me would really just like you to get back to work and write stuff to entertain me.
Here’s the funny part: so would the writers. They’d just like to actually get paid of fair amount for what gets sold via DVD (the place where most of the money is increasingly coming from) and anything at all on material that is streamed over the internet (the medium that everyone expects to be the next area where all the revenue is going to be).
In other words, while I will find it annoying/frustrating to miss out on some material for shows that I like, everything that I’ve read/heard has convinced me that the WGA is doing what it has to. Heck, maybe they should have done this the last time that negotiations were going on.
That said, I’m at a loss for anything that I could do that would make any perceivable defference.