HOLLYWOOD ACTOR PREP by Dana Kaminski

Seventy-What ? Television Pilots, All AFTRA?

Gee. The Acting world is sure changing. The actors union drama keeps on twisting and turning.

Keep up, if you can…I’ll do my best to post everything I can, and to make it as simplistic and succinct as possible. If you find SAG stuff that would be good to post, good for other actors to read and know about,  please do let me know. This actor unions-in-flux will majorly affect all actors’ futures.I, too, think it’s cumbersome to figure out, and keep up with. But, even if ignored, it does play out in every actors life. And the less actors are involved, the easier it is to be taken advantage of. To lose out on things that matter as life goes onward.

Even if you aren’t union, now. You will be. Anyway: The unions set precedent, and standards, for how all actors are treated; should be treated.

Especially now, that it seems like lots of industry (and surrounding) professionals are expected to work for free, not just actors anymore! Just this week, some of the critics at Variety were let go. (Variety says they can get freelancers for almost nothing to do same writing…Seem familiar?)

Hang on to your hats, actors. And your union, if you can…Even if you find it faulty, or too much about legal-mumbo-jumbo, to understand or to care about…

It’s there, just under the logo at the top, in case you have a hankering to check into the Actor Union News part of Hollywood Actor Prep every once in awhile.

Here’s a link to it  today, so that you can read about ”The Dire Situation”, as Anne-Marie Johnson wrote.  Click here: Hollywood Actor Prep Union News.

Best,

Dana

List will be back up here this week. It appears this was fractured by my webhost, Hostgator. I am hoping they will get around to fixing it. (Yawn.)

SAG Indie Was Created So That SAG Actors Can Work In Low-Budget Movies

And…So Independent Films Can Use Professional Actors.

Remember Melissa Leo’s acting nomination, at last year’s Oscars?  Frozen River was a SAG Indie film.  I’ve seen her in at least 3 indies, this year.  Big acting roles, and smaller ones.

Here’s a video with Tom Bower, an actor who has been active in SAG for years. I filmed him at the end of an event at AFI. Tom helped create SAG Indie, at SAG; and shares all about it.

Indie Filmmakers Can Download The SAG Contracts From SAG Indie’s Website

SAG tailored SAG Indie, specifically, to the needs and ease-of-utilization; for low-budget, novice, or smaller films.

SAG even has incentives for low-budget films that use SAG Indie contracts. They also have incentives when for casting diversified talent.

Here’s the website address to the SAG Indie site. http://www.sagindie.com.  Here is a direct link to their PDF contracts page which includes contracts for short films, ultra low-budget, modified low-budget,  low-budget, theatrical and film agreement, and the SAG Basic Agreement. There are monthly informational meetings, as well, to teach filmmakers, and actors, how to utilize the contracts.

It seems like a great thing.  If anyone has experiential information, or an opinion on SAG Indie, I welcome it.  Let me know…

Best,

;~Dana

This may be a useful post for actors and filmmakers that you know. Please remember that the “fee” is to pay this forward…That is, to share .Thank you very much.

Basically, The Academy Of Television Arts And Sciences Announced This Week…

…That they were dropping the changes they were going to make in the format of the upcoming Emmy Broadcast.

In case you didn’t know, The Emmys were going to make the show part live,  and part recorded.

Now they are going back to the old way: live.

That’s all you need to know about the whole  deal.

If You Do Doubt The Power Of The Creatives In This Industry, Read On…

The Emmys said that they wanted to have the Primetime Emmys appeal to a more “general audience”.

Not sure how their proposed remedy would do serve to accomplish that; but they said that, amongst other changes, they would take 8 award categories and pre-record them.

Somehow, at available  moments, they planned to slip these pre-recorded Emmy Award Acceptances,  into the live show.  And example was given: Like when someone was walking from their seat to get to the stage to receive an award.

Yes, it does sound like too-much-fancy-footwork required.

Not by the Award-Accept-ee…but by the Emmys Broadcast techs, during the show…

But the Accidents-Just-Waiting-To-Happen weren’t what upset so much of  Hollywood’s creatives.

:: And the Actors and Writers unions.

:: And TV Writer-Producer Chiefs, Called Showrunners.

:: And the Cable Network Companies.

Whether Intentional Or Not,  It Looked Like The Real Quality Shows

That Happen To Come From Cable TV Networks, and That  Usually Win Emmys

…Would not win their awards, live.

Would they be relegated to a second string, B-level appearance, in the Emmy Broadcast?

…After having worked their butts off all year to make some very high-quality shows, that are Emmy-worthy?

They also thought that it appeared that since the Emmys are broadcast on one of the three major television networks (revolving each year), that it appeared that the Primetime Emmys may be trying to highlight  NBC, ABC, and CBS. So, even if those networks weren’t winning Emmys, they would somehow appear more important, to the Emmy Broadcast Audience.

[Apparently in prior years,  HBO and other Cable Networks had offered to broadcast  the Emmys,  for big bucks..Millions, But the Academy Of Television turned them down.]

So the Cable Television Networks complained.

The Directors Guild complained.

The Writers Guild Complained.

They didn’t want their writers cheated.  (See the funny thing they did, it’s in the article I posted below…!)

SAG Complained for the Actors.

They didn’t want their winning actors cheated, nor did they want the speeches cut or reduced.

And the TV Showrunners, who are the often the people who created these shows…

Just didn’t want their “babies” cheated out of full recognition.

Overall, it was an interesting debate,  with two very different sides.  It  wasn’t a simple problem either.

Some people reduced it down to money vs art.

I’m not sure, and we  will never know.

It doesn’t matter now.  Because a lot of the Hollywood Creatives spoke out, the Academy listened.

…And once again…

The Primetime Emmys Will Be About Quality Television.

Live.

And the shows that deserve awards, will have the live audience attention. And get the press.

And the evolution of television quality will continue.

[That's what I really care about.]

Here’s Some Industry Press Coverage  …

From The Hollywood Reporter:

It has been a season of reversals for the Primetime Emmy Awards. First, the ceremony was shifted from Sept. 20, only to be returned to that date two weeks later. Now, in an even bigger about-face, the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences has scrapped a plan to time-shift eight categories on this year’s broadcast after a firestorm of criticism from the creative community.

As a result, all 28 categories slated for the CBS broadcast will be awarded live.

“This decision was made to mend relationships within the television community and to allow executive producer Don Mischer to focus his full attention on producing the creative elements in the telecast,” TV academy chairman and CEO John Shaffner said. “Our goal is to celebrate the year in television and honor excellence and this year’s great achievements with the support of our industry colleagues and our telecast partner.”

Last month, Mischer proposed and ATAS’ board of governors voted to approve a time-shift of eight awards.

The proposal included mostly longform categories: best movie and best miniseries; writing for movie/miniseries; directing for movie/miniseries; supporting actor and actress in TV movie/miniseries; writing for drama series; and directing for variety, music and comedy series.

“We try to make the Emmys more relevant to mainstream viewers while honoring the choice of the academy properly and appropriately,” Mischer said at the time.

But the move drew criticism from the WGA, DGA, SAG and several networks, including HBO, which dominates the longform field. More than 100 writer-producers, including Shonda Rhimes, Seth MacFarlane, Matthew Weiner and John Wells, signed a letter protesting the decision.

That petition was the wake-up call for the Academy that created the momentum to scrap the plan, WGA West president Patric Verrone said.

“It’s important that the TV Academy appreciates the power that writers and showrunners wield when they work together and they are a force to be reckoned with,” he said.

…

“There will be more going forward to prevent unilateral decisions like this being made without consulting with a very important part of the creative process — writers,” Verrone said.

The creative community’s public outcry over the plan spilled into the recent Television Critics Assn. press tour, where talent and executives univocally condemned the idea and CBS execs were forced to defend it.

…

Mischer said the decision to keep all Emmy categories live “was made because ultimately it is in the best interest of the show” and “in the best interest of the entertainment industry.”

“We had attempted to make room in the show for more live performances. However, our community did not embrace the plan, which is a very important consideration,” he said.

This year’s Emmycast is a crucial one for the academy coming off last year’s ceremony, which hit an all-time ratings low, and entering the final year of its contract with the broadcast networks.

With ratings for other main awards shows rebounding, the academy and CBS have been looking for ways to liven up the telecast, which includes more categories awarded live than its counterparts.

Here’s the fun one, from Movieline:

Upon learning their categories would be relegated to the hour before the live Emmy broadcast, then rattled off in a video package as a time-saving measure, outraged TV writers mobilized. They [wrote up a signed document] called the Declaration of TV Writer Importance, which expressed their strong feelings that they be allowed to enjoy their moment live, with everyone else (and designated an area encompassing the Farmers Market and the WGA building as their sovereign homeland). Today, CBS and TV Academy have conceded, as the Emmys have officially abandoned the time-shifting measures.

Best,

Dana

Emmys Change Their Broadcast, SAG Speaks Out, Stands With Other Unions

From LA Times Aug 7 2009, by Richard Verrier

″

Now The Actors Are Griping About The Emmy Changes

Changes aimed at jazzing up the Emmy Awards aren’t going down too well with the Screen Actors Guild, the big labor union that negotiates contracts on behalf of actors. Their complaint? Actors — who love the limelight, after all — wouldn’t get the “recognition they deserve” under the award show’s format tweaks, the guild says.

The board of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences recently approved changes that would shorten the presentation of many movie and miniseries awards by allowing producers to air edited versions of acceptance speeches during the Sept. 20 telecast.

But the move has drawn fire from the Writers Guild of America, a number of leading TV writer-producers and the Directors Guild of America, which called the proposed changes a “material breach” of its agreement with the academy.

Now, the Screen Actors Guild has weighed in. David White, interim executive director of the union, highlighted its concerns in a letter Thursday to John Shaffner, chairman and chief executive of the academy.

“The Screen Actors Guild remains concerned about the recommended modifications which, if enacted, would reduce the level of recognition that our members, and other talent, have come to expect and appreciate through your program,” White wrote.

White urged the board to review further changes with “input from the guilds” to “arrive at a mutually agreeable solution to this situation.”

Please  Note:

Verrier  didn’t explain, correctly, the changes the Emmy show re-vamp is planning…

….Nor the consequences, that is actually, and viably, making the Cable Networks; and WGA, DGA, and SAG upset.

And also notice his “tone” when describing the situation–About the Emmy Show changes, he uses positive terms: “jazzing up”.

Alternately…Look at how he describes SAG: “big labor union”  (…as if SAG is just s0 very powerful, or does he mean big and bad?)

The word “Complaint” has a negative connotation; thus, he’s invalidating, belittling, the SAG side of the debate.

How about this: “Actors love the limelight, after all”…As if their “griping” is about attention, Plain-old-insulting.

Is he insinuating that the  major Hollywood dissent about the re-vamped Emmys broadcast, is merely Actor Narcissism?  Or just the Actors reasons for now joining the ranks of dissension?

–Not entirely, it appears.  Look at the wording he uses when talking about the WGA, TV  show runners,  and DGA: in their sparse sentence, he uses  professional, legal terms.

Even in the page’s title bar, he writes:

“…changes-aimed-at-broadening-the-appeal-of-the-emmy-awards-arent-sitting-well-with-the-screen-actors-guildthe-board-of-the-ac–dot–html”

Forget about the jamming of Internet Keywords!  He cuts his own words off, and makes typos…He just can’t fit all that bias inside the title bar…!

Is this what all the journalists are so sad to see become extinct? Journalistic integrity?

I’ll spell out the problems with the upcoming  Emmy Broadcast that almost everyone, along the professional strata, here in Hollywood, is “griping” over,  in a post, soon.

Best,

Dana

 

This is the official letter regarding the SAG run actor contract information meetings. Please note that it was posted by David White and John McGuire.  They were brought in by one faction of the SAG National Board, in what is referred to as a “Coup”.  Therefore, these meetings may or may not be presenting only the side of those that want the membership to vote “yes” on the contract.

Many working actor members, and SAG Board representatives, consider this actor’s Contract to be so potently bad; they are certain it’s acceptance will damage the acting profession.  That is, if the membership approves it, in the upcoming SAG-membership-vote of whether-or-not-to-accept.  

I will certainly be covering both sides of this SAG conflict over the AMPTP’s offer, during the next few weeks.

I’ll also be doing some actor contract explaining, and simplifying… Here, in the Hollywood Actor Prep Blog.

Dear Screen Actors Guild member,

As you know, the Screen Actors Guild National Board of Directors voted April 19, 2009, to approve and recommend to members, new, two-year successor agreements to the 2005 Producer-Screen Actors Guild Codified Basic Agreement and 2005 Screen Actors Guild Television Agreement.

Ballots will be mailed to all eligible members on May 19, 2009. Ballots must be mailed in the return envelope provided and received at the Everett, WA, post office box no later than 5:00 p.m. (PDT) June 9, 2009. Ballots received after this deadline, or at a location other than the post office box, will not be counted.

We are holding member informational meetings so that you can hear about the tentative agreement and ask questions. Member informational meetings are scheduled for Hollywood and New York as follows and will be announced for Branch locations next week.

HOLLYWOOD
Thursday, May 21, 2009
7 p.m. – 9:30 p.m.
Renaissance Hollywood Hotel
Hollywood Ballroom
1755 N. Highland Ave.
Hollywood, CA 90028

PARKING: No-host self parking at Hollywood & Highland – validation available at the Hollywood & Highland complex: $2 for 4 hours when you are validated in any shop, restaurant or theatre that is part of the mall. Guild not responsible for illegally parked vehicles.

NEW YORK
Monday, June 1, 2009
6 p.m. – 8 p.m.
Directors Guild of America
110 West 57th Street (between 6th & 7th Aves.) New York, New York

Unfortunately, no guests will be allowed. Parents/guardians of younger performers under 18 years-old are welcome. PLEASE BRING YOUR SAG MEMBERSHIP CARD FOR ADMITTANCE (paid thru April 30, 2009). For more information call the National TV/Theatrical Contracts Hotline (323) 549-6665 or email contract2009@sag.org.

Member informational meetings are also planned for Branch locations across the country. More information on Branch member informational meetings will be available shortly.

Please plan to attend the member informational meeting in your area to get important facts regarding the tentative agreement. Screen Actors Guild negotiators, national board members and staff experts will be on hand to provide a thorough overview of the tentative agreement.

You can also find more information on the upcoming referendum, including details of the tentative agreement, by visiting the TV/Theatrical Contracts Center at www.sag.org or by emailing contract2009@sag.org.

We know how important this contract is to all Screen Actors Guild members. We urge you to stay informed by visiting www.sag.org often, attending the member informational meeting in your area and contacting us with questions and comments.

Watch for your ballot which is mailing May 19, 2009, and when you receive it, vote yes and return your ballot right away. Don’t delay, ballots must be received by June 9.

In unity,

David P. White
Interim National Executive Director

John T. McGuire
Chief Negotiator

 

I urge you to sign up for email notification from Hollywood Actor Prep. It is safe, secure, and private.  Why do so?

There is so much changing and evolving, currently, that affects all actors.  If  you are interested in the profession, you may miss very important updates and info.  

I am also branching out this blog into other areas that you may want to participate in, it’s valuable stuff. I will invite and include those on the mailing list; before I do so, for anyone else. I may not contact the public at all.

So sign up…at the upper right corner of this page.

Best

;~Dana

 

Haven’t Hollywood Movie Studios Always Been Like Monolithic Powers?

Yeah. They have. That’s why the Screen Actors Guild came about, and why it was so necessary.  Actors have always needed protection from exploitation.

Which they were able to get, by all of the protections that SAG was able to put into place.  These protections were put into the “contract”.

What’s  happening now, is that the current contract has caused such dispute because some of these protections were removed from the latest contract; additionally, for new media, some of these protections aren’t included.

 

 

Hollywood isn’t owned by Hollywood anymore.

Some people think that when Hollywood was running Hollywood; then the community of Hollywood, and it’s actors, writers, and artists, had much more of a say. And that the powers that ran Hollywood had more of an interest in it, and everyone involved here.  More than just dollars and cents, and profits.  

Example: Sony was once Columbia Pictures. Sony is a conglomerate out of Japan. So Sony is not only not owned by Hollywood, it’s not even owned by Americans.

What was once 20th Century Fox Studios, is now called News Corp.  Why “News”?  Because it is owned by Rupert Murdoch, an Australian, who is a newspaper magnate.

Newspapers, both really trashy, and high level; globally.  Now, additionally, among other stuff like the Wall Street Journal… he owns Fox News, Fox Television, the Fox film studio, MySpace, Hulu, and on and on…

Apparently, he doesn’t even like movies.  Really. (I have a podcast that I will be posting so you can hear more about Murdoch…)

The point is not whether Mr Murdoch likes or doesn’t like movies.  

 

The point is this, if you don’t respect movies, then you probably don’t have much respect for actors.

I’ve got a list, that’s ready to post, that shows just how large these conglomerates are.

I’ll be posting that soon. There’s another change that is important to understand…

 

 

 

The film studios aren’t just film studios anymore.

Neither are the TV networks. They all used to be very separate entities. They were,until recently, based primarily on different coasts. Movies were West Coast; Television was East Coast.

Now, there’s ‘NBC Universal’.

And they all have internet stake.

And almost all, except one, are on Hulu.  

You probably know that Hulu doesn’t pay any of the actors that you watch on it.

So, the complaint is that if these companies can run content without paying the performers in it, then they will. By simply funneling it into the parts of their business that gets away without paying the actors.  Due to the ‘contract’ provisions concerning New Media.

Click on the ‘play’ arrow to watch the video:

 

 

More on this and the actor contracts, in my next posts…

In the meantime, please go and sign up on the email list at the very top of the right sidebar.  That way, whenever I add something to Hollywood Actor Prep Blog, you’ll be notified.

I also plan on doing some branching out this blog–Those that sign up will be invited to participate.

 

 

Best,

Dana

This is a reprint from a website called ‘Counterpunch’…

The Perils of a Faithless Membership

SAG Should be Praised, Not Assailed

By DAVID MACARAY

On Friday, April 17, after nearly a year of negotiating, a humbled and restructured Screen Actors Guild (SAG) reached tentative agreement with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) on a two-year contract.  The following Sunday the 71-member board voted to recommend the agreement to the membership. 

This contract is said to be no better than the one that’s been sitting on the table since last summer and virtually identical to the one accepted by Hollywood’s writers, directors and competing actors’ union, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA).

Because the original team (headed by SAG president Alan Rosenberg and chief negotiator Doug Allen) couldn’t get the deal it wanted, Hollywood is now piling on, accusing the previous leadership of having under-estimated the Alliance, misread its membership, and failed to anticipate the recession.  Indeed, people are now saying the negotiations were an exorbitant waste of time and money.

Those people are wrong.

First, to criticize SAG for not accepting essentially the same contract that was accepted by the writers, directors and AFTRA is to miss the point.  Yes, the WGA (Writers Guild of America) signed the contract, but they had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table.  Don’t forget:  They took a 100-day strike to avoid signing it.

Why did they strike?  Because the AMPTP’s offer didn’t adequately address critical issues, including New Media jurisdiction—an area which happens to be (along with residuals) one of SAG’s key agenda items.  And Rosenberg’s committee believed the Alliance’s “last, best and final offer” was still inadequate.  Second-guess them all you like, but don’t say they were wrong for wanting to secure the membership’s future.

Second, a quick look at the dynamics of contract negotiations tells us that there are two (and only two) considerations that matter:  fairness and attainability.  Obviously, what is deemed “fair” is subjective and is going to depend, by and large, on where you’re sitting.  What’s fair to the union may not seem fair to management.  That’s why you bargain. 

As for “attainability,” that can never be known in advance, because a union never knows what can be gotten until it sits down at the table and tries to get it.  Bargaining is not about sharing new ideas or reaching a consensus; it’s about trying to get very powerful and selfish people to part with their money. 

Also, it’s important to remember that if organized labor had routinely accepted management’s “last, best and final offer”—if they took as gospel management’s assurance that such-and-such was simply unobtainable—we’d still be working 12-hour days with no health insurance or overtime premiums. 

Third, management will use any excuse to avoid sweetening the pot.  When there’s a recession, they’ll use the recession; when there’s a hurricane, they’ll use the hurricane; and when the economy is healthy and everyone is prospering, they’ll give you ten reasons why that prosperity is irrelevant to your negotiations.

And finally, the union knows what to expect.  It knows that taking a hard line can be tricky, especially if management chooses to take an equally hard line.  On one side, you have management, fully mobilized and dug in; on the other, you have your usual mix of union people:  loyal members ready to battle, puzzled members wondering what’s going on, and nervous members ready to abandon ship at the first sign of trouble.  It’s Negotiations 101.

Similarly, union bargainers will be regarded as either weak and gutless, or belligerent and stubborn.  Unfortunately, there’s very little middle-ground.  If a negotiating team puts the membership in jeopardy by asking for a strike vote, they’re militants; if they bring back a lousy contract and recommend ratification, they’re wimps. 

So let’s get it right, people.  Labor relations is a contact sport.  Unless you take the view that your union should never fight, or that it should fight only when it’s assured of winning, you’re always going to risk having your butt handed to you in a sling.  But if you’re not willing to fight for a decent contract, you don’t deserve one. 

And not to rehash the past, but if SAG’s membership had remained faithful—if some of its big-name stars had not seen themselves as deputy ambassadors, and set off on their own bizarre, diplomatic mission—this bargain might have turned out differently.

Actually, it’s not over yet.  SAG’s membership could still reject the offer, which would put the AMPTP in a bad spot.  The Alliance can posture all it likes, but a membership rejection, particularly after a board recommendation, would be a body-blow. 

David Macaray, a Los Angeles playwright and writer, was former president and chief negotiator of the AWPPW, Local 672.  He can be reached at dmacaray@earthlink.net

You can view this and other op-ed pieces at …. www.counterpunch.org…

 

Here’s to free speech.

Here’s to overview, to vision, to intelligence. Here’s to succinct and talented writers who can see what only some can, and have a remarkable ability to put it into words, so that we all can see.  Here’s to you, Mr Macaray, for being so skilled that you wrote such a insightful and clear piece, and for being brave enough to speak clearly, and out; in an industry culture that not only doesn’t condone that, but also is fear-laden.  

Above all, I’d like to thank you, Mr Macaray, for having only a good intent.  And for publishing something, for others. Without any apparent personal gain.

I wish that I could say that about all the major parties that are involved in this negotiation.  I wish I could also say that about all of those who have commented, publicly; and even all of those who took on leadership positions in the union. 

I especially wish I could say that, even in a small degree, about the AMPTP and most especially, those people (businesses, corporations) the AMPTP union is representing.  

I urge everyone, when thinking over the SAG: AMPTP conflict, negotiations, offers, voting, etc.

…To remember to include personal gain factors in whoever’s side or opinion you are weighing…

…And true losses, as well.  

Some items on the contract look so glossy and good, and actually may not be.

Same with some of the people who are backing one side or another.

One item or another.

Even those that chose to report (journalists) or blog.

(All Next Week, We Will Be Discussing What The Points Of The Contract Really Say, And How That Can Affect You)

Especially, when you weigh the terms of the AMPTP offer, and if  you are a SAG voter, I urge you to remember to take care of yourself.  As actors.  It isn’t going to just happen. It isn’t all going to work out on it’s own.  Or in the future. 

One side is taking all they can, and has no apparent respect or regard for the acting profession, talent; and especially, does not seem to bear any ethical responsibility to you, in this business negotiation.  

You may be thinking of “fairness” while buying into delusions of marketing.  There is no “fairness” that is even being pretended, by the other side.  Look and see, for yourself.

If you disagree, please comment below, and let me know. I sure would appreciate feeling a bit better about the people who now run our industry, hold the power, and how they regard the talent.  Please, I want  you to!  Enlighten me, and my readers, as to how this is a decent conflict, with decency on both sides.  And that the AMPTP, and the studios, and the networks, have not only decency, somewhere, interwoven in their actions and intent…and that they aren’t knowingly causing harm to the acting profession, as a consequence. 

Thanks.

Here’s the Press Release that was issued by the Screen Actors Guild

…After the SAG board approved sending out these AMPTP terms, to all SAG actor-members,  to vote on.

I will be writing more about the terms of the contract, the SAG member vote, and the ramifications, in the near future.  My goal is to make the information easy-to-comprehend; and to put it in ‘laymen’ terms, and to talk about how it’s going to play out, in real life, for actors.

I’d also like to expose some double-speak, or  bull***t, where there is some.  In other words,  there’s a few points that look like wins for actors, but are actually losses.  There is hype about some things, and it’s really not the truth, nor the bottom line.  I’m not looking to make any wars or take any sides, I just wish to present the facts.

 

The Actors Will Vote On Whether To Ratify This Contract In May.

That gives SAG, and all actors, plenty of time to get a good understanding of what this all means, thoroughly.  For now, and for the future.

When the terms are sent to the SAG membership, there will be both pro-and-con arguments, sent along with that.  I’ll be posting that.

If there’s more necessary, such as things not covered, details, or simply what that means, in terms of work-a-day experiences for working actors, or pay, or even ramifications of increases, losses, and all that subtext of “putting off ’til tomorrow” stuff.  (…Uh, the Renegotiating-Later-Theme, that has been underlying this whole deal.)

SAG’s Press Release:

SAG President Alan Rosenberg Emails Actor Members

Not an April Fools joke…

 

 

 

 

April 1, 2009

Dear Screen Actors Guild Members,

As you read in a SAG email sent to you this morning, the Joint SAG/AFTRA Commercial Contracts Negotiating Committee reached a tentative agreement with advertisers early this morning in New York City.  I would like to thank and congratulate the hard-working staff member team for their unity and collaboration over the past months starting with the W & W meetings, and especially during the long 6 weeks of negotiations.  They who worked tirelessly on behalf of SAG members and I know each of them sacrificed time with their families, and work opportunities.

The advertising industry displayed a willingness to have labor peace, and to make compromises even during these challenging economic times, to keep actors working,

It is clear that when SAG members work together, unified and focused on common goals to benefit actors, we really can accomplish many things.

I’m gratified that we were able to reach an agreement with AFTRA and conducted these negotiations together. More details of the tentative agreement will be released once the Joint SAG/AFTRA Board has met. Please watch the SAG website at sag.org for updates and email your comments and questions to Contract2009@sag.org.

Again, congratulations to the professional women and men who gave their time and expertise to these critical negotiations.

In unity,

Alan Rosenberg
National President

Best, 

:Dana

Follow me on Twitter, for alerts as to when I post this blog, and for important actor news.

My Twitter name is __dana__. If you click on that, a new window will open at my twitter page. You can sign up for  Twitter by clicking on this.

This is a second video, a different one with Ed Asner featured, from the CBS Rally… 

…That I edited and posted for Hollywood Actor Prep, that is.  (The first is an interview and can be viewed by clicking here.)

I find this speech powerful.  

I  am typing out his words here; because they are so true, and so very moving for me.

Maybe all actors should keep this and play it back, from time-to-time. If you know any, please send it on to them by email, or post it on your Facebook page.

You can use the white “share/save” widget down below, and it takes just two clicks only for the whole deal.

 

What Ed Asner says into the megaphone:

…Warriors,

Keep up this wonderful demonstration, every week,

Thanks to Scott Wilson.

And I’ll be with you each time as much as I can

Right now I am going to get a blood transfusion

So that I can come back next week

Know that this is the righteous cause that  you are fighting for fairness

In an industry that’s usually been fair

But the great leaders of the past are gone

So by your demonstrating here

Hopefully you will make them produce leaders

Who have compassion

Who understand this business

And who appreciate actors 

Rather than machines

Don’t let the robots take us over

Either in management  or performance

You are artists

Never forget it 

Never forget it

         ***

I’d love for you to let me know what you think of this….

 

 

SAG Actors Rallies Are Now Held Every Thursday. 

Scott Wilson announced that the next SAG Actors Rally will be Thursday, March 26, 2009, from 11 AM to 2 PM, in front of the Department of Justice. In downtown Los Angeles: See map below.

 

 

“This rally is timely in light of the fact that the NLRB is investigating SAG Interim NED David White and SAG Board members on unfair labor practices because of their refusal to give members a chance to have a voice in their future: Whether voting on the AMPTP’s final offer, or a strike authorization. This is all part and parcel of a conflict of interest that is rampant in our industry.”

 

Letter from Scott Wilson regarding Actors Rally:

We are drawing attention to the fact that the handful of vertically integrated corporations who finance, distribute and exhibit motion picture and video productions, have gained unchecked control over the entertainment industry. They are denying the professionals of the Screen Actors Guild below star level -supporting actors, stunts, dancers, jingles, background – a fair participation in the rewards of this very lucrative business. In our collective bargaining process these giant corporations have demanded rollbacks that ruthlessly cut down the minimum safety net on which our membership depends – residuals, pensions, health care. All our unions have been impacted. Conflicts of interest are rampant. We call on the Department of Justice to investigate the anti-trust implications of these corporations that have abused their market power to disadvantage the entire creative community.

In solidarity 
Scott Wilson 
Henry Kingi

 

Directions for Actors Rally:

This week’s Rally is at the Department of Justice, 312 N Spring Street in Downtown Los Angeles on THURSDAY, March 26, at 11am-2pm. Public parking at the Olvera Street Market. The nearest Metro Rail station would be Union Station, from there head west on Arcadia Street or Aliso Street , turn L on Spring Street. 312 is on the first block of Spring Street after the freeway bridge, 3-4 blocks from Union station.

 

 

 

 

More from Sagwatchdog.net:

The letter to SAG General Counsel Duncan Crabtree-Ireland from the National Labor Relations Board is dated March 20, 2009. It begins, “This is to advise you that the enclosed charge alleging the commission of an unfair labor practice within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act…has been filed with this office.”

The letter asks for full cooperation and advises Mr. Crabtree-Ireland that a refusal to fully cooperate might cause a case to be litigated unnecessarily. It stipulates that the Region cannot honor any limitations, including claims of confidentiality.

It, also, states that all unfair labor practice charges are subject to prompt disclosure to the members of the public upon request under the Freedom of Information Act.

The charges in this case stem from a claim made to the NLRB, by a paid up SAG member, that his rights were being violated by interim NED David White and others on The SAG National Board, who were working against the membership by not getting out the contract to allow them to vote on it. The member included the Sixty Day Clause advising the NLRB that if no action was taken within the sixty day period, the AMPTP could arbitrarily impose the contract on the members.

Secondly, he advised the NLRB about his concerns of the “gagging” of SAG President Alan Rosenberg, and curtailing his ability to speak to the membership about what the member characterized as coup of our board by New York and the Branches.

The member, also, said that he was told that if any other SAG members had similar concerns they should contact the NLRB.

 

What I have to say about it all:

I don’t claim to understand much of this, and I have read conflicting arguments, and they both seem legal and logical. BUT, there is one major overriding issue, that trumps all the arguing, for me.

The AMPTP contract terms are terrible, for actors.  They rollback all so many advances that SAG has fought for, over the years, so that actors can make what they are owed (or a fraction of it, anyway.)  I think the contract terms are just unrighteous, and the power pushing by the conglomerates that now own the studios and networks is a whole new form of bullying. 

I believe, vehemently, that actors are artists. I am sure that artists should be paid, and treated as the contributors that they are, in society. I think artists should be valued. Actors should be valued.

I don’t think we should have to stand up to say that. Because it’s obvious. Unfortunately, we live in a culture where business reigns. It truly does, in Hollywood. (The same corporations who own the studios also own the entertainment journals–which is why you don’t see a lot of “pro-actor” coverage in the press…)

Therefore, we do have to stand up and say we need to be counted.  Someone has to say it, outright, and speak up.  The more, the stronger the message is…That we need to be paid.  That we deserve compensation, of “some of the pie”. 

As far as “negotiating later”…well, I lost so much money on the VHS/DVD contracts that were supposed to be re-negotiated once that “new media” showed how relevant and profitable it was going to be.  That never happened.  

I cannot allow fellow actors’ work to be broadcast anywhere, without them getting paid for it. I cannot allow the future of the profession to appear so dismal, as far as income goes.  It seems absurd to allow someone to keep all of the money, and not allow actors some of the profits.

So in the midst of all of this confusing chaos, I show up. Somebody has to.  For a lot of somebodies.  Who are actors. 
So that the conglomerates know that they need to count actors in, as they count all their profits. And as they plan, even more.

As they use, and plan to use, actors to work; they need to know that they need to pay actors, for this work.

The book was already a best-seller; before it was even published, everyone knew about it and was waiting for it.  

The book took 6 years of research; and for most of that time, the main characters were awaiting execution, in prison.

Much of that time, the author spent interviewing them.

 

 

Newspaper excerpt about their hanging.

Wednesday, April 14, 1965

Hickock, Smith Pay  
Extreme Penalty 
 
Pair Meets Death On KSP Gallows 
 
LANSING — Perry Edward Smith, 36, and Richard Eugene Hickock, 33, are dead. 
 Within an hour during this early-morning damp and chilly darkness the two men paid the extreme penalty on the unpainted but sturdy gallows at the Kansas State Penitentiary. 
 Hickock, 33, died first at 12:41 a.m.; Smith, 36 died next at 1:19 a.m. 
 It was almost 5 1/2 years since their conviction of slaying Herbert Wesley Clutter, a well-to-do wheat farmer, his wife, teen-age daughter and son at the lavish Clutter home west of Garden City, Kan., the night of Nov. 15, 1959. 

 

 

 

It was about a true crime, a gruesome crime.

In those days, authors were celebrities.

This author was famous, he was Truman Capote, and the book was “In Cold Blood”.

 

 

 

 

 

Within a month of publication, a movie version of the book went into pre-production.

The film studio wanted actors Paul Newman and Steve McQueen to play the killers.

Instead, the director, Richard Brooks, cast two unknown actors.

 

In Cold Blood Film Trailer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here’s Roger Ebert’s Review, from 1967, The Sun Times:

 

In Cold Blood

Release Date: 1968

Ebert Rating: ****   

By Roger Ebert / Feb 6, 1968

“In Cold Blood” is an eerie case. Not a movie. A case. The film itself, which is fantastically powerful despite its flaws, is the last episode in a chain which began eight years ago when the Herbert Clutter family was murdered near Holcomb, Kansas. Without that murder, Richard Brooks would have been hard-pressed to make this movie, and Truman Capote would have found little employment as the New Yorker’s ruraI correspondent.

When I was typing up the cast credits, I came to the line “based on the book by Truman Capote.” Some grim humor suggested that I could keep on typing: ” . . . and the murders by Perry Smith and Dick Hickock.” In an important sense, this movie was created by Smith and Hickock. They spent most of their lives compiling biographies that prepared them for their crime.

Perry came from a violent childhood. His mother drank, his father flew into explosive rages, he was beaten in orphanages. Dick came from marginal poverty, a rootless existence without values. So both were “victims of society,” in the way defense attorneys use that term. For their own victims, they chose the Clutter family — a well-off, middle-class, God-fearing family that, in every respect, lived in an opposite world.

If this had been fiction, the themes could not have been more obvious. Two opposed cultures collide. The outsiders kill the insiders in the first round, then lose the second to the hangman. But the film is not based on fiction; the Clutter murders actually happened. If you look at the list of characters you will find names like Herb Clutter and Perry Smith. Real names. Also featured in the cast are Sadie Truitt and Myrtle Clare playing themselves. They were citizens of Holcomb on the night of the murders, and they still are today.

Considerations like that make it difficult to review, “In Cold Blood” as a movie. This is not a work of the imagination, but a masterpiece of copying. Richard Brooks and Truman Capote brought technical skill to their tasks in recreating the murders, but imagination was not needed. All the events had already happened. And every detail of the film, from the physical appearance of the actors to the use of actual locations like the Clutter farmhouse, was chosen to make the film a literal copy of those events.

I do not object to this. Men have always learned about themselves by studying the things their fellows do. If mass murders of this sort are possible in American society (and many have been), then perhaps it is useful to see a thoughtful film about one of them.

And to the degree that “In Cold Blood” is an accurate, sensitive record of actual events, it succeeds overpoweringly. The actors, Robert Blake (Smith) and Scott Wilson (Hickock), are so good they pass beyond performances and almost into life. Many other performances also have the flat, everyday, absolutely genuine ring of truth to them. At times one feels this is not a movie but a documentary that the events are taking place now.

What does bother me is the self-conscious “art” that Brooks allows into his film. It does not mix with the actual events. The music on the sound track, for example, is almost conventional Hollywood spook music, as if these murders had to be made convincing. The sounds of the landscape — the wind and weather — would have been music enough. Again some of the photography is staged and distracting. We see Herb Clutter shaving, and fade to one of the killers shaving. We see Perry’s bus transform itself into a Santa Fe train passing through Holomb. Gimmicks like this belong in TV commercials.

Another of Brooks’ mistakes, I think, was his decision to write a liberal reporter into the script. This figure obviously represents Capote. He hangs around during the last half of the film, tells about Death Row, narrates the hangings and provides instant morals about capital punishment. He is useless and distracting. Brooks should either have used Capote himself or no one.

What we are left with, however, is a film that this Hollywood artiness does not damage very much. The sheer evocative power of the actual events and places sweeps over the music and the trick photography and humbles them. The story itself emerges as bleak and tragic as the day the murders first occurred. The questions raised by Smith and Hickock’s senseless crime and the deaths of their undeserving victims are still as impossible to answer.

Cast & Credits

Perry Smith Robert Blake
Dick Hickock Scott Wilson
Alvin Dewey John Forsythe
Smith’s father Charles McGraw
Herb Clutter John McLiam
Nancy Clutter Brenda C. Currin

 

 

Here’s an excerpt from a more recent review, from the LA Times:

 

 

MOVIE REVIEW

 

‘In Cold Blood’

Made nearly 40 years ago, Richard Brooks’ film version of Truman Capote’s book has been reissued just in time for  [2006]Academy Award festivities.

By Kenneth Turan

While the current film focuses on Capote’s personal relationship with killers Dick Hickock and Perry Smith, 1967’s “In Cold Blood” is almost entirely about the murder, the killers’ relationship to each other and law enforcement attempts to capture them.  In fact, no one named “Truman Capote” so much as appears in “In Cold Blood.” 

 

…Also portrayed differently are the two killers, with Robert Blake playing Smith and Scott Wilson as Hickock. Because theirs is the film’s most alive relationship, there is considerably more theatricality to these characters in the 1967 film. Smith and Hickock are more blown up, larger than life if you will, perhaps a trifle self-conscious but, with actors as strong as Blake and Wilson in the parts, always involving.

 

 

 

MORE ON THIS SOON…

What a time for Actors. What a time for Americans. What a time for American Actors…

Perfect time for some comedy (comic timing?)…with Jon Hamm playing Lex Luthor, in a comedy skit…

Because:

1. SAG is still infighting and still no strike, but an authorization vote may go out (on whether to accept the AMPTP puny-Contract, or not–called the “Poor Man’s Strike”) …but we still don’t know what is going to be, except we get a lot of scares like “Well the AMPTP could make us take their contract” (which may not be true) and p-r-e-s-s-u-r-e, like from A-List Actors who get paid so much and live inside such a lovely bubble, that they couldn’t begin to know how important the Residuals and New Media terms are.  

And that’s not even the half of all the SAG stuff, except…

2. The newer actors that should be the most interested seem to be, in fact, the least interested.  They are the ones who will be impacted the most greatly, by this current contract offered by the AMPTP (consisting of the TV Networks and Movie Studios)…and either these actors don’t know understand they are getting screwed out of a career, AND their dream…. I don’t know…Either way, SAG or  not, they aren’t showing up for the rallies…

3. It’s Wintertime. Even here, in Hollywood.  We have our extremely modified version, but it is still funkifying at times… Okay, so we have a mock-winter; but we can still get mock-Spring-fever.

4. America is in a Recession.

5. Personally, I am a bit too busy, and a lot too bored.  So let’s have some fun, shall we…

Jon Hamm as Lex Luthor, On The Recession…

Some Professional, Middle-Class Actors Made Videos About Issues Of Grave Concern.

Do you recognize some of these professional actors, in these videos?

They Are Not From The Press, And That’s A Solid Blessing, In This Case

The good news is, these videos talk about the real issues; and just how imperative they are…How damaging it will be to accept this ‘AMPTP contract’, for the future of all actors, and to the profession altogether.

 

These middle-class actors did the math.  

For you.

They looked over the legalese, and all the boring stuff, so you don’t have to…

Maybe it’s because they are real working actors.  

And, they’re not obscuring what is important, with all that other stuff…gossipy-drama that most of the press puts front-and-center; when discussing SAG, altogether. And, yes, even most of the bloggers do that too.  Even those that claim to be “an expert” on the topic.  (Um, those people that write those articles, aren’t actors usually.)

 

Like I say, often, here at Hollywood Actor Prep…it takes a professional actor…

It takes an actor to understand an actor’s life.

It takes one to know one.  It takes one to understand one.  And, it takes one to inform  and advise another.

It takes an actor to explain what the issues are, and how it can impact all actors…now, and in the future.  

So, here they are.  Here we are. 

 

The Actors. You. Me. All Of Us…Solidarity.

I appreciate you watching these videos, and thank you for taking a look at the issues.  And I hope you will tell others.

….That’s far more than what the journalists have been doing. Ironically.  (It appears to me, that most journalists may not even know what the issues are, or that there are issues and conflicts.  Is it reporter-laziness?  Is it just easier to make fun of Alan Rosenberg, or talk about this star or that one, than to research about the AMPTP? Or do they think it attracts more readers?? Lots of people say that the reporters are also paid by the same people as those on the AMPTP, like Rupert Murdoch…That may be true, but I don’t think it’s that complex….I think it’s just laziness.  It takes time & effort, to look into a contract. Takes none,  to ‘throw mud around’. )

 

I think that actors, profoundly,  contribute to our culture.

And, to be redundant, because I will say this again and again, happily.  

(And then… once more with feeling!)

I think that actors are valuable.  

I think that actors deserve to be paid. And to be regarded as valuable professionals.  

I think that actors deserve to be treated with dignity, and allowed to earn money and healthcare…a living.

I believe that every time an actor performs, that actor should receive payment.

And that includes performances live, OR recorded.  

I firmly believe, that when any venue, studio, channel, or internet station, : especially when they make money from sponsors/advertising, and the sponsors are paying for productions that feature actors, that the producers should compensate the actors.  

Elementary, right?  Well, they don’t plan to.  

That’s what this is all about.  

Surprised?

 

Call me a “hardliner”, but I don’t think exploitation is ever acceptable.

And, I do believe the AMPTP contract is exploitative. And, I think they are quite aware of that.  I think they know the inherent implications that come along with it.  

Are you aware that they are clear, that they, flat out,  intend to keep all earnings for themselves. While using the work of actors, to earn it.  And there are earnings, and these earnings are increasing, all the time.  Especially on the ‘net.

All the while, the actors, will be unpaid and impoverished, as a result. Really. Impoverishing them individually, and their families, and all the ramifications that come with that.

It will have a devastating effect on the profession of acting, altogether.  A career that is regarded as perilous already. Rendered utterly, truly, impossible.

The AMPTP, quite consciously,  created this situation.  They knew, all along,  that they were offering actors a terrible, lessening, deal.  

They also used a lot of PR, they hired marketing experts, even for the internet.(Look it up on Google, if interested in more details.) They knew that the timing was terrible for a SAG Strike; and they were able to use the current public economic fear, to their advantage.

So they’ve been paying a lot to feed the public some very persuasive, and mostly, obfuscating information.

To the max, they power-played… They played on the public’s insecurity about the economic situation of our country, to somehow flip it around…and make the actor the “bad guy”. They played on the fear that every actor lives with, and professional insecurity. 

(And, some of the problems were waged between actors themselves…because like any lesser class in any social social system, in terms of wealth or power; when the lowest classes can’t fight back, they fight who the ones they can. Themselves.  Especially when the pressure, anxiety, and potential loss, is so high.)

 

Generally, the acting profession is a mystery, for the public.

Unfortunately, that has served to weaken the interest, and the severity of the actors’ side, in this conflict.

 

The public regards the acting profession, in one of two ways:

• Illogical, and fruitless, as far as income.
  • or
• Overpaid movie stars.

That’s just not so.  There are many, many actors who earn a living; just a living, in the acting profession.

 

As for actors, well…most don’t even know the issues, themselves.

I hate to admit that, and to see such lack of interest too.  But, I think I know why that is…

That has to do with their professional stature. Because, at different caliber levels, the professional experience vastly differs. As does the actors’ personal life. Social experiences, too.

Interests, and goals, too.  Perspectives.  

Younger actors,  who are just beginning, only can focus on trying to get a foothold in, professionally.  They aren’t concerned with livlihood, not yet.

And, the very successful stars, well, you’ve heard some of their opinions…but the truth is, they can’t relate.

It’s so very far from their experience…They just don’t need to worry about dollars-and-cents, in their lives. Things like residuals, and even the internet, are not issues that have anything to do with them. And they do live pampered, cloistered lives. (They actually do.)  So they just don’t get it.

Even though they may appear to be wise, it is within the realm of their “blindspot”.  Their perspective is just too far removed from actors, on the other strata.

 

As actors, we can always use support, but it’s very necessary, now.  

And, we need solidarity.  So please, connect with each other, and inform each other. 

And public awareness. (Because if the issues & facts & ‘the math’ doesn’t make it into the press, then we can get the knowledge out there, right?)

Please send this post to your friends who act, or wish to. Professional or not.   

Because if it’s your profession, your life, then they should know.  And, it would be good for you to support that profession…

It may be that if we don’t consolidate, there may not-be-an-acting-profession in the future.

We must get the issues out to the public, because it isn’t happening in the media, otherwise.  

…The actors’ stance and SAG  is losing power, every day, as a result.  

Please email this post to your friends, it’s so-o easy and takes a second, only.  Send it to all of them, because it’s very important to get the public to know the facts. Put it on your Facebook page…Your MySpace…

Use the “SHARE” widget down below, the white one…it will take you right to your email or Facebook page, etc. Directly, too, no clicking around or filling in stuff…

Thanks, for all of us…

And keep the faith. 

Follow me on Twitter, if you don’t already….my Twitter name is __dana__.  (Twitter registration is the shortest…!)

 

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkmKbRSfTlI[/youtube]

Once again, I ask you to please share by emailing to your actor friends, and to others, as well. Actors need the public to know, and to be in support of the profession, right now.

Best,
Dana