Mark
CreativeMountainGames.com
Barendd Nobeard said:What would a Bollywood version of Heroes look like?!![]()
With an American geneticist?

Barendd Nobeard said:What would a Bollywood version of Heroes look like?!![]()
But you are looking at a highly skilled union vs a largely unskilled union. If the Daily show, for instance, has Bob, James and Jeremy the consistently funny and dependable writers who go on strike in solidarity with their union, sure, it's tempting right then to have Joe from accounting who's always wanted to be a writer put together some stuff for them, and maybe it won't totally suck.... but then Bob, James and Jeremy's union gets things worked out, and they say "We're looking forward to coming back, but this will be a union show again, right?" Joe is back in accounting pretty quick. And then, when every other show in town has their dependable, consistently good writers back on staff, if those writers say "you buy a script from Joe and you are telling us you don't want us back afterall"....trancejeremy said:And just how much would breaking the actually hurt a career in Hollywood. Wouldn't it just annoy the other writers, but not so much the directors/producers/actors? Inter-union solidarity really only flows from the bottom up, not the other way around.
For instance, I can remember several years ago, the local stadium workers were on strike. Yet did the baseball players union (or umpires) strike as well, or even honor the picket line? No, they still played in the stadium full of replacement workers. The writers are probably on a similar spot on the totem pole.
The actors are sympathetic to the writers, for one very simple reason - their own union's contract comes up for renewal next year, and they're also going to have to make a deal with the studios over compensation for digital media. The writers' contract is being looked at as a precedent for the deal the studios will make with the other unions, and that's likely why the studios are taking such a hard line with the writers. The few pennies the writers want for digital media don't mean much in and of themselves, but if the studios agree to give the writers a chunk of the digital distribution profits, they'll have to give out even bigger chunks to the directors and the actors next year.Barendd Nobeard said:I think you would actually find many of the actors sympathetic to the writers.
Barendd Nobeard said:I think you would actually find many of the actors sympathetic to the writers. A few years ago, the Broadway producers tried to reduce musician use (and use recorded music instead--makes perfect business sense because it's cheaper). The musician's union went on strike--no biggie, but the actors supported the strike and shut down Broadway for several days. So, if the Hollywood actors sympathize with the writers, a "writers only" strike can have a huge effect.
trancejeremy said:Or could they simply re-use old scripts for other shows and simply change character names?
Ranger REG said:One thing to be frightened of a prolonged strike:
Kid Nation sequels.
The same thing happened with Star Trek: The Next Generation. They began production during the 1988 strike using an old unused script from what was going to the Star Trek II television series (which eventually became the movie Star Trek The Motion Picture). They just changed the names Ilea and Decker to Troi and Riker and produced the 2nd season opener "The Child". They started to do that with another old Star Trek II script but then the stike ended and they were flooded with new scripts (that second Star Trek II rewrite was later finished and became the episode "Devil's Due").Glyfair said:During the 1988 strike they created a new "Mission: Impossible" series with Peter Graves leading the group as Jim Phelps (Greg Morris' son actually played the role of Barney Collier's son in the series). They only did 4 of the old scripts before the strike ended and had new scripts after that.