Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles
1695 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 32 33 34 35 36 … 68 Newer→ Last
-
Whipp is a poisonous individual, little wonder Warners don't take his assurances about not sabotaging The Hobbit at face value.
He's more than willing to spend time and energy destroying a low budget indie short film to further his ambitions.
-
So......
Who's coming to the Rally of Hope tomorrow?
Rally to support filming of "The Hobbit" in New Zealand
RALLIES FOR ALL NEW ZEALANDERS, Industry & public on Labour Day Monday, 12.30 for 1pm-2pm!
These POSITIVE rallies of support are timed to coincide with the visit of Warner Bros. movie executives to discuss moving The Hobbit away from NZ. We're going to show them that we like them, we want The Hobbit filmed here and we SUPPORT Sir Peter.
These rallies will also emphasize the points other groups like film techs intend to make in the national media to influence Warners.
They are NOT protests against certain groups.
Invite ALL of your friends!!!
"Is the movie going to come or go? We don't know. Warners are coming here next Monday and we've got to fight like hell,"
Sir Peter Jackson. -
My mother had some interesting thoughts about this yesterday. She opined that perhaps PJ stirred up some stuff so that he could get the Gummint to pay for more of his film.Oh for fecks sake if the guy wants to lobby for an increase in film production tax breaks there are ways to do it besides a cluster-fuck that got The Hobbit global press for all the wrong reasons...
I'm not saying I agree with her, Craig. I just thought it was an interesting and reasonably credible thing for her to say.
I'm personally of the opinion that our AE has been manipulated by the Australian outfit. -
Who's coming to the Rally of Hope tomorrow?
Rally of Hope??????????
Jaysus give me hope. -
I'm not saying I agree with her, Craig. I just thought it was an interesting and reasonably credible thing for her to say.
Fair enough -- but I just can't see the logic of it, myself.
-
I sort of understand how she came to that conclusion. If one were using a conspiracy theorist lens, you could see how the MEAA stirs things up, and PJ takes advantage of it somewhat.
-
On Saturday I read an e-mail from an actor’s agent inviting my acting friend to consider dumping EA for a list of reasons and inviting him to join a new union forming on facebook.
Alas a massive head cold is now preventing my memory from being functional and I can not recall the correct name of the new union. Had the word 'creative' in it and steered clear of the now tarnished brand of 'equity'.
I believe the new union will be entirely wary of 'global rule one' when engaging with its international equivalents
-
I can not recall the correct name of the new union. Had the word 'creative' in it and steered clear of the now tarnished brand of 'equity'.
NZ Independent Actors Guild
-
I sort of understand how she came to that conclusion. If one were using a conspiracy theorist lens, you could see how the MEAA stirs things up, and PJ takes advantage of it somewhat.
There's been a bit of that kind of speculation here already, though without much in the way of supporting evidence. Over in the Dancing with Dingoes thread you've described your lady Mum as "somewhat of a linguistically oriented snob". Perhaps her opinion's based not on something that PJ may have said, but the way that he said it.
-
So ... an industrial action misfires SO spectacularly that there are public rallies in all the main centres to decry their action (or, at least, try to mitigate the effects of it) ... on Labour Day!
This must be something of an historic day for the labour movement in NZ. In a not-so-good way.
-
I sort of understand how she came to that conclusion. If one were using a conspiracy theorist lens, you could see how the MEAA stirs things up, and PJ takes advantage of it somewhat.
If someone insists on shooting themselves in the foot, it would be churlish to interfere. But the downright apoplectic chap who did Campbell Live last week, sure doesn't look like the Machiavelli of Middle Earth to me. Then again, Jackson might have missed his true calling on the other side of the camera. :)
-
And just when you think The Standard can't get any more bizarre -- here we go:
Would Warners and Jackson really walk away from the $100 million that Watkins reports they have already invested in this project in New Zealand? Would that much of the spending actually take place overseas anyway given that the expensive stuff – the special effects – will be done by Weta Digital here in NZ?
First, I'm sure Tracy Watkins is glad to be downgraded from Key-fellating Tory tool. :) But, yes, I have no doubt that if push came to shove Warners would "walk away" from New Zealand without a backwards glance -- just as happened when the first unit work on Green Lantern shifted from Sydney to Louisiana without missing a beat.
-
Oh, Craig. I just think there are many perspectives out there, and as in many situations, everyone has their own truth. Whether you be PJ, or Warners, or the actors who wanted to shut the thing down, or the actors and crew who really don't see the point in putting on the kaibosh. Mum's opinion is just an opinion, as are all the opinions on these 28 pages. Some people who have commented here have no knowledge of the thing, some have a bit, and some are involved a bit more. Unless any one of us is PJ or Robyn Malcolm or, god forbid, the Whigg man, none of us knows what's going on, really. So in my opinion, it's all just speculation.
-
If one were using a conspiracy theorist lens, you could see how the MEAA stirs things up, and PJ takes advantage of it somewhat.
That does appear to be where the unons have gone with this.
Given that Peter Jackson had tried to make sure the films would be made in NZ since he genuinely likes working here and he has considerable loyalty to the local industry it's very hard to see why he would conspire against himself to have the films made overseas.
As for money, PJ would be getting a fee plus residuals that are not influenced by whatever money the govt throws at Warners. The residuals that the actors will be getting are based on box-office takings not profits and I guess that's what PJ will get as well. No-one would rely on the studios determination of profit if they didn't have to.
-
Given that Peter Jackson had tried to make sure the films would be made in NZ since he genuinely likes working here and he has considerable loyalty to the local industry it's very hard to see why he would conspire against himself to have the films made overseas.
Let's not forget, too, another way in which Peter Jackson makes a lot more money making the films here: he owns Stone Street Studios, Weta Workshop and Portsmouth Equipment Hire. He has a huge amount invested in those facilities ... all of which he rents back to the studio film he's making here. To suggest he somehow profits from making the films off shore is ludicrous.
Wherever he makes the film, every time saves on expenditure he doesn't pocket the difference ("Oh, picked up another grand for myself.") His fee will be his fee, his back end will be his back end. Everything between now and then will be going toward making the biggest and best film he can (improving its chance of success, improving his back end -- and the back end of the actors getting some). Every dollar saved goes back on the screen: another day's shooting, another helicopter shot, another CG creature etc ...
-
...it's all just speculation.
perhaps on blog threads but in the conflct itself these haven't been speculations, they've been accusations made against PJ on the basis of zero evidence. It's no way to run industrial relations.
-
I said a few days ago it appeared that the union might have had a swifty pulled on it by Warners. I do think it's possible that Warners has taken the opportunity to exploit the weak position the actors founds themselves in after they caved on their demands, perhaps as an extra slap to SAG.
Or maybe Warners really did tell Jackson they were coming down to pack things up. Perhaps they'd already made that decision. Maybe they manipulated the timing of the announcement.
But that was after a month of stonewalling and dicking around while a boycott stayed in place. And the union has to own the consequences of its actions -- even the unintended ones.
And now, on Labour Day, public sentiment is such that there will be large anti-union rallies. Ouch.
-
And now, on Labour Day, public sentiment is such that there will be large anti-union rallies. Ouch.
anti-incompetent-union pro democracy rallies IMO
-
Given that Peter Jackson had tried to make sure the films would be made in NZ since he genuinely likes working here and he has considerable loyalty to the local industry it's very hard to see why he would conspire against himself to have the films made overseas.
Or he could long ago have take the option of fucking off overseas, a la Donaldson (no relation), Ward, Tamihore, or Karl Urban, rather than working out ways to pull work back into NZ. I'm sure he profits handsomely from it, but it's hardly the easy option.
And now, on Labour Day, public sentiment is such that there will be large anti-union rallies. Ouch.
Well, anti-AE, perhaps, but yes, AE have certainly done a bang-up job of acting like every almost negative cariciture of unionism. About the only things they haven't managed are links to organised crime.
-
About the only things they haven't managed are links to organised crime.
Well, Roy Billing says he's on the MEAA board in Aussie, and Billing was in Underbelly: Mr Asia, so....
-
I said a few days ago it appeared that the union might have had a swifty pulled on it by Warners. I do think it's possible that Warners has taken the opportunity to exploit the weak position the actors founds themselves in after they caved on their demands, perhaps as an extra slap to SAG.
Or maybe Warners really did tell Jackson they were coming down to pack things up. Perhaps they'd already made that decision. Maybe they manipulated the timing of the announcement.
Jackson pretty much addressed this point on Campbell however. It's possible he doesn't know they wanted to relocate, but unlikely. I'm inclined to think they intended to shoot in NZ but hadn't signed off. Maybe they wanted more inducements too but I've not read anything to suggest they wanted to screw actors - isn't the agreement for residuals an indication that wasn't the motivation? Perhaps that was an easy sop instead of offering more secure employment (which gets to the issue of what the underlying international IR arrangements are in this industry).
But that was after a month of stonewalling and dicking around while a boycott stayed in place. And the union has to own the consequences of its actions -- even the unintended ones.
Listening to Malcolm and other actors, I believe they genuinely wanted to improve the conditions for less vulnerable workers. I think that's both admirable and precisely why you have a union. I'm only sorry that their agenda has been exploited by Whipp who clearly has other objectives.
While I'm at it, I commented a long time back that I was pleased the CTU got involved. They are professional IR advocates and generally take a very constructive approach. Kelly's comments about Jackson though sounded nothing other than churlish.
Cool heads were needed, she should have been one of them.
And now, on Labour Day, public sentiment is such that there will be large anti-union rallies. Ouch.
Which is bloody sad and politically risky!
-
And now, on Labour Day, public sentiment is such that there will be large anti-union rallies. Ouch.
Nonononono. No.
NOT anti-union - otherwise there'd be no way in hell I would go.
These POSITIVE rallies of support are timed to coincide with the visit of Warner Bros. movie executives to discuss moving The Hobbit away from NZ. We're going to show them that we like them, we want The Hobbit filmed here and we SUPPORT Sir Peter.
These rallies will also emphasize the points other groups like film techs intend to make in the national media to influence Warners.
They are NOT protests against certain groups.
As many here have said over the past few weeks, one can be pro-union and still be able to speak out when one sees incompetence by a union that affects members of other unions in a negative way.
Or, as Neil described them:
anti-incompetent-union pro democracy rallies
It's about a show of support for the movie being made here. That's it. And yes, I do see the irony in the fact that it's Labour Day.
Shameless plug to explain my POV - Why I will be attending the Rally of Hope to support filming of "The Hobbit" in New Zealand
-
Nonononono. No.
NOT anti-union - otherwise there'd be no way in hell I would go.Yeah, I think calling it 'anti-union' is drawing a slightly long bow ... but it's clearly anti the action this one particular union has taken, and I don't think you could get a more emphatic full stop on the public -- and the wider film industry's -- opinion of their tactics. (Hoping this is a full stop, not the twist into Act III!)
-
Nice post, webweaver.
-
So, what action do people want the government to take, as a result of these rallies?
It's "Hope" ... for what?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.