Posts by Kyle Matthews

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First

  • Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit,

    Still, some motels I have stayed at recently (including one in Epsom on Saturday night) seemed like they were designed for hobbits--except that hobbits probably weren't responsible for the condom wrappers under the bed!

    I think that's the result of some hobbits that people have been referring to a lot in the past month:

    "Fucking Hobbits!"

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit,

    And the production was? Spartacus. The one that has never heard a peep from the actors' unions.

    I think some questions have to be asked about that.

    I think you need to be careful about "you protested about Y but not about X, and X was first/worse etc" arguments.

    For one thing you want the wider public to give a shit about your struggle, and clearly that's the case with the Hobbit over Spartacus.

    But for another, targeting one thing doesn't create any obligation to in the future or in the past target another similar thing. Laws should be fair, unions don't have to. If you're campaigning to change something I'd be more concerned about making it effective rather than consistent when there isn't a base requirement to do so.

    The whole thing backfired, but I don't think the reason for that was because "oi, you didn't protest Spartacus".

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    Presumably ACT have said yes. Wonder what Rodney wanted in exchange?

    I'd imagine he was very happy. Corporate tax cut, changes to employment laws going in the rightwards direction.

    Really - the left needs to take this one on the chin, and make sure it doesn't screw up this unbelievably badly again.

    I really don't get why things like this belong to 'the left', but the Act Party falling apart only belongs to them.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    But still, having good cause to believe that the boycott would be lifted is not likely to be enough for Warners - they need it to be actually lifted.

    Like I said, mischevious with their public statements.

    What series of events would lead to the international unions not lifting the boycott after being advised by NZ to do so? None. So in practical sense once NZ says the boycott is over, it's over. It's not like Warners were going to suddenly expect contracts signed the next day.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    Tim Watkins blogs that no one comes out of this well.

    Pretty fair summary really, though I suspect he was light on the union who have come out of this the worst.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    Fair enough, but an exception rather than the rule (has anyone else seen I'm Not Harry Jenson or The Strength of Water or Insatiable Moon?)?)

    I've seen the first one. I think there's a pretty narrow lane when you consider "uniquely NZ films". Harry Jenson could have been made in other places.

    Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are clearly international movies made in NZ. Boy and Whalerider are NZ films. There's a big area in between. Outrageous Fortune I definitely see as a NZ story, very much reflecting part of our cultural identity, but the US version will be similar but with an American mirror held up to it.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Field Theory: Great game of netball or…,

    Apologies for the recent lack of posting. I'm sure to catch my breath soon. Until then get along to the freakin Roller Derby! Both Auckland and Wellington have bouts this weekend and both look like they'll be HUGE.

    A couple of nutty acquaintances are trying to start ice derby here in Dunedin. This Thursday night they're giving it a first go.

    So many males are keen to play they're making it mixed, not sure if fish nets are compulsory.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    Warners never actually said that.

    New Line Cinema said it:

    Recent reports that the boycott of The Hobbit was lifted by unions a number of days ago and that Warner Bros asked to delay this announcement are false.

    It was not until last night that we received confirmation of the retractions from SAG, NZ Equity and AFTRA through press reports. We are still awaiting retractions from the other guilds.

    (The next paragraph doesn't make sense. "NZ Equity/MEAA continued to demand, as a condition of the retractions, that we participate in union negotiations with the independent contractor performers". The paragraph above they say that they've received retractions from NZ Equity).

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    "Better" would have been someone with more experience with these issues, with formal office in the union, and with the ability to deliver a consistent, coherent message. None of these things are true of Robyn's performance. They tried to leverage her star power, and it backfired quite badly.

    I wonder how much her 'brand' has been damaged by this episode. She really was climbing quite high in NZ circles.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

  • Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles,

    So, er, yes. It does not appear that Peter Jackson himself received a request to meet, as has been claimed, let alone spurned one.

    That needs tying down. Probably not so important in the final picture as Jackson no doubt would have said 'no we can't meet, it would be illegal', but some of us are keeping score.

    Someone listed a bunch of misleads by the union on the last page, I think they're up to 4 now, Warners still on 1. None for Jackson so far.

    ...could be read two ways:

    In the end, it comes down to production companies following the pink book. I can't imagine at this stage, if the hobbit follows the pink book, they're going to be targeted, members wouldn't let them.

    Why should Warners have considered the ban lifted on the 17th if some of the parties to the ban weren't aware that is was being lifted at that time?

    I still think they got caught, and now there's wriggling going on to make it look OK. NZAE or MEAA control the ban. Clearly no other bodies are going to follow the ban once NZ says "boycott off" or whatever language they want to use.

    The fact that it takes several days for everyone to say "ok ban off guys" is simply evidence that it takes time for the message to get there and people in the right positions to sign off. For Warners to say "NZ has called off the ban but Canada/UK haven't" or whatever, is mischevious.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report

Last ←Newer Page 1 103 104 105 106 107 624 Older→ First