Strike Two

Typically, it's "three strikes and you're out." But when it comes to Hollywood, it seems like "two strikes and you're out." Recently, the Writers (WGA) went on strike, and now, as of July 13th, the Actors (SAG-AFTRA) have joined forces. For those working in the industry, it’s a scary time, and for those who aren’t in the industry and don’t know what all this means, here is another blog that serves as a companion piece to the WGA strike I wrote about earlier this year.

Credit: Charles Sykes/Invision/AP

Credit: Gilbert Flores /Variety & Brian Feinzimer/LAist

Note from the author, even though this is a blog on the SAG Strike I wanted to show that these are both happening simultaneously in front of the big studios.

"The endgame is to allow things to drag on until union members start losing their apartments and houses." This is a direct quote from an anonymous studio executive, made right before SAG went on strike. If you’re wondering why these strikes are happening, I could sum up the blog with this quote. The studio executives are raking in hundreds of millions of dollars every year, while everyone beneath them is scraping by. To quote Bob Iger, the CEO of Disney, a man who made $27 million last year, "It is and has been a great business for all of these people, and it will continue to be even through disruptive times. But being realistic is imperative here." To translate what he’s saying, "I don’t want to pay the people who make my content an affordable wage because I want another yacht." The studios are trying to play the "woe is me, we can’t afford this" card while independent companies like A24 are meeting SAG’s demands (more on that later).

Before I continue, you may be wondering a few things: "Ok, but why is SAG on strike?" and "They're actors. They make a lot of money. They're being selfish." To address the first question, I have to address the second one first. Just like how I mentioned that big writers do sometimes get a big paycheck, the little guys are having trouble affording their rent – and it’s the same for actors. For every Tom Cruise and Sandra Bullock, there’s a person with a dream scraping by.

Take, for example, Becky Jones from Fayetteville, Arkansas, who dreams of making it as an actress and has the guts to move across the country to make it happen. Good for Becky! She tries to find work, gets a role here, gets a role there. Finally, she's gotten enough work that she can now be SAG. Good for Becky! She starts to get some attention, more frequent roles, until she lands a role as a supporting actress in a TV show! Good for Becky! The show's a hit! Good for Becky! She isn't quite a household name yet, but she has guaranteed work because the studio has greenlit two more seasons! Good for Becky! Except Becky can’t pay her bills. Not good for Becky. Just because an actor lands a role doesn’t mean they’re financially secure.

In light of all this, the cast of Orange Is The New Black recently came out and spoke about not being able to afford to work on the show. So the next time you see a picture of Mark Ruffalo striking, or hear Jamie Lee Curtis talking about the disgusting nature of the Studios, remember this is not just for them. This is for all the Becky Jones from Fayetteville, Arkansas out there.

Credit: GETTY IMAGE / JOSE PEREZ/BAUER-GRIFFIN, Angelique Jackson/Variety, & Robert Hanashiro/ USA Today

Credit: David McNew/Getty Images, Gilbert Flores/Variety & Michael Buckner/Variety

Ok, so now we get the picture. This is for Becky Jones, blah blah blah, but WHY? Why now? What exactly are the reasons that SAG is striking? We just talked about a big one: pay. Similar to the writers, the move to streaming and inflation has completely changed the game. In the past, if you worked on a TV show or movie, you would receive long-term payment for that content (which, fun fact, became a thing in the 60s during the last time the actors and writers went on strike together). But now, with streaming, the landscape has shifted. Of course, a lot of this depends on the contract (which the studios aren't really allowing, claiming they can't afford it. You see a pattern here?). Essentially, you now only get two forms of residuals: one for domestic and one for foreign. That's it. If you had it on Broadcast, it was a whole different story, but things changed, and when it comes to payment, things need to change too.

Moreover, just like how the writers are concerned that artificial intelligence will take their jobs, actors are also fighting against it. What the studios are trying to do is pay the actor for a day, scan their likeness, own their likeness, and use it over and over again while only paying the actor once. It may sound like a sci-fi film or a conspiracy theory, but it's a cold, hard fact. I could go on and on about the reasons, but there's nothing I could say that hasn't already been said by SAG-AFTRA President Fran Drescher.

So this takes us back to the studios. Apparently, they can’t afford to give a living wage. But as I mentioned earlier, there are studios like A24 that have been given waivers by SAG to continue filming. In fact, SAG has made waivers for several projects with unstruck companies that are willing to meet the terms that SAG is after (including a project that Charthouse is working on this summer – just a quick humblebrag). SAG doesn’t want actors to lose work; they just want the studios to compensate them properly for the work they’re doing.

So how can independent companies meet these terms when studios can't? Well, it looks like we have gone full circle. The answer is greed. Studio Executives want another yacht. Independent filmmakers want to tell a story. Studio Executives ask, "What are you willing to do for the part?" Independent Filmmakers ask, "How can we make this work?" Studio Executives want to take credit for the work of others. Independent filmmakers want to collaborate. It all comes down to ego and the downgrading of what has become a cycle of reboots, remakes, sequels, prequels, movies based on side characters from shows in the 80s, squeezing the life out of every intellectual property that has ever existed, all made by the studio system. These are not people who love movies or the process of making one; they are people who love money and never having enough of it.

Credit: KATIE MCTIERNAN/ANADOLU AGENCY/ Getty Images, Alexi Rosenfeld/Getty Images & MARIO TAMA/GETTY IMAGES

I wish the conclusion of this blog was a little more upbeat. But honestly, the filmmaking business in the 2020s is tough, and it currently looks a little bleak. The good news is that this has happened before, and every time it has, the film industry has emerged stronger and better for it.

For the Love of Movies,

Jonathan Austin