Debating the Writer’s Strike: Schmucks With Underwoods
The following is an exercise in forensics. Not the gory “CSI” type, the talky sort of exercise.
I’m going to take a viewpoint and elaborate on it. I do not necessarily hold this viewpoint, but I think any reasonably intelligent person can see both sides of any argument and defend either effectively. It’s Speech and Debate stuff, straight from high school. But even the most cursory browse of the blogosphere reveals that even these rudimentary debating skills are truly a lost art.
Dan has agreed to follow up with a counterpoint article.
—
RESOLVED: The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) should take this opportunity to crush the Writer’s Guild of America. Lock out WGA members, force the hyphenates and showrunners (executives with memberships and allegiances in both camps) to renounce their Guild cards, and encourage the creation of a new writer’s union based on objective literary skill.
There are several reasons why this would be an excellent idea for everyone concerned: Writers, producers, and consumers of entertainment.
• Just looking at television I have to ask: What is a writer’s job? For scripted television, it’s crafting scripts based on concepts and ideas put out by staff writers and show executives. Think about the best television episodes you’ve ever seen. Were they written by the show’s creators and staffers, ones who not just write the season story arcs but have a hand all creative aspects of the program? Chances are the answer is yes.
Hiring a Guild writer to create a TV script is a division-of-labor issue: If the staff could write every episode of a show, they probably would. Some do. Late-night shows certainly do.
• Staff writers and showrunners are the compromised players in this labor action, the loose-cannon heavy-hitters who choose to side with either the studio or the Guild. At this point, many well-known names are joining the picket lines, among them Marc Cherry (”Desperate Housewives”), Seth McFarland (”Family Guy”) and Shonda Rhimes (”Grey’s Anatomy”). Steve Carrell decided not to cross the picket lines, and production of “The Office” shut down, with the last new show airing next week.
As much solidarity as they’re showing, They’re ready to bolt back to their desks pretty damn quick:
For now, they’re staying off the job — and writing is out of the question until a settlement is reached. But, said one showrunner who was at the powwow, “We will gladly return to our (showrunner) jobs the day that the producers return to the negotiating table.”
NOT if the strike is settled, NOT even if an agreement is reached, but as soon as the reps sit in the same room. Solidarity!
The people who add value to scripted television, those who make television shows compelling and interesting, are half in both camps. If they no longer hired Guild writers, I’m actually not sure of the quality would suffer much.
The showrunners’s dilemma turns one of the arguments for the strike on it’s head. Over and over again, I’ve read how the WGA represents creativity and artistic endeavor, and they’re up against Ivy League executives who see it all as widgets. But the truly creative entities in television are to a large extent hyphenates and showrunners, executives in their own right. These executives create and make art, and hire writers for the heavy lifting.
• What does hiring a Guild signatory do for both parties? For the guild member, it’s a guaranteed pay scale and dental insurance. For the producer, it’s just a guarantee the writer has at least one sold script under their belt, and they can be generally trusted to finish the job without going on a week-long bender with the up-front money. Generally. Doesn’t seem much of a deal on the producer’s end, does it?
• As motion pictures go, I once read that there are only about 200 writers who make a full-time living writing features. Studios always tap the same proven talent pool when they assign writers to projects (this is a different story with spec scripts, of course).
But most movies are crap.
Anyone with an informed opinion on films seem to think most of the innovative ideas are being put into independent films. Non-union productions, mostly from spec scripts, seem to be the leading edge of contemporary cinematic expression.
If we want better movies, isn’t there some wisdom in decapitating the status quo and giving independent films and independent writers a stake in the game?
• Writing screenplays isn’t rocket science. Buy Final Draft, read through Syd Field’s book, and give it a try if you don’t believe me. In fact, I’d venture the more formulaic you can get your story, the better chance it has of not only selling but reaching a wider audience.
Anyone standing outside show biz looking in sees the WGA much differently than those in the business do. They’re the first stumbling block to a film career, an often-insurmountable barrier between the studios and the aspiring writer. They’re Hollywood’s immune system.
(Not that Hollywood doesn’t NEED and immune system. My recent visit to LA confirmed the old joke: EVERYBODY has a script.)
• This leads to an old Guild defense of the system: Studios aren’t writing schools, so why should they waste resources on untried talent when they can hire a Guild writer?
The answer: Maybe this whole writing school thing is something studios should consider.
If the big players can self-regulate movie ratings through the MPAA, they can certainly finance an entity to vet and certify independent writers based on merit and skill. I’m just spitballing here, but I envision something like a minor league farm team for wordsmiths. Someone who is keen on screenwriting can submit material to this entity, where it is evaluated. Crummy writers are asked to come back next season. Barely competent ones can be tried out with award shows and direct-to-DVD movies. Better ones can qualify for basic cable TV and cheapo genre pictures. And so on up the food chain.
This may not sound much different than what is already in place, but I can’t help but think objective, sound quality control on the outset will, in the end, make better entertainment. And better entertainment will be more eagerly consumed, and that rising tide will lift all boats. If Los Angeles can insist on letter grades for restaurants to guarantee wholesomeness, why not do the same for screenwriters?
Remember: The primary purpose of a guild is to protect it’s own members. Quality and creativity are unspoken givens, not guarantees. A better, fairer, more meritocratic system will have the primary purpose of developing great writers and helping them reach their potential and their audience, to the benefit of all.
—
Well, there it is. Flame away.
–Skot C.
November 12th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Mr. Skot C.,
What a simpleton you are … please stay out of something you truely do not understand (LOL - You’re not really a simpleton, and your opinon has some valid points - but the essence of drama is conflict!)
“Writing screenplays isn’t rocket science. Buy Final Draft, read through Syd Field’s book, and give it a try if you don’t believe me. In fact, I’d venture the more formulaic you can get your story, the better chance it has of not only selling but reaching a wider audience.”
That is BS. Why don’t YOU do it then? Or is making $200,000 a year (the average screenwriters salary) just to much for your ‘artistic and creative’ temperment. God forbid you sacrifice your vision for … UGH … MONEY!
Give me a utter and complete break. All you are doing is spouting more of the tired sterotypes that those who completely misunderstand ‘the biz’ love to perpetuate.
First of all, if you attend film festivals and indie screenings as I do - you’ll quickly realize that most Indie flicks suck to high heaven. AND I MEAN SUCK. At least with studio films you can count on some sort of quality as your mind slowly goes into metabolic numbness.
What is good and bad is so subjective anyway, writers (or others) who say all films suck or television sucks, has always been code to mean that either:
1. The person speaking is a failed or frustrated writer who can’t understand why Robert Zemeckis won’t turn his navel-gazing into a multi-million dollar live action animated feature.
2. Is someone who completely misunderstands the purpose of entertainment and/or creativity in general. All pieces cannot move your soul or speak to your inner child. Ever wonder why we don’t have any writeristic garbage from Shakespeare? He smartly threw the crap away….
The WGA serves its purpose as effectively as it can. It says to new writers “if you can get someone who matters (i.e. money men) to put their ass on the line for your project then welcome to the club.”
If you don’t like what’s out there - then don’t partake (and despite what everyone thinks, Hollywood is healthy) and get your entertainment from YouTube. And on that topic, ever wonder why the internet is 90% crap? Because there is no Internet Writers Guild.
Then when the YouTube sophmoric stupidity wears off - you can put your money where your mouth is and fund a project from an aspiring writer OR you can “encourage the creation of a new writer’s union based on objective literary skill.”
Wonder who is going to make the call on the ‘objective literary skill’? Especially when entertainment is almost completely subjective….
Either way, one fact remains, television, movies and the internet suck. Oh and so do the writers…LOL.
November 12th, 2007 at 8:56 am
P.S. - If there were an Internet Writers Guild and I were in charge - I would gladly offer you membership based on your fine website and also expect you to be on the picket lines (if ever the need arose).
-The Rooster
November 13th, 2007 at 4:59 am
Dear The Rooster:
Interesting, thought-provoking stuff. A bit ad-hominem, but compared to typical online discourse it’s practically Emily Post. I’ll point-to-point some of the issues raised:
“[If Screenwriting is so easy,] why don’t YOU do it then?”
–Hey. I do. I just returned from a film shoot, a production based on something I WROTE. (More later.) I’ve written specs that scored high in several screenwriting contests. I’m plowing away on a co-written feature (have been for 2 years and thirteen drafts!) If I were truly serious about pursuing a career scripting I’d have moved to LA. But I ain’t.
When I say anyone can write a screenplay, It was meant in a literal sense. Anyone can. The question of writing compelling screenplays is where talent and person experience come in. I’ve read script pages by experienced literary authors that stank. I’ve read script pages written by dumb college freshmen (Used to be a English tutor) that were so vivid and funny they jumped off the paper. Form is unimportant.
The argument goes thus: The WGA are defenders of people who use Final Draft to make a living. If they happen to be good, that’s a bonus.
“[W]riters (or others) who say all films suck or television sucks has always been code…”
–Didn’t say that exactly. I said MOST FILMS are CRAP. I think Isaac Asimov said it first: “90% is everything is s***.” I’m looking at the numbers here. For every worthwhile film that is a true expression of the director’s vision and the writer’s skill there are at least five producer-compromised, hackwork, lowest-common-denominator popcorn movies competing with it. The thing is: I’ll wager this ratio has been consistent from the dawn of feature filmmaking. I’m sure for every excellent Charlie Chaplin two-reeler, there were a slew of horrible ones by imitators. So when I say most films lack merit, the films I’m talking about were designed that way.
Same goes for indies. I didn’t say they were better, I said they were innovative and seem to be the leading edge of cinematic expression. Most indy films are crap, too, but for different and better reasons: most bad indies are failed experiments. For instance, producing a feature all in headache-inducing comic-book CG (A SCANNER DARKLY) was a noble experiment, one that failed to find a wide audience. But they tried, right?
The idea of hacking away the top screenwriting hired guns in hopes of getting better films might be wishful thinking, I realize.
I also didn’t say that most of TV is crap. I think that’s self-evident.
And yeah, If the WGA fairy waved her wand and a Guild card appeared in my wallet I’d be picketing… something. As I said, this argument is an arbitrary side taken in a debate, a debate nobody seems to be having. In other words, thanks for the counterpoint!
In a sideways fashion you brought up another issue I hadn’t even considered: killing off TV content during this current swell of online “entertainment” may be suicide. And no, I’m not of those people who think YouTube is the next television. But there are plenty of people with less discerning tastes out there who might gladly switch away for good.
Scripted entertainment, good or bad, is increasingly becoming the only source of reliable quality entertainment in an ever-widening sphere of reality show, infotainment, and blurry flash movies of skateboard accidents. The WGA needs to lead, follow or get out of the way.
Thanks for writing! –Skot C.