Hollywood on strike

"Disney loses 900 million" is a very charged statement.

If you google it, nearly every result contains the Phrase "Woke Disney" and they all specifically refer to Lightyear, the Little Mermaid and GOTG. (and maybe 1 or 2 others).

It means that in the last year they lost 900m on what they thought they'd earn on those titles. Like TLMM broke even, but they were expecting to make 250m on that and they didn't. so that's being marked incorrectly as a loss by sensationalist new services.

Titles such as Thor L&T, Dr Strange MoM, Spiderman No-Way home (which pulled in nearly 2 Billion at the Box Office) are not not included in the 900 lost list. (That being said NWH was Dec 2021)

If you take into account all the Titles that Disney Studios made in the last year, they still made money, they didn't lose money

It's Ying and Yang, you can't have the all the products, toys and theme parks without the movies. and even if the movies flop, they represent less than 20% of the revenue stream to to company like Disney.

And you're correct, MCU died with Tony :(

I agree with them striking, they need to ensure they're not going to be fooked over by AI and lac of residuals. But I just can't help but get angry and the A-Listers bigging it up. Ok, grand, it's bringing more of a bang to the whole thing, but it just feels so fake imo. Saw an article recently where the cast of Oppenheimer walked out of the London premiere "in solidarity". The picture used was the main cast and it made me chuckle as to how much more the writers and other actors could have got if there wasn't over $15 million of the budget in that 1 photo of 6 people. Nolan is $20 million just to hire and he has sweet deals on top, like 20% of Dunkirks takings. Murphy got $5 million and no doubt some residuals and most likely some profit from takings. Even if he "just" got $4 million, that million would pay a lot more to the other actors/writers.

I just hate seeing the rich "stand up" for those beneath them when they've already their money made from the crappy system up until now. The words of Mark Ruffalo, net worth $35 million, sure are useful. And he's someone who actually worked hard to get the breakthrough. But still, it stings coming out of his mouth. Out of any of the A-listers mouths tbh.

Like RTE, I'd love to know who and how they come up with these figures that actors are worth. I'm 100% in support of this strike, I just hate seeing A-Listers jump on board because I doubt most of them actually care.

I agree, I just don't like them jumping on board and pretending they don't have it cushy no matter the outcome. Didn't know that about the premiere, most what I read indicated they walked out in solidarity, didn't know they basically had to. Just galls me when the highest paid butt in, in any situation.

Using my example above, the cast for Oppenheimer is allegedly at 128 (presuming they're not including extras here). Of those, 6 are responsible for over $15 million. If even just Cillian Murphy, RDJ and Emily Blunt took a $1 million less deal, they're still coming out with $4/3 million respectively, a fine payday and not even finished there as they will definitely have crazy good residual and profit deals. That's $3 million they could put towards the other 122 actors. Ok, I'll round it down to about 100 actors if we exclude the slightly famous ones who were paid more than the minor cast members. That's an average of $30k per actor. That's just shy of my full year working basic salary. That's just with $3 million. Nolan could have taken $17 million as a base salary and done the same.

I just don't like rich people speaking from their on-high sandboxes when their salaries/wages are part of the problem they're speaking about.

super oppressed millionaire actor wants to be paid properly because she has to wear a costume or something, you would have some sympathy perhaps for people at the bottom of the chain bur miss entitled not so much

They will sort something out eventually and TBH I doubt this strike is even on most peoples radar because they have their own bills to pay and it doesn't affect their everyday lives unlike a strike in health or education.

Thought Murphy would be on a bigger salary than 4 million, he is around a long time and an established actor.

The only accounts I'm seeing that are really fixating on her are the kind of accounts that likely blew when a black woman was cast for the Little Mermaid. So doubt she's particularly concerned or should be.

Hopefully theyll do the same with an army of actors and singers and presenters.

These complete empty-heads getting treated like gods on earth, for looking a certain way and/or having a good voice.

Like your typical pop act, its just a random bum born with a certain selection of traits, and these traits aren't even that far off the norm, and are just superficial, serving no real function outside of pop media.

Its just low importance traits, but the same traits are widely appealing, and this individual happens to have been born in the era of mass media, and so can be used by a studio to gather up a tide of low grade interest, for their low talent. And this can be monetized, so the studio can budget to keep hyping and pushing these otherwise mediocre individuals, with their manufactured attitudes and lifestyles, in our faces as some kind of ideal. So everyone has to live with what appeals to the moron market.

Then the star will eventually start to believe their own bs and start proselytizing to us mere normie mortals with their air-head takes, while living detached from the struggle of normal life, where you find the real stars, the real heros, and the people who do actually have deep things to say.

In other cases the studio and pr industry will do this for them, the talent being embroiled in manufactured petty nonsense with other talents, and we'll all get to hear about it, instead of real news.

I'm hoping for technology to completely undermine the basis of the cheap plastic popstar/film star through massive supply and industry saturation. If there are 1000 channels of singing bimbos/himbos then they'll all get their appropriate pay, which I'd put at around fast food delivery driver pay.

Wow you really seem to despise actors. The main Union published stats that had 95% of its membership were on the average workers wage. They are the ones that are being threatened with being replaced by AI not the Tom Cruises of the world.

It seems that because Hollywood is defined to be Left that some observers seem to want to be against the strike even though those most affected are working class actors and production staff. Support the studio exec if you want over the workers, but don't pretend you are doing otherwise.

I have encountered youtubers welcoming the strike thinking all the woke writers will be let go and only talented non woke writers will be left. Its wishful thinking. You will just be left withsoulless scripts like the worst of the worst manufactured pop and only writers and actors who are independently wealthy only being able to work in industry and nepotism in Hollywood will only get worse. Either way the working class actors and writers will really struggle.

its nothing to do with left/right. its my own observation, if others think similarly then it irrelevant to me.

i don't despise actors, i just see an irregularity. i see relatively low skills and hugely disproportionate pay, not just for actors but any media darling.

the market says they deserve such huge and disproportionate pay, for now, and i can foresee technology hopefully changing the market.

if the situation happens to come about so that engineers and doctors are getting paid more than some pretty face reading lines or singing a song then ill be happy.

i dont see any reason outside of present day market dynamics that some lad up on a roof, or a surgeon, or a professor should be paid less than someone reading to a camera.

If 95% of actors are on average wage then proper order. Thats what they should get. Hope the other 5% can join them. Along with presenters and singers, and hosts. If I can walk into a room and do your job to some functional standard then in a more just world you probably should be on something like average wage.

Their skill is in generating revenue through their films. You think an actor lesser than Tom Cruise would have created a Mission impossible franchise? Or AI would be able to do that. You may want actors to be on average wages but the revenues they create currently will just go into the pockets of Studio execs. Millions are generated through the entertainment industry, perhaps you just want that to go to the businessmen instead of the writers or actors.

I agree that Doctors and engineers should be rewarded more but the idea that everyone can write or act in movies to the same ability is a bit deluded.

This may be the case for generic boybands, I'm sure you could join one of those( or girlband, if youare female) but i doubt you could sing like sinead o connor could, despite your inflated ego.

You do realise those execs may have been given their jobs by their mammy and daddy and that all parts of the entertainment are not meritocratic.

You just sound like another worker that want all the rewards to go to the millionaires and don't want anyone from a working class background to get rich from their raw talent whether it be thrpugh writing, acting or achievements in sport.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, regarding many sounding like Sinead O'Connor. But continue to cheer for the executives over the workers.

I heard somewhere they could attend but not promote their current or forthcoming work.