Sunday, October 21, 2007

From the E-Mailbag...

David Jobe writes to ask little ol' me...

I've been following your entries on the (potentially) upcoming WGA strike with great interest. I'd be curious to know your thoughts on what Nikki Finke is reporting on her blog about the likelihood of and timing for the strike, especially with regards to how accurate you think her information is. Her blog purports to represent the studios' point of view, and I'm wondering how accurate you think it is.

Fairly accurate, I think, if you take it as what the studio heads want us to believe. In labor wars, one's public posture is always calibrated for effect. That applies to all sides in all negotiations. I don't buy that anyone running a network really "welcome[s] a strike because they believe the 2007/2008 TV season is dead on arrival anyway" or that they'd say that even if it was true. If you think your schedule's a catastrophe, the more prudent position is to moan, "We had some potential hits but that %@#&% Writers Guild Strike (or the threat, thereof) killed us."

The most interesting line in that piece is where Les Moonves said, "I'm not concerned about the state of CBS. I'm a bit concerned about the state of network television generally." Some others in comparable positions to his might not be that perturbed if the major networks lost still more market share to HBO, Showtime and Basic Cable, as well as home video and gaming. That's because those people may not figure to be in the network teevee business much longer. But Mooves just reupped his contract and ain't goin' nowhere, so he may be sitting there, thinking of how those other forms of entertainment got a huge boost from the '88 WGA Strike. No one can ever calculate what the studios lost that year but it was probably greater than any dollar estimate you've seen. Not meeting the WGA's rather modest demands that year was far from cost-effective. It actually wounded the networks' entire business because a lot of loyal network TV viewers found other interests in life and never returned...at least not with the same loyalty.

In any case, I don't believe the Producers are confident that they can get through a long WGA strike on "reality" shows and games. They'll say they are but they've got to be terrified of more viewers discovering they can amuse themselves without the likes of CSI:Wherever and Two and a Half Men.

The intriguing thing touched upon in that article is the question of when we'd strike if we strike. The WGA Leadership could call a walkout at any time after November 1 if no deal is in place then. Some people have suggested that we'd continue working, sans contract, until such time as the Screen Actors Guild pact was up, at which time we'd link arms with them, sing a few choruses of "Kumbaya" and present a united front. I consider that scenario highly unlikely. The SAG deal isn't up until June 30, 2008 and that's a long time from now, plus the Producers would have to be suicidal to allow such a marriage to occur...or even to seem possible since it would embolden both sides. Besides, a WGA-SAG partnership could ultimately be a rocky one, anyway. It would be very easy for the AMPTP to float proposals that would screw one union at the expense of the other, thereby driving a wedge.

I'm thinking that if we're working without a deal into December, Management will set a lockout deadline and say, "If the WGA doesn't accept our current proposal by X date, we withdraw it and your work and paychecks stop." Everyone hopes, of course, it will not come to that.

I have no idea what's on the minds of the WGA leadership in terms of timetable, nor do I know their thinking about Interim Deals. What those are are "favored nations" deals we make during a strike with studios (mostly independents) who are willing to sign. Writers can go back to work at those companies and then, when the final big contract is signed, the studios that signed interim agreements can opt for its terms. These deals are generally controversial from our side, both for strategic reasons and because some writers like the idea of everyone hanging together. They're generally frowned upon by the majors and they pressure the smaller producers not to go for them.

Will that be part of our battle plan? I have no idea. But you're going to hear a lot about them as a strike grows more likely. And it will grow more likely.

• Posted at 11:32 PM · LINK

Today's Video Link

I'm kind of a sucker for the show, Forever Plaid, which is always playing somewhere near you, no matter where you are. I first saw it at the Canon Theater in Beverly Hills, a few days after my father passed away. It was a rough time in my life, obviously because of that but also because of some other problems. Still, I had tickets for the show — ordered long before — and I decided to go, regardless. I was glad I did. Even though it's (sort of) about people dying, it's such a happy, entertaining show that it did a lot for my sense of well-being that night. In fact, on the way out, I purchased tickets to come back and see it again a few days later, and have since seen it perhaps another half-dozen times. The casts are not always as good as the material but the show always works.

This is a spot from a TV morning show. The guys then starring in Forever Plaid in El Cajon (that's near San Diego) appeared to plug the show and perform a number from it. Here are the four of them for four minutes...

• Posted at 5:38 PM · LINK

It's Alive!

It's too early to set your TiVo but don't worry. I'll remind you when we get closer to the date.

That date is January 4, 2008. That's when Turner Classic Movies is running the film that you cannot watch without wondering, "What the hell were they thinking?"

That's right. They're running Skidoo.

Wow. It doesn't get any better than that.

• Posted at 2:34 PM · LINK

Come On Down!

Okay, I've watched a few episodes of The Price is Right as hosted by Drew Carey and I can't help but commit heresy: I think he's a much better host than Bob Barker ever was...or at least, he will be if he gets a wee bit more comfortable in the role. He still has the look of a guy who can't believe he got the job but that will pass. He's also still trying to do Barker's show, as opposed to Drew Carey's, which is probably wise. Carey is a much funnier guy than the format requires and my sense is that he's been advised, or perhaps has decided on his own, not to change things too much his first few weeks. Devout Price is Right fans first have to accept that he's worthy of their favorite show before they'll be ready to tolerate anything different. So he's suppressing his urges to be a little looser and to not do everything the way Bob did.

I already like him more than Barker. He doesn't have that smarmy self-adoration. He actually seems to like the contestants and not because they're fawning over him — which so far, thankfully, they're not. Carey's "nice guy" image doesn't appear to be a mask that he dons when the cameras are on. I never felt that way about his predecessor. I'll bet the people who work on that stage over at CBS are a lot happier now, too.

When I first heard it was going to be Carey, I thought that was a poor fit. Now, I'm thinking not. The Price is Right formula has gotten very stale over the years. Everything that could possibly happen in a game of Plinko or The Money Game has happened a thousand times, and even adding new games won't reduce the sensation of déjà vu because they won't be that different from the old games. CBS, I gather, first went looking for someone who could replicate the Barker style, then realized that was exactly what they didn't want. The one thing that could keep that show going for a while is a host who breaks away from that and makes it his own. Drew Carey has the capacity to do that. I think I'll wait a couple of months and then tune in and see him doing it.

• Posted at 1:00 PM · LINK

Go Read It

Ben Schwartz, who has written some of the best mainstream press articles about comics, writes about the new biographies of comic book and strip artists, including my upcoming book on Jack Kirby. The piece contains some awkward phrasing that I assume occurred in the editing stages: One section makes it seem like The Complete Dick Tracy is a reprinting of Kirby's work. Also, I'm usually pretty diligent about referring to partners as co-creators so I can't believe I said that Jack created Captain America and didn't say he co-created it with Joe Simon. And lastly, I'm not supervising the reprinting of Jack's Fourth World material at DC...just contributing advice and afterwords. Other than those minor quibbles, it's a great piece.

• Posted at 11:08 AM · LINK

October 22, 2007 • Current • October 20, 2007