Saturday, October 27, 2007

Saturday Afternoon

Some parts of Southern California are getting a little rain this morning...not much but any moisture may aid in knocking down some fire or preventing another. Even though many spots are still blazing away, there seems to be a feeling that the worst is over, at least for now, and that the firefighters have gained the upper hand. You can sense it as sure as you can smell musty, charred air and see the blurry skies.

I'm quite some distance from any of it. I don't think any of the fires were even in my area code. Still, I know many of the areas and, of course, I know people in or about those areas...and it was just very sad. So, in a different way, are several e-mails I received from people whose attitude towards the victims was that they brought it on themselves by living where they lived, by not living in homes made of different building materials and, of course, by being Rich Hollywood Liberal Phonies. That's true of perhaps a single-digit percentage of those who lost their homes and belongings — especially in parts of Orange County where they're still, one way or another, voting for Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan — but there's no point in explaining that to them. Some people take their schadenfreude where they can get it, and if it means making up or believing nonsense, that's fine by them.

I found it all very depressing and frustrating. The most likely thing that most of the victims did wrong was to not be more demanding that dry brush in their area be cleared away or irrigated. We can't stop the Santa Ana winds or the arsonists, nor can we eliminate forever downed power lines. But it would be really maddening to think we couldn't do better at the aspects we can control. One of the main things that has soured me on the Iraq War — even more so than the ever-shifting rationales for it — are those stats on things we're not doing here like increased port security and mopping up after Katrina and more health care for uninsured kids. It's particularly upsetting when it seems to be no big deal if a billion or three earmarked for The War slips through the cracks and just disappears. One question I'd like to see put to all who would be President is: "Will you swear that if elected, you will vigorously investigate fraud and corruption in the spending of money allocated for the war, and prosecute those who have engaged in such practices or overlooked them?"

Even if we weren't being robbed of money we could use to help out needy folks (as Liberals would advocate) or use to lower taxes (as Conservatives would like), I can't see any argument for tolerating all the theft and corrupt accounting and war profiteering. But I'll bet no one will do anything about it, no matter how many Californias burn or Louisianas flood.

• Posted at 12:45 PM · LINK

Go Read It!

What's it like to be a guest on Stephen Colbert's show? Paul Glastris describes his experiences.

• Posted at 9:23 AM · LINK

WGA Stuff

Negotiators have adjourned until Tuesday in the talks between the AMPTP and the WGA. These are the talks that everyone hopes will lead to a new contract and therefore no Writers Strike. The contract expires at Midnight on Wednesday but even if there's no deal by then, there doesn't have to be a strike at that precise moment. If talks are proceeding and progress is being made, a strike could be delayed until it is no longer necessary or becomes necessary. Or they could call a walkout, a.s.a.p. No one can say for sure at this time.

The hopeful sign is that they are talking and demands are being withdrawn or modified. By contrast, at this point prior to the WGA strikes of '85 and '88, Management was refusing to even listen to WGA proposals. In both those years, the Producers' idea of "bargaining" was to run down the clock and then, a few hours before the old contract expired, they'd hand our negotiating team their "one and only offer," as they called it. And then they'd say, in effect, "Here — this is it. Now, go vote to accept it. We're going home."

I remember arriving for the Strike Vote in a ballroom at the Sheraton-Universal in '85. In that year, the strike vote occurred after the old contract had expired — the day after — unlike this year, when it came two weeks before.

A lovely man named George Kirgo, who was then on our Board of Directors (and, I think, the Negotiating Committee, as well) grabbed me and a couple of other writers he knew and pulled us into a huddle. "We have to vote this offer down," he said. George looked terrible. He hadn't slept the night before. He'd been up talking to other WGA officials and worrying and strategizing. The offer, he said, was designed to be voted down. It included a major financial rollback plus a major rollback in screen credits. The Producers' strategy, he said — and I'm quite sure he was right — was to force a strike but a short one. We would, of course, vote it down but the magnitude of the strike vote — how many people voted to walk versus how many didn't — would enable them to gauge WGA resolve and to estimate how little they'd have to improve the offer to get 51% of us to accept it.

After a short walkout, the Producers would pull the credit rollback off the table. The idea was that enough of us would then figure we'd "won" something and would accept the contract with the major financial rollback. George explained to us that most unions, faced with a rotten offer, can muster a strike vote but thereafter, each strike vote is a matter of diminishing returns. Members get worried and lose bravado as their jobs stop or they see projects floundering or hear the inevitable rumors that Management is equipped and determined to ride out the strike and break the union. That makes them especially eager to believe that a terrible offer, slightly improved, has become a good offer even though it's actually still terrible.

Anyway, that worked pretty well for them in 1985, aided by the fact that our leadership was in general disarray. We had a short strike, and then they dropped the credit rollback and we took what was still, even with that improvement, a terrible deal. No one in '85, even those of us who were against it, imagined how terrible it was because we didn't then dream how big home video would become. Since it had worked so well for them that year, the Producers tried much the same trick in 1988 but this time, the Guild was more solid and we not only turned down the really rotten offer, we voted it down after they bettered it slightly. And at that point, the Producers were stuck with no Exit Plan (insert George W. Bush analogy here) and they had a five month strike on their hands.

There's cause for limited optimism since bargaining is happening at all in advance of the contract expiration. It was announced today that a Federal Mediator will preside over Tuesday's session but I wouldn't expect that to change anything. Usually, a Federal Mediator comes in after a strike has been going on for a while, says "everyone needs to try and make this work," then goes home. Still, that phase is ahead of schedule, too, and that's probably a good sign, if only because it'll stop people from believing that a Federal Mediator will step in and drag unwilling parties into a settlement.

But if you asked me for my prediction — and amazingly, some of you have — I'd say we're going to wind up with a "final offer" that contains at least one major rollback that is in there so it can be dropped and one that they'll fight to the death to protect. It's been reported that the Producers already dropped a demand for a new residual structure that would essentially have reduced them from guaranteed compensation to something at the vagaries of Hollywood Accounting. Other, less important rollbacks have reportedly also been withdrawn, and we've given some on our side, as well. But my suspicion is that the negotiators for the Producers, to earn their keep and because they've been so ordered, still feel they have to come back with some significant giveback from the Writers. More importantly, on the issue of sharing revenues from new technologies like DVDs, they have to come back with some precedent that can be forced next year on the Screen Actors Guild and the Directors Guild and which will translate into not sharing revenues.

So that'll be in there, maybe dressed up with language to suggest that we'll do some joint studies to determine if a better plan is feasible for the future. They often do that. It's like you and I make a deal where I get your pants, but to prevent you from feeling like a total loser, I'll agree that at some later date, we'll meet for exploratory discussions about me possibly giving you back some part of your pants.

They'll do that and then they'll include some other rollback that's in there to be dropped so that they can better the offer without altering the part they really care about. Maybe they'll keep the talks going so they can keep the work going until a better time for a stoppage, and maybe our leaders won't let them get away with that. Or maybe the Producers will try to hurry up the strike and get it over with so they can try the trick of dropping one rollback...and of course, at the same time they'll spread the word that they're quite prepared and even happy to ride out a long strike. We'll hear that they have a nice stash of game and reality shows that will do just as well...a claim that will not be believed by anyone who saw the debut last week of Phenomenon. (Who ever thought you'd see a TV show where Carmen Electra looked like she didn't want to be on it?)

As you can tell, I'm not all that confident in parts of my prediction because a lot of this is unprecedented. The WGA seems more "together" and determined than I've ever seen it, and I don't think the A.M.P.T.P. can possibly underestimate that this time, as they have so many times in the past. The mere fact that the two sides are actually bargaining now suggests that a lot of the Producers' past methods are not in play this time. Still, some of those tricks have worked so well in the past, not just with us but with other unions, that it's hard to believe they won't try any of them again. So I'm optimistic but not optimistic enough to think there won't be a strike.

• Posted at 3:52 AM · LINK

Today's Video Link

Just to get you in the mood for Halloween...

In 1964, animation producer Walter Lantz whipped up a syndicated Woody Woodpecker special called Spook-a-Nanny (or maybe Woody Woodpecker's Spook-a-Nanny) comprised of old cartoons and some new footage. Today's clip contains most of the new footage. The rest of the show was live-action intros with Mr. Lantz, some scenes of him socializing with an animated Woody, the old cartoons, and a couple of replays of the semi-catchy "Spook-a-Nanny" song that you'll hear if you make it to the end of this clip.

One of the thing that amazes me about technology today is how it's made a lot of stuff that was once impossible to come by not only available but almost effortless to obtain. I saw this show in '64 when I was twelve years old. That was about the age I started to outgrow these characters but I liked the little song and would have liked to have heard it again. This was not possible in the sixties or even the seventies. The program ran in 1964 and if it repeated anywhere, I sure didn't see it. And now, here it is on the Internet.

The most interesting this about this special is that Mr. Lantz stuck in most of the characters in his catalog, including several who by then existed only in merchandising and comic books. In '64, his studio was long past making cartoons of most of them, doing films in three series — Woody Woodpecker, Chilly Willy and The Beary Family. (Lantz was just winding down a fourth series, Inspector Willoughby.) I'm not sure why they didn't include the Beary Family in Spook-a-Nanny unless it was because Walter didn't want to spring for the rather minor dollars to bring in Paul Frees, who did the voice of Charlie Beary. In the clip that follows, Grace Stafford (aka Mrs. Lantz) did Woody and Splinter, while Daws Butler did all the other speaking voices, and Gloria Wood performed the song.

It was interesting to see Andy Panda included. The last Andy Panda cartoon was made in 1949, though he made a few cameos in later Lantz cartoons. Homer Pigeon is in there. Lantz made three Homer Pigeon cartoons — one in 1942, one in 1943 and one in 1956. I remember that when I was a kid, Homer was in a number of my comic books and on toys, and every article I read about Walter Lantz mentioned the pigeon among his list of animated superstars...but I still don't think I've ever seen a Homer Pigeon cartoon. Space Mouse was in there. As explained, here, he was a character from the comic books, though Lantz made one film with him. I believe his "Spook-a-Nanny" appearance was the only other time he was animated and based on his participation, it looks like they had this cartoon all storyboarded and then someone said, "Hey, let's stick that Space Mouse guy in it somewhere."

They also left out Oswald the Rabbit because this was 1964. Even before 11/22/63, Oswald was becoming a forgotten character and then along came Lee Harvey Oswald to despoil the name. Oswald Rabbit merchandising came to a screeching halt.

Anyway, here's the "Spook-a-Nanny." I'm not sure if it's a trick or a treat but it is something I remember vividly from my childhood.

• Posted at 1:28 AM · LINK