It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
1) I understand that part of the writers'/actors' beef is with streaming services. I think I know what they're talking about, but just to be sure... Exactly what is the issue with Netflix and such?
2) I've also heard about the fear of AI. But to be honest, does AI really pose that big a threat? Computers have been making music for years, yet the artists people really gravitate to, are "real" people in the end. We can all throw a few samples in a box, put a beat on it, and call it a dance track. Few of those are ever picked up. I honestly think (hope?) that audiences will always pick "genuine" over something an AI bot compiled from existing material. In fact, should AI start writing plots and the market be flooded with such "low-calorie" stuff, perhaps the true artists will start gaining even more recognition than before. Or am I being too optimistic?
Re: streamer like Netflix:
1/ with feature films going straight to streamers and no longer having a theatrical run, these tech studios have been playing fast and loose with the terms: made-for-tv film and feature film. Now they won’t mess with ppl like the Russo Bros, but up and coming writers, who have been hired to write feature films for streamers have been paid “made-for-tv” fees which is the difference between a 30-50K take home and 300k.
2/ residuals: film financing has always been tricky, but with streaming, it’s like voodoo-economics. They’re able to hide the profits more, and pay less in residuals to the writers. Most writers aren’t the Russo Bros, and they may not get another gig for six months? Two years? And so residuals help keep working writers from losing their homes, and putting food on the table.
3/ they’ve cut the number of writing-rooms down so four writers are now doing the job of six, sever, or eight writers, and they’re effectively being paid less, to do more work!
4/ and tv residuals are hidden like feature film residuals are hidden.
There’s so much more to this than these four points, but I think these are the big ones (and I’m probably missing some excellent points, but I’m sitting on a beach in Marco Island at the moment and my brain’s “gone fishin’”.
AI:
1/ Studios who love saving money, only to give themselves bonuses, can now easily program AI to come up with a concept and a first draft of a script, with the intent to hire writers to then polish this “artificial script”, paying the writer significantly less.
2/ and then, the “R” word again: residuals. How does the studio divvy up the already shrinking residuals when AI regurgitates a concept and a first draft and then a writer is hired to put a polish to
It. Will the writer even receive residuals? If the studio had their way, it’d be a no…
Does that give you a little more info, Darth??
One wonders then if any of this will ever get resolved. Streaming services are obviously here to stay. So either way, some kind of "truce" will have to be established eventually. Strict rules, transparency in residuals, control mechanisms of sorts? I don't know. Right now, I am definitely on the side of the writers, that's for sure.
Yes, absolutely @DarthDimi , this is an existential fight, and the power definitely is in the court of the studios.
@chrisisall rightly called it a pivotal moment in filmmaking.
As you said, streaming is here to stay, and the writers know they can’t keep getting diminishing returns, but I honestly don’t know how or when this ends. It’s terrible. And when quotes are leaked to reputable industry media that studios are ready for writers to lose their houses or be unable to pay rent… I mean, that goes beyond the pale. That’s just evil.
The writers are definitely on the right side of history.
@DarthDimi The leaps AI technology have made recently is incredible, and frightening. It's certainly not perfect, but it's not unthinkable that we will see a lot of AI based content soon enough. I've tried Chat GPT out of curiosity at work, asking stuff like "Write a short summary of the advantages of this product" – adding a couple of key notes to get it started – and the results have been almost good enough to use "as is". A colleague of mine tried asking it to write a complete product blog post, and got a similar result; not perfect, but certainly not far from good enough to use. And frankly, most people wouldn't even have noticed a bit of imperfect wording here and there.
What AI can (or soon will be able to) do to other areas in creative industries is equally frightening, and I have no doubt studios are already looking to implement AI as part of their "toolkit".
And then there's stuff like this:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/jul/13/disney-bob-iger-actors-writers-strike
I scoff at them. Where would they be without their writers? Indeed, @MakeshiftPython, it is a sign of runaway greed. Reminds me a bit of when Cubby and Harry weren't willing to let Connery share in the profits of the Bonds.
Say I was a wealthy businessman -- I'm not! -- and I wanted to produce a movie. I make my living selling, say, farmaceuticals, and the money is good and I can easily invest 30 million dollars in an independent movie. More than that, I'd be willing to pay my writers, actors, set builders, and other crew members very handsomely, much more than they are used to get. Could I get such an independent movie production going right now, with members of the SAG-AFTRA in my cast and crew? And would such a film have any chance of actually being released, distributed, ... regardless of the strike?
@DarthDimi , the independent world is taking notice of the strikes; US producers are looking at indie-co-pros with other countries as we speak.
And yes, theoretically, if you financed a legitimate indie feature you could potentially hire striking SAG-AFTRA talent (you’d have to hop through hoops and get waivers).
If talent isn’t striking, then yes, you could independently finance and hire union talent from both the WGA and SAG-AFTRS, no problem.
The tricky business in indie filmmaking is getting the distribution deals to release your picture (selling to territories one-by-one, figuring out tv deals/streaming rights….; the studios of course don’t have that problem. Distribution is kind of built into the studio system/model. Doing it independently is a complex business and far above my pay-grade, but, it ain’t easy at all).
No time like now for Kevin Smith to get another film made, then. ;-)
Seriously, though, a big thank you for your explanation as always, @peter. I feel like I'm using you as a source of information, but I'm genuinely interested and I welcome the opportunity to learn.
If I don’t know an answer I can always ask a peer with more knowledge!
All I’m sure of is the writers (me included!) and actors, need to establish some fairness or else we will be experiencing diminishing returns, until there’s nothing left to share…
Thanks! And yes, the math is simple. No writers, no content. AI cannot replace creativity and heart.
Now we are starting to see completed films, or almost completed films start pushing back release dates. This will further delay other projects, jamming everything up on the release side (not to talk about all the projects in development, or were in pre-production).
For Bond fans, unless EoN has a magic wand, be patient….
Good question…. I don’t think they’ll strike this year, but I know nothing about their agreement. I will ask my producer and see what she says.
You and me both! As a tool, AI can definitely be a great asset – I imagine we might see something like AI aided movie restorations, for example. But there's so much that's best left being made by real people.
Exactly. I also believe that we ultimately connect to something man-made more. Knowing that something was "created" by a computer, already makes me far less interested, if at all.
I agree. Take CGI, for example: it's unavoidable these days, and often it might look great, but if you know that a film stunt or sequence is done without the aid of CGI, it makes it a lot more exciting to watch.
CR was the last movie I saw with an audience that elicited real gasps from people. They understood that they were seeing real stunts and it made them respond in a visceral manner. Not a single CGI scene ever managed to do the same, at least not while I was attending.
Interesting observations from George Martin.
I was just texted this and I haven’t read the full articles, but something stinks here…. I hope there’s a simple explanation (but considering this strike is entering its third month….)….
It’s even more remarkable given that his version of Lando was in the one Star Wars film that actually lost money!