tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post7996942473298447607..comments2023-10-17T02:44:03.005-07:00Comments on Animation writers: Answering Alex' QuestionStevehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17349670871562090251noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-22156855212835924752007-12-23T18:04:00.000-08:002007-12-23T18:04:00.000-08:00my name is Frances BeckhamI know this is off the s...my name is Frances Beckham<BR/>I know this is off the subject but I could not find any other topic to ask this question under. I have written a children novel and I have recently published it. I am interested in having it made into an animated movie. I wonder do could you direct me to any studio contacts that I can present my book to for consideration for an animation movie or series. If you can this info would be helpful to me and my agent. My email address is ahicks4298@msn.com.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-18864517301225231222007-12-15T09:00:00.000-08:002007-12-15T09:00:00.000-08:00I'm guessing a lot will be discovered when the Dir...I'm guessing a lot will be discovered when the Director's Guild starts to negotiate in January. I understand they've actually been talking to experts about the internet - unlike the WGA.<BR/>My guess is that the WGA's approach is all wrong about the internet. It's trying to pigeonhole into the same formula as broadcast TV, but since there are no specific times everyone needs to 'turn on' the interent to watch a specific show it seems like it operates closer to, say, Netflix or a rental service like that. Where everyone watches a show at different times and may hold onto it for awhile as a download and watch it later or mulitple times, etc.<BR/>It seems like a better model might be broadcast radio and how they pay publisher/artists for the use of their songs where there's a collective pot that is divvied up amongst all those involved to cover 'x' amount of time.<BR/>Personally I think they're jumping the gun right now on trying to predict how the internet will be the only way to view TV. It seems like it might be better to wait until it actually happens and chances are good it won't happen before the next time their contract comes up. Settle for a small toe in the water and renegotiate later when it's clear what is happening with the internet. Right now it's a guessing game.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-90265199384562133572007-12-15T01:50:00.000-08:002007-12-15T01:50:00.000-08:00Steve - Yeah, it's obvious there has to be an amou...Steve - Yeah, it's obvious there has to be an amount in the middle that's reasonable. However, that money given up front would seem to depend (at least, as I can see it) on what money is being generated from the current structure of Internet reairings. As in, the WGA shouldn't be asking for money that's not there. I don't think they're doing that, but I'd be intrigued to see what the earnings are from the Internet (ads? studio-provided budget? etc.) and see where that all figures out to. Again, an honestly-done sliding scale or preset language regarding percentage would seem like the best choice, allowing the writers to get the correct piece of the pie no matter how big or small the pie is at the time. What sucks is that the studios don't seem to be arguing what the correct piece of the pie is, but whether they deserve a slice at all.<BR/><BR/>Matt - Funny how that works, isn't it? Human psychology is an easy-to-predict bitch; if you've got some remote source to lay all your hangups or baser urges on, you can sleep at night like an innocent baby. I'm sure the eighth circle of Hell is waiting for them with open arms (although it'll have to fight off the fourth circle for the privilege). BTW, Matt, the Legion episode "Chained Lightning" was freakin' fantastic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-42073403652032698022007-12-15T00:11:00.000-08:002007-12-15T00:11:00.000-08:00Alex, it isn't that the studios are greedy. They h...Alex, it isn't that the studios are greedy. They have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. By which they get all the benefits of greed, guilt-free.Matt Waynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16072155061020369468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-40723421836297173472007-12-14T22:01:00.000-08:002007-12-14T22:01:00.000-08:00I actually think the Guild is asking for a "split ...I actually think the Guild is asking for a "split the difference" on this issue.<BR/><BR/>Money up front for the rerun, more money in success if there's a lot of downloads.<BR/><BR/>I tend to think the guild might be aggressively realistic about things, but the emphasis is on realistic.<BR/><BR/>It's unfair to simply cut out that second window.<BR/><BR/>But it's silly to assume that the world is what it was a decade ago.<BR/><BR/>That being said, the difference can't be 10,250 vs. 250. It has to be in the middle.Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17349670871562090251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-86340681321001149512007-12-14T19:33:00.000-08:002007-12-14T19:33:00.000-08:00Anonymous implies an interesting point. How does i...Anonymous implies an interesting point. How does inevitable Internet reairing affect the rerun process that currently exists? And conversely, how much money is trading hands in regards to this Internet reairing?<BR/><BR/>It would be unfair for the WGA to ask for a flat rate of money that's not actually being earned by the Internet reairing, despite what your average and established TV rerun will earn. But I trust that they're not asking for that. The reasonable thing that occurs to me, the audience member, is to simply ask for a specific percentage of what that Internet reairing gets, which would obviously increase as the Internet becomes the dominant medium. <BR/><BR/>Which, of course, is where that whole problem of sketchy language and net/gross conflicts comes up again. And that's where I look at the situation and I cannot help but charge the studios with purposeful greed. Screwing around with language and getting the writers to agree to a crappier arrangement thanks to dodgy phrasing is hard to justify by accident or principle. All it does is remind me of this exchange from Shakespeare in Love:<BR/><BR/>Philip Henslowe: But I have to pay the actors and the author. <BR/>Hugh Fennyman: Share of the profits. <BR/>Philip Henslowe: There's never any. <BR/>Hugh Fennyman: Of course not. <BR/>Philip Henslowe: Oh, Mr. Fennyman. I think you might have hit upon something.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8022653905840889580.post-23102247135534591292007-12-14T09:26:00.000-08:002007-12-14T09:26:00.000-08:00So if they receive their 10.5 for the internet re-...So if they receive their 10.5 for the internet re-airing then they won't scream for the same 10.5 the first time it's re-aired on TV?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com