Animation writers

Poached from the TAG blog... thoughts?

2008-07-16T23:13:00.000-07:00

From Steve H:

The Indecision is Over
... Let the employment begin!

Kevin beat me to the punch with this, but I post the news anyway:

After five weeks of negotiations, we have accepted employment as writers for Sit Down, Shut Up! under a new contract.
Though the program will be produced under the jurisdiction of IATSE Local 839, The Animation Guild (TAG), we have achieved Writers Guild of America (WGA) parity in key areas such as auditable residuals, new media, script fees, merchandising rights as well as a guarantee that these gains apply not only to ourselves but also to all future writers on the show.
We thank the WGA for its guidance and support during this process. We believe we’ve made a statement to the studios how important the standards of the WGA are to working writers. All animation writing -- television and features -- should be covered by the WGA.
This contract is a compromise: an improvement over the standard TAG terms we were initially offered, but not full WGA coverage. Compromises are never easy nor satisfying, always less comforting than a clear victory. We know that this is part of an ongoing struggle.
Reaching a deal will allow this program to move forward, providing jobs for many writers, animators, actors and production staff. Not every writer originally offered employment on Sit Down, Shut Up! has decided whether to return, and we understand and respect whatever decision they make. We remain hopeful that all animation writing will one day be covered by a WGA contract ...
As we say, negotiations are about leverage and momentum. It appears that nobody came away from this totally satisfied, but I'm happy that the writers made a deal that's acceptable to them. And I'm pleased ... no, delighted ... that a lot of folks are going to have work for a while.

Congratulations to everybody.

Posted by Steve Hulett at 7:36 PM
2 comments:

Kevin Koch said...
Wow, I'm amazed at the viciousness (and ignoranance) of the comments coming from fellow writers over at Deadline Hollywood Daily. The "Dirty Nine"?!? Ugly and uncalled for.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:25:00 PM

FROM ME:
Agreed.

We can go back and forth on IATSE/TAG/WGA whatever until we're blue in the face, but minimums are minimums and you get what you negotiate.

These writers were in the middle of their own post-strike strike... What did they think was going to happen when they let go of their fight for prime time animation?

At the same time, I think TAG has a responsibility now to take what these writers negotiated and use it as a springboard to raise incomes across the board for TAG writers.

This was the last battle of the strike, and even though they weren't trying to, they won a victory for IATSE animation writers.

Will our union do something with that?

Apparently there ARE residuals on my work, and they cover more than just me.

2008-06-24T22:58:00.000-07:00

...and I feel better knowing that.

(Here comes math. I prepare to be corrected.)

So... apparently, when I write a half hour script, and am paid $7500... management kicks in about $1750 per script into health care. Which means that as an IATSE covered union type, you get full health care for $3500 per year.

Good health care probably costs 5 times that.

What makes up the difference? You guessed it: Residuals that go to the union, not me.

So, going back to the root of all this - the "Greater Good" comment:

How do feel about the fact that freelancers, and people who work on daily call, and short-term employees that work on my productions get covered because of these residuals? Better than I would knowing that money was simply not being collected.

It doesn't mean I'm thrilled with all aspects of TAG, but it does give me some small peace of mind to know that monies being raised on my work, work which COULD NOT have existed without others working on (or fixing, depending on who's leading the discussion), does something for them as well.

Other writers reading this? Kevin? Steve H? Obligatory Angry anonymous guy? Am I right in my numbers?

And if so, why the hell didn't somebody say so 48 comments ago? :)

July 10th

2008-06-24T18:45:00.000-07:00

Woo.

Nothing like a dust up to make me want to realize there are faces attached to these names.

July 10th. Evite going out to writers.

If you haven't gotten it yet, shoot me an E-mail.

Fuzzily...

- Steve

Obama as a metaphor

2008-06-22T08:19:00.001-07:00

Nothing kicks the debate up to 11 like a talk about residuals, huh?

To Steve (and others): As I said, here and there, some of my venom has less venom right now, for a few reasons.

On a larger scale - I know that the 9 scripts I wrote the first season of Yin Yang Yo probably chunked enough hours into the pension to help cover the insurance of 7 additional workers. Not writers, workers.

Seriously, if that's how the hours work, I have to assume IA gets paid on my work and when I go "over" on my hours, that money goes somewhere.

And now I have to think - as a human being, as a person... as someone who makes money in a business that takes so many other people to make happen... is that bad? Am I going to be annoyed about that?

It's an election year. This year, I am voting AGAINST pocket book issues and voting for Barack Obama. (As long as we're mixing apples and oranges). Why? Personal reasons... but voting for Barack WILL affect my pocket book. My taxes WILL go up.

And I wonder: How is that different from my work in IA? Everybody talks about universal health care - that shit's gotta be paid for. Well, I think it's safe to say that at 7500 per six month period, IA health care is pretty much socialized medicine, and pretty much universal. You work in animation, chances are you're going to get it. You work for IA, chances are you're going to get it.

IA covers what - 100k people with health and benefits? I have to assume my hours help with that. So perhaps, on some of this, I have to put my ACTUAL money where my PHILOSPHICAL heart. Unlike every other union, IA is NOT a single issue union. They have writers (which I think they could do a better job servicing) but they have a lot more. Even TAG is not a single issue guild. They have writers (which I *know* they could service better).

We're part of a whole, whether we like it or not.

Which is why I'm starting to feel change needs to come from within, rather than waiting for any other union - or lack of one - to save the day.

Apples and Oranges? My breakdown of the residuals discussion

2008-06-21T19:04:00.000-07:00

Okay.

So, I'm not the biggest fan of how IA/TAG handles writers within it's fold. No big secret there.

But for very good reasons, I've had to do some digging into something I think IA gets right for writers - Health care.

Steve H - You'll be better at the math than I am, but here's my guestimation.

If I writer writes one half hour of material - they are paid 7500 and clock in at 300 hours. That is enough to qualify them for health care for six months. That means someone making 15K per year can get health and pension. Do that fifteen years, and you get health care for life. (I don't know what the "for life" plan is for the WGA).

So now, I want to do some math. I am intentionally NOT differentiating between animation and live action, and I am rooting all of this in the basic cable world, because that's what I know.

Animation writer
One half hour: 7.5K
No additional monies. Ever.
Healthcare: Triggered for six months upon completion of script, 300 hours of pension and health credited.

Basic Cable Live action writer
One half hour script: 12K
Reruns ONCE: 6K more.
Total with 12 runs (since that's where the math stops changing): 21K (ish)
Health care: Triggered at 31K

Head expoloding yet?

So here's what it boils down to:
You write two scripts a year, you get health with both.
With IA/TAG - You make 15K, and that's it.
With WGA - You make 42K, with the potential to make more.

So here are the questions every writer asks when they think of this stuff:

Is an IA writer compensated higher in credited hours for work than others in the union? (300 hours for one script? I would say yes.)
Is there a difference between the two if there are no reruns? (Yes. 4.5k)
Could a writer take that 27K and buy their own health plan for their family? (Maybe. Depends on health, I suppose.)
Does a writer qualify for health care in IA faster than the WGA? (Sorta)

So for people like me - people who work in BOTH unions - it's a conundrum. I would much rather be getting WGA minimums for my work. But if I wasn't getting WGA work, my world view would be much, much different.

The question is this: What is apples and oranges?

Writing vs. Writing?
Prime time animation writing vs. Basic cable animation writing?
WGA Basic cable writing vs. IA basic cable writing?

Those are the facts, as I know them. I know how I feel about the whole thing. The question is, if the above is correct, how do you?

Sit Down, Shut Up? Honestly... when it comes to my unions, I'm used to it.

2008-06-16T00:24:00.000-07:00

So, yeah. There's this:

Writers take a stand over 'Sit Down'
Dispute highlights ongoing tension between unions

On Thursday, the writers for Sony Pictures TV's upcoming animated Fox series "Sit Down, Shut Up" walked off the show in pursuit of WGA representation.

The writers, who are members of the WGA, claimed that they were misled by Sony TV that they would be covered by the Writers Guild, while the studio had made arrangements with another union, IATSE.

The labor dispute highlights the ongoing tension between the two unions over jurisdiction in primetime animated series. The writers on all other animated Fox series, produced by 20th Century Fox TV, are represented by the WGA. (20th TV also co-produces "Sit Down," but Sony TV, which developed the comedy with studio-based writer Mitchell Hurwitz, is the lead production entity.)

Sony TV produces "Sit Down" through its animation division, Adelaide Prods.

Under IATSE, writers not only won't get new-media revenues and other terms the WGA negotiated with the studios during the strike, they also won't get paid residuals, a crucial safety net for scribes between jobs.

There's a bunch of other blah blah blah stuff in there - but it really boils down to this. The writers on this show are getting a taste of how little animation writers make under the IATSE contract. Or, to be fair, how little they make "in success." I'm sure their episodic rate was the same - it's the residuals and the back end that's lower than they're used to.

And by lower, I mean NONEXISTENT.

I'm torn here: Of course, I'm pulling for the writers, because in the end, all they're asking for is money "in success." But then, there's ambivalence, because I am not so foolish as to think it will affect anyone but these individual writers. Good for them, doesn't mean anything for the rest of us.

The WGA had a moment where they could have stood their ground for animation writers, and animation writing was one of the first things they folded on during the strike. No surprise, really. Animation writers (of my level, not of the Simpsons/Family Guy/King Of The Hill level) simply are not a large enough part of the WGA, and they weren't going to strike over us.

I get it.

Meanwhile, the same math works on IATSE. Non-writing union members call the shots. We're a small percentile (Steve? Got a number?) within the union that does represent us.

One doesn't want us. And one doesn't hear us. But they're both fighting loudly over us.

Thanks for the invite, guys, but I know you're only doing this to make the girl you love jealous. Call me when prom is over.

Falling Hare: Update

2008-05-30T22:43:00.001-07:00

Hey there!

Okay, so... you're probably wondering what's up. First, the obligatory preamble.

Seven scripts went to Stephen Worth with the caveat of "read this when you have time." They were messengered over - scrubbed clean of any identity - and he has them. At his leisure, he will read them.

Then, he'll let me know which script he felt best took the cartoon and backward engineered it into script form. I have my choice, but that's not the contest.

Once a winner is picked, I will reach out to that person and see if they're okay with their work being scanned, and uploaded, as a PDF file.

Part of my radio silence has been a little bit of good news which I'll share with anyone who wants to shoot me an E-mail.

With that, have good weekends...

Update: Reading this weekend

2008-05-08T12:02:00.001-07:00

Honestly, that's it.

The scripts are in!

2008-05-03T13:03:00.000-07:00

And there are thousands of them!

Okay, honestly, it's less than that. You know who you guys (and gals) are. :)

Here's what's up:

1) I will read them, remove any hint of identity (which means I probably have to cut and paste and lay them into another document, because a clever reader could do a CONTROL-I and figure out where it came from)

2) I will forward the best (in my opinion) of the bunch to Stephen Worth, along with my first, second and third place.

3) The winner will be announced here - and that script will be placed up here (anonymous)

Keeping you posted!

Three hours!

2008-04-30T20:09:00.000-07:00

And then, the phone lines are closed.

If you haven't voted for your idol, and they're voted off, you have nobody to blame but yourself.

...

Wait, you know what I mean.

Tick, Tick, Tick.

2008-04-27T21:56:00.000-07:00

It's April 27th.

Three days away from the cut off, which is midnight the 30th.

Stephen's been posting his theories, and I've been storing submissions... but to be honest, I ain't got that many. If you send something to me, you've got halfway decent odds.

And if you're still polishing, shine it up and get it in.

SPAM, a lot.

2008-04-20T09:14:00.001-07:00

Hey gang.

So... somehow, my E-mail got into the hands of evil doers last night. Around 12:45 AM.

I have to say around 12:45 AM because that's when I started getting about 20 bouncebacks a minute.

I'm being promised by my web person that it's being fixed but just to be safe:

IF YOU HAVE SENT A SCRIPT, RESEND with "SCRIPT" in the subject line. If you are sending a script, send it with "SCRIPT" in the subject line.

Because right now, it might get lost in a sea of bullshit.

:)

The problem with Vilification...

2008-04-19T23:26:00.000-07:00

...is you learn, 99 times out of a hundred, that once you start actually talking to someone, they don't turn out to be villificatable (not a word, I know.)

Stephen and I finally connected today. As you know, part of the reason I want to do the "script that classic" contest is to find that middle ground - prove that words can paint pictures, show that there's a place in animation for scripts.

We talked for about a half an hour - I know this because my Iphone counts upwards - and it was a good chat about animation, cartoons, process, what works and what doesn't.

And while we CLEARLY have different viewpoints, I think that Stephen's world and mine are not as far apart as the internet might make it seem. So... here's where we're at with this.

Stephen's the judge on this. That's always been the goal: Get the guy who is the historian at the ASIFA archive to judge a contest based on words.

I'm the filter - you send the script to me, I "anonymize it" and send it to him. But I am the moat between submission and judgment. Which is, as I've said, seasoned to taste.

I know what I'm looking for, so does he. And you guys know the process. As of right now, the number of scripts received is... well... LOW. There are still 12 days left to get me the script so they can be judged.

We now interrupt the update with a side note.

SIDE NOTE:

Interesting point of conversation:

While I believe history is important, I also understand that people are inspired by what they know. Ren and Stimpy inspired people. So, quite frankly, did Fairly Oddparents. Different people from different sides of the isle, to get involved with different sides of the same industry. Everybody's going to have an opinion as to what's better.

Lets use John K as an example: I think there are a couple of Ren and Stimpy's that are classics - that work, that are funny. And then, there was the new Ren and Stimpy, which I could not watch. There's the ranger smith cartoon which left me feeling icky (sorry, but if we're being honest, that's where I am.) Then there's spongebob, or Power Puff girls, or more recently, El Tigre (picking stuff we talked about) that most of the time, I leave laughing. And impressed. And maybe even jealous that I could not have done that.

I think most of the time, writers who post are more interested in "There's two ways to do it, and they're both right" more than the artists who post are. But script writers aren't trying to cut artists out of the picture - their opinion is that the words drive the art. Which relegates the board and art to a place where it serves the word and script.

Artists that believe scripts have no place in animation want to relegate writers to serving cofee, or at the very least, punch up.

I defend the Family Guy and South Park's of the world as "pop" - they are cartoons of the moment. And they are as strong if not stronger, to me, than some of the classic sitcoms I enjoyed growing up and SOME of the board shows I see now.

They are - on an entertainment level - STRONGER to me than some of the stuff that he holds up as classics.

I will let him discuss this.

His point is interesting and intellectually valid: The sitcoms I like have actors interpreting the words. And then, there was a moment where I realized - a good board artist / story person is the person who takes the words in a script and turns that cartoon character into an actor, the same way Woody Harrelson did on Cheers, or Kramer on Seinfeld.

I hadn't really thought of it that way, honestly. And, to be fair, I don't know that I care too much about that while I'm laughing my ass off at the cartoons I like. Moreso, I don't know how you make an adult, prime-time, sitcom style cartoon with those goals, or if that even matters.

There are scripted shows I don't like, and board-driven shows I do. And vice versa. It's all about personal taste. What I don't like is anyone telling writers their contributions are invalid, or unimportant.

So now, we're having dialogue. Which I think is important.

So, the contest continues. The criteria is admittedly arbitrary. But the goals are concrete.

Me? I'm looking for a script that best shows "Falling Hare" in script form. So is he. And as long as words are used to do that, we're all on the same page.

Tomorrow: I'm going to talk about my view point about the difference between "Animation" and "A cartoon." They can be, in my mind, two different things. They have different criteria. And neither are wrong.

Glad to be back.

- Steve

P.S. Taking down the moderation now.

Jesus. Thank you, Jury Duty.

2008-04-19T09:30:00.000-07:00

Okay. Back on Track.

It's amazing to me, by the way, that the court system can pull you out of your life... but then the DA and the Public Defender can set their schedule anyway they want.

You: Out for 8 hours, four to five days a week.
Them: An hour or two in the AM, 90 minute lunch, a couple hours in the afternoon, and then done by 4.

Why do the wheels of justice run slowly? Because they're YOUR wheels.

I owe Stephen Worth a call, and you guys an update. That's my goal for today.

- Steve

P.S. We convicted of Voluntary Manslaughter.

Whoa whoa whoa...

2008-03-30T18:21:00.000-07:00

Hey there. Diving in.

1) I'm still on Jury Duty, so I haven't had time to connect with Stephen yet. But...

2) Stephen: You can use whatever criteria you want, but two caveats:

A) The contest is to watch Falling Hare, and write it in script.

B) The winner is the script that best reflects that cartoon in a way that it could then turned into an actual cartoon. "None of the above" can't be an option because we're looking for the best version of that.

That being said:

Ya can't put out rules as to what you're looking for in the middle of this, as it gives an unfair advantage to people who haven't submitted yet. If we do this again, feel free.

But the above has always been the mission statement for this... anything other than that - and especially changing how this works - wouldn't be cool. (Note: I moderated comments long enough to get this up here and connect via Email)

Tomorrow's the last day of jury duty, and I'm sure we'll chat after that.

- Steve

Extension!

2008-03-30T17:41:00.000-07:00

Well, as you probably guessed by the recent back and forth, I'm going to extend the deadline. No rule changes, same deal: Write "Falling Hare"

Submission deadline moved... one month. April 30th.

Just to remind from the previous post:

- - - - - - -

So, by now, some of you have probably figured out what I was thinking about... but maybe you didn't figure out all of the details.

I think there are writers who can write lyrically, visually and well enough that they can script out a classic.

I am not so vain as to think it's me.

But I do believe that person is out there.

And so, in honor of this week's "Annie Awards," which also includes script writing as part of its list of honors... I'd like to propose, announce (and God Help Me, fund) the First annual Script Script That Classic Contest!

The rules are pretty simple:

Watch the cartoon. Write a script in Final Draft, or in RTF format. Mail it to me at Marmel@marmel.com. Include your name, address, contact information, etc.

I will then log it, anonymize it (remove all names, etc.) and then submit it for judging.

And while I plan on reaching out to other board artists, directors and story people to help go through the stuff and give opinions, I would like the final judge of this to be Stephen Worth.

Pick the best of the bunch. Show script writers what's right.
And in return, you can take the worst of the bunch, and gut it.

Here's what happens when a winner is picked.

The winner will be announced, and un-anonymized. I will see that the winner is paid a "teleplay fee" for a short-subject script - as determined by the IATSE/TAG 839 rules. I think it's a little less than $2000. This may be out of my own pocket, but I'd like to see this person be paid to punch up an existing project. (Note: If the winner is from out of state, travelling to a punch up meeting would be on them.)

I will personally make an in-kind donation to the ASIFA-Archive.

So... it might be a bust, but I'll still honor my part.

2008-03-27T22:41:00.001-07:00

So, three days and counting before the March 31st deadline for "Script that classic" times out. And the fact is, submissions have been... well... LOW.

And that's cool. It was an experiment, it started a debate, and that's what I was gunning for. And perhaps I could have promoted it more - but then, I had a few weeks of human stuff hit, and that's life.

For the record, submissions are still open. Also for the record, Stephen Worth wrote a very eloquent defense as to why he didn't want to judge this, and I respect it. To be fair, his time would have been very minimal. So will mine.

However, there are still three days or so left to submit a version to me, anonymously and there still is a cash reward that will be paid out. And I will do this again. Next time, tho, I might shrink the contest down to a section, rather than a whole script. Lesson learned. :)

I return to Jury duty and will announce a winner mid-April.

Script That Classic Update

2008-02-21T11:06:00.001-08:00

Hey guys. Quick update.

1) Some scripts coming in. Would like to see a lot more. I'm going to set a deadline for script entry: Monday, March 31st. (I'm out of town a lot in March)

2) I am still discussing this with Steve Worth. We'll be chatting later in this month about his role in this. It's important to me that the ASIFA ARCHIVE be the judge of a good script. That's my point. But "none of the above" and "they all suck" is not an acceptable answer.

So... Rules still apply!

Contest is still on!

Solid dates in place!

Scripts sent to Marmel@marmel.com

Contest: SCRIPT THAT CLASSIC!

2008-02-07T14:46:00.000-08:00

So, by now, some of you have probably figured out what I was thinking about... but maybe you didn't figure out all of the details.

I think there are writers who can write lyrically, visually and well enough that they can script out a classic.

I am not so vain as to think it's me.

But I do believe that person is out there.

And so, in honor of this week's "Annie Awards," which also includes script writing as part of its list of honors... I'd like to propose, announce (and God Help Me, fund) the First annual Script That Classic Contest!

And the classic I'd like to propose be scripted - retrofitted backwards from classic cartoon (as listed by our friend and periodic poster Stephen Worth) is "Falling Hare."

The rules are pretty simple:

Watch the cartoon. Write a script in Final Draft, or in RTF format. Mail it to me at Marmel@marmel.com. Include your name, address, contact information, etc.

I will then log it, anonymize it (remove all names, etc.) and then submit it for judging.

And while I plan on reaching out to other board artists, directors and story people to help go through the stuff and give opinions, I would like the final judge of this to be Stephen Worth.

Pick the best of the bunch. Show script writers what's right.
And in return, you can take the worst of the bunch, and gut it.

Here's what happens when a winner is picked.

The winner will be announced, and un-anonymized. I will see that the winner is paid a "teleplay fee" for a short-subject script - as determined by the IATSE/TAG 839 rules. I think it's a little less than $2000. This may be out of my own pocket, but I'd like to see this person be paid to punch up an existing project. (Note: If the winner is from out of state, travelling to a punch up meeting would be on them.)

I will personally make an in-kind donation to the ASIFA-Archive.

I humbly ask other producer on this 'blog to chip in work as well. (Hell, the more that gets chipped in, the less out of pocket I face. I'm not an idiot. :) )

But it boils down to this: I will only do this if Stephen judges, in deference to his knowledge of the past. I freely admit - I know less about this than a lot of people. So I'll need the assistance of people with artier minds than I.

The cartoon is picked - one of the classic cartoons of all time. Chosen by someone with not only an encyclopedic knowledge of animation... but who directs the archive that honors it.

I'm in for the parts I can bring to the table. My time. My scripty-producer head. Cash. And opportunity.

Stephen? Whattya think?

Just in case anyone was actually waiting...

2008-02-04T19:41:00.000-08:00

...I'm dragging a little ass.

Nothing like a whirlwind trip to the superbowl to slow down your animation experiments.

Will return to posting, probably, Weds.

- Steve

"Falling Hare"

2008-02-01T00:25:00.000-08:00

Classic. Really awesome cartoon.

One of the few in Steven's list that I'm kicking around for what I want to announce next week.

A quick: "I'm learning as I do this side note," as I was trying to track down "The Big Snooze" I found a Chili Willy cartoon of the same name. I was assuming you didn't mean that.

"Big Snooze" is a little harder to find (in other words, didn't instantly show up on Youtube) but find it I shall. And find it I did!

Looney Tunes - The Big Snooze (1946)
Uploaded by Cartoonzof2006

I loves me the Bugs Bunny. These are both excellent choices because Bugs is a smart ass, there is verbal to him...

Look for the "What the F*** is this all about" post Monday or Tuesday.

I wouldn't want to see a script for this...

2008-01-31T00:13:00.000-08:00

Stephen Worth suggested I write a script based on the "Bugs/Porky" section of "Corny Concerto"

I'll be the first to point out... I don't think you COULD do a script for the Bugs and Porky section of this cartoon.

Something WAS written before this cartoon was boarded... and it was the music. So if anything, the music is the script to service the cartoon, which is whimsy and romp.
About 2:40 seconds worth of cartoon with a wafer thin thru-line that is there to go from gag to gag to gag. (If you're just looking for the "Bugs" part, start watching at about the one minute mark.)

So... while it's a good suggestion, it feels like a bit of a trap. :)

I don't think you can script out a cartoon like this in a way that services what this cartoon wants to do. Nor would I try.

Keep the discussion going tho. Somebody suggested "Tail of Two Kitties." but i'll take a few more before I throw something out for a vote.

Thanks!

Updated: An idea is brewing. And maybe it's time to put my money where my mouth is.

2008-01-29T23:06:00.001-08:00

But I'll probably need the group to make it work.

If you could pick one cartoon - ONE - to work backwards from... To go from Animated Cartoon backwards to script... to either prove that it's possible or prove that it's not... what would it be?

One of the classics - a cartoon that would make the "purists" (the quotes are sarcastic, by the way) want to stab themselves in the eyes before reading as text - what would it be?

Pick a cartoon you think is so perfect, so flawless, that words could NEVER do it justice...

Which one would you choose?

A few extra caveats:

* Give me a classic cartoon with words and actions that holds up today.
* If it's wordless, give me something in the Road Runner / Tom and Jerry world where there's conflict AND cartoon comedy.

I'm looking for that "played in the mornings when we were kids, they don't make cartoons like that anymore" cartoon that everybody holds up as the standard.

And then, I'll let ya know what I'm up to.

- Steve

2008-01-27T21:48:00.000-08:00

Why did it take no TV to make me stop watching shit TV?

I can't speak for everyone on the planet, but... I am not in the sole control of my TV, or my TIVO.

On any given day, there's movies on there I don't like, Oprah's I'd rather get eye cancer than watch... and then Cashmere Mafia, which makes feel very serial killer-y. I really need an hour of women telling me that they have a place in the workplace? Really? What is this, 1955?

I like it better on Madmen when it's done in context and nobody's trying to convince you it's a comedy.

But in the dry spell that has been the wrtier's strike, I have discovered Weeds, Battlestar Galactica, The Sarah Conner Chronicles (Nerd!), Breaking Bad, Mad Men, and I absorb Grey's Anatomy like a sponge.

All of them: Scripted.

Don't get me wrong. There are some reality shows I like: I like the end of American Idol, I enjoy Celebrity Apprentice, and I can find myself absorbed in Amazing Race, provided the people in it aren't all complete tools.

But the shows that get my loyalty... are the ones that are written. With stories. And characters. And plot lines.

Everybody talks about this strike sending people screaming to the internet. But I think there's something else happening too: It's sending them screaming to DVD box sets and netflix.

I think you're going to find that people are seeking out good TV. And for all we know, that's good news for shows like 30 Rock, shows that are on the bubble that people are finding for the first time...

...and will return to when they're back on the air, brand new.

Foolishly optimistic, I know. But a boy can hope.

Network attitude: Sell to me, don't try to change me.

2008-01-25T21:50:00.000-08:00

Okay, so... Bob Harris makes a good point. And, before the waterfall of people who say I don't respect how hard it is to do a storyboard begin to anonymously flame, I'll start a new discussion.

I am not saying that Board artists waste their time and do a board, only to have it retrofitted into a script when they are in the midst of a production. That's dumb.

I'm giving you my opinion on how someone who writes on storyboard could sell a show to someone who wants a script.

Because it boils down to this: If you want to sell a show, and then you want it to be a board-driven show... YOU have to be in charge. If I'm in charge, or someone like me is, it's gonna be script-driven. That's how I think, that's how I work, that's what I like.

Whether I'm a good executive running a script-driven show in the eyes of the board artists who work on it... is another discussion.

But lets say you - the artist who writes on storyboard - has the greatest idea for a cartoon ever. And you, the artist who writes on storyboard - sells it... but the network wants to see a script before a board. But you, the artist who writes on storyboard... DOESN'T WANT TO WRITE LIKE THAT.

Then don't.

When it comes to scripts, you write, you rewrite, you rewrite again, you get notes, you get more notes, and then eventually... in a pilot, you get to go to board.

My suggestion to you, to beat this system, is play it to your strengths.

Thumbnail your pilot.
Write the way you know how to write.
Then, retrofit it back into script, to give it to the network in a way they understand it. Go and talk to a writer friend of yours who will help you turn it into a script, if you don't feel that's your strength. It entails making a writer friend, but you can do it. I believe in you.

This is no different than pitching your thumbs, getting notes, and then having to revise and clean up. It takes more effort to redraw than it does to rewrite... I get that. But do you want to sell a show to an executive that only gets scripts?

Give them a script.

Give them the script version of your thumbnail board pitch. Include your board if you want. Don't if you don't. In success, they tell you to "go to board" with notes. Then you'll get paid for that step. And guess what? You're half way done, ideally.

In an ideal world, I - as a script writer - would like to be able to sell a show without a board to back it up. But in cartoons, I can't. Boards are the second step in any of my pilot processes, finding a director who I can work with... who likes the show I've created or produce and wants to either work on it or add to it... is integral to its success.

But in the real world, a board artist can cheat the system... sell the show, do the board, hide the board, transcribe the script, get the notes and then sell the series.

And then, in success, you can fight to have the show "written" anyway you want.

Unless it's a network that only takes board pitches for shows. In which case, I have no place there. At best, I work on someone else's vision.

No writer - board or script - gets paid for their time, compared to the effort it takes to sell a show. The success is in series.

So I pose this as a possibility. If you could play to your strengths, and sell to what the buyer wants and understands... where is the harm?

Technorati Tags:
ANimation writing, selling a pilot, writing animation scripts, pitching cartoons

Del.icio.us Tags:
ANimation writing, selling a pilot, writing animation scripts, pitching cartoons

To the 80 hour a week guy - you get what you negotiate for, and you put up with what you choose to put up with

2008-01-24T14:05:00.000-08:00

What the hell, lets make this it's own thread:

Anonymous guy:

"Since when do studios NOT respect animation writers? studios kiss your inept asses and make you producers. you writers are just lucky studio executives have no idea how animation works or they would realize that MOST of you bog down your stories with crap slow down the pipeline and make shows twice as expensive to produce. instead you get promoted to producers and showrunners and sometimes they even call you directors. "
Uh... that's not entirely true. There's a whole strike going on because of how writers are respected, but... you have your opinion and I have mine. (I appreciate you highlighting "MOST," I'm not taking anything personally here.)

On a script driven show, do I think writers have more contact with executives and creators than other people on the production? Yes. And a producer/story editor needs that access, because they're the interface between the production and the network executive. Notes are delivered to the first person in the chain that can then manage the notes down to a production and have them addressed... whether it's story notes from an EP, network notes from the Channel, or S&P notes from the fine folks in Standards and Practices.

But that doesn't mean we're getting our asses kissed. It means we get the unfiltered negatives.

If you want to be an animation writer and stand out from the crowd then be the opposite of what most of them are right now. study more than writing. study film and art and design. artists only hate writers who are crap at scriptwriting so if your actually good at it you will be loved.
Well, everybody wants to be loved, but that's the last thing on my mind when I'm writing. All I care about is writing a script and producing a cartoon that I'm proud of.

I'm going to try to do it in a way that doesn't kill a crew, and try to do it in a way that's smart about the medium, but regardless of your background, that's all you can do: Try. In the end, every production is going to have it's own complications and constraints... and you do the best you in the time you have with the money you've been budgeted.

As for the pay dont worry about not getting residuals because when you are made a producer it will make up for it. until then just accept everything else as "part of the job" the way this blog constantly tells storyboard artists that fixing shitty scripts and working 80 hours a week is just "part of the job".

Being made a producer and getting residuals are two different things. Producer is a title, with a pay raise probably, but it doesn't mean back end, residuals, or monies in success.

But here's the part that I really wanted to debate with you.

Are you getting paid for 80 hours a week? And if not, why not?

If you're working 80 hours a week and you are getting paid for it, you need to stop complaining about that because you're being paid for 80 hours a week. But since I doubt that's the case, I'll say that if you're working 80 hours a week and you're not getting paid for it, then you need to stand up for yourself and get paid.

That's YOUR job. Or your supervisor's job. Or your union's job. Nobody's going to tell you to NOT work if there's work to be done. You're the only one that can ask to be compensated fairly for work done.

Continuing that thought: If somebody else can do your job in half the time (or less time, I suppose), in a way that makes the Production work or the producers happy, then you need to figure out how to do what you do differently and stop complaining about what the writers are doing.

Every production has a schedule and a budget. They are either reasonable, or not. But if I can't produce something on a schedule, I push the schedule. If I can't produce something on a budget, I say something. And if those two issues are immovable objects, then something has to give.

For me, on my current production, maybe that's a retake. Or the inability to get a joke in a show. Or I have to live with a background I hate, in a color palate that makes me think I'm looking at Salmon. Or facial expressions and character acting that's not what I was hoping for.

If I don't have the time or budget to fix those things, I can't wave a magic wand and create either. And I understand your frustration, if people above you want you to. But you need to figure out how you can say "I don't have a wand to do that."

There's three circles in any production: Shit you can control, shit you can influence, and shit that's out of your hands. Fix the stuff you can control and accept the stuff you can't. Otherwise you end up very bitter, very quickly.

Who then, speaks for the animation writer?

2008-01-22T19:34:00.000-08:00

It's been the topic of a lot of commentary:

"In order to make absolutely clear our commitment to bringing a speedy conclusion to negotiations, we have decided to withdraw our proposals on reality and animation. Our organizing efforts to achieve Guild representation in these genres for writers will continue. You will hear more about this in the next two weeks."

Me? I'm disappointed, not surprised. Forgive me if I don't clutch my heart over this.

So who represents animation writers?

Well, at least, for now, it's not the WGA. We're off the table again.

And as an animation script writer, I can say... I don't really think it'll ever be IATSE. We are a small voice in a gigantic union.

The IATSE contract is up in 18 months. Lets see how that all shakes out. Will IATSE use the WGA as a template in the same way IATSE wanted the WGA to use the DGA agreement?

Hell if I know.

If you're an animation person, and you want good representation, you're gonna have to find it, pick it, and pay for it.

For a lawyer to read your fine print and protect you.

For an agent to fight for you and you alone.

For an accountant, or a business manager, to help you save money and build your own pension.

And most importantly, for your own talent to shine bright enough that it can secure a future above minimums.

Because apparently, as of right now, I don't see a better option.

Is this what it's like for animators to watch "Bottom Biting Bug?"

2008-01-22T03:45:00.001-08:00

Or any other cartoon that takes the medium and uses it for something else?

Lets start with the fact that this is on Youtube, under the poorly thought out linkline of "Are you funnier than Jay Mohr." Holy God, is that a set up for a waterfall of negative comments.

I've always gotten along with Jay. So, I'm not critiquing the comedy. Truth to tell, I haven't watched the clip. I'm commenting on the marketing of it all. Nothing else.

As a comic, there's nothing more infuriating than watching an actor get up on stage and do five minutes of horrid material, as a way to showcase themselves in front of a talent scouts who happen to be at comedy clubs.

It was a BIG thing in the '80s, when people were tossing out sitcom deals the way most people toss out aluminum cans. Yeah, you get five cents back, but who cares?

So here's this clip, produced by Turbotax, and "Tax Laugh.Com." Here's this clip that uses stand up comedy - the art form - but (I'm guessing) has green screened Jay and dropped him in front of a brick wall with the word "LAUGH" spraypainted behind him, as though the Joker's hunchmen were there.

So here's this clip, for a contest that didn't even have the courage to show Jay on a stage at, say, an Improv Comedy Club, doing this material in front of a live audience.

Ignoring the fact that I don't want my taxes to be funny, I want them to be accurate - this is a campaign that takes something I hold to be sacred and uses it in a way that's not so kind to the art form.

I see parallels there.

The flipside is this: The best comics came from somewhere else, as well. I know Lawyer comedians. Rodney Dangerfield sold vacuum cleaners. I was an editorial columnist for several papers before I moved into comedy. They were all people who came from some place else and then found their love of it later.

Maybe they studied the greats. Or, maybe they just became really, really good.

The combination of art and commerce - the melding of promoting creativity and pissing on the genre - Somewhere between Eddy Izzard and Taxlaugh.com or between The Incredible World of DIC and PIXAR, who doesn't need an adjective in front of it to promote it's inredible-ness... there's an answer there somewhere.

You'll notice, the guild didn't react.

2008-01-21T08:02:00.000-08:00

A lot of people are reacting FOR the guild.

But the guild is running numbers. And the guild is rightly trying to figure out what this means for its members, not how it affects directors or what they look like in the media.

The very fact that CBS has to advertise "Big Brother 10 (or whatever)" as "Now that's good television" should say something. Maybe it is: If you're grading on a curve.

With awards shows coming and an actor's strike brewing, this is the perfect time for the WGA to make a decision as to whether this is a good deal, and negotiate from it... or to stand strong, and keep up the fight.

I don't have an opinion. I don't know the numbers.

I also don' t have an opinion, because I have a weekly paycheck. I am vested, and I am affected... but I am not suffering as others are, for this cause.

Everybody wants this over quickly. But for it to be over without meaning would mean it shouldn't have happened in the first place.

The WGA can take heart in the fact that any big gains given to the DGA were a direct result of the pressure the WGA put on the AMPTP in the first place. The gains given to the DGA, that they made that deal in six days, is proof that there was merit to the WGA argument... and the AMPTP gave in on some things but gave them to the DGA as a face saving measure.

The question now becomes... is it enough for the DGA? Would it be enough for SAG?

Interesting days.

I'm thinking it's time we get together again.

2008-01-20T09:19:00.000-08:00

Personally, I don't think this strike is going to wind down as quickly as everybody else would like it to, because right now... the writers have all the fiscal leverage.

They might not have the PR leverage, since the DGA took a deal that is still being analyzed...

...but with the Oscars coming, TV viewing down and Wall Street starting to realize that greed is the driving force for locking the writers out of their fair share, not smart business decisions...

...pressure is mounting.

At the same time, I think we - animation writers - script writers and board writers - have a unique and singular opportunity to discuss what WE want, and how this strike and the sacrifices that were made for the gains that are coming (regardless of size) - can be used to change our situations for the better.

Regardless of how.

In the next few weeks I'll be figuring out the where's and the whens of the next get together. It'll probably be Burbank - that's the center of existence for all three studios. But aside from drinking and commiserating, I'd like to put a little bit of a "think tank" on it as well...

Anybody got a better suggestion for a place to get together besides Gordon Biersch?

I'm thinking:
Castaways
The Outside Area at French 75 Bistro
The Blue Room (but they don't take credit cards. Bleh)

I'm open to suggestions about where, and what this one should be about.

But I'm also about to start watching football, and the Packers are one game away from a Superbowl trip, so my Sunday priorities are my Sunday priorities.

Stay linked. :)

Barguments over the strike

2008-01-19T16:04:00.001-08:00

So, I live up in the Valencia/Stevenson Ranch area.

This is, I think it's safe to say, where successful but not mega-rich people in the entertainment industry live. The below the line folks who are doing well on a week to week basis, or, for the sake of arguments, animation show runners who have been doing animation show running for nearly a decade.

I like it here. I could use a few more decent restaurants, but the "Claim Jumper Buffalo Chicken Tenders" are pretty good.

But... I am outnumbered here - more above the line than below, more IATSE than WGA, more people affected by the strike than people striking.

There are a couple of places I hang out, and invariably, when somebody hears I am a writer, the discussion goes one of two ways:

Sometimes it's: "How are you handling the strike?" And I have to be honest, that aside from the time I put in striking with, or working with, the WGA... it's not hitting me. I work in animation, and animation writers are not on strike... at least the ones who aren't covered by the WGA. Our shows continue, if we're not prime time.

But mostly it's: We don't like you. You're killing us." And this is the reaction I get more than not. And I always - ALWAYS - engage those people in a discussion. Because yes - to the hair stylist and the production person that I talked to over the past week - I get it. You're jobs are either on the bubble or drying up, and your life is on the line. And I don't think there's a single writer on the face of the Earth that isn't sorry for that.

But also invariably, when I talk to them, I point out that for every penny the WGA negotiates for, the other unions also get. IATSE, for example, will make 4.5 cents for every penny the WGA manages to get. It's pattern bargaining. For the WGA's sacrifices, despite IATSE's lousy support, they win. As does every other union. We were the first union to have to fight the digital download battle. If it wasn't the WGA, it would have been SAG.

And if it wasn't the WGA, the DGA deal would have been a big, steaming pile of ass, as opposed to what seems to be a pretty good starting point for a renewing of talks.

And I get that writers are paid more than most. But that' s because - in prime time and in animation sometime - they created it. They created the show, or created the episode. It started with them.

When a person creates a new drug, or invents something like the artificial heart, nobody begrudges them getting a big cut of the profits. But because writing is considered a "fun" job, the fact that writers are fighting for what they believe is their fair share is considered greedy.

Nobody gets mad at the person who invented the cell phone because not anybody can invent a cell phone. But everybody - on some level - can write. Either a letter. Or a blog. Or a note. Consequently, it doesn't feel important.

As a writer - as somebody who tries to create things that become television shows - I get that I have a blessed life. I get that I'm one of a small group of people who will ever come up with an idea, get the chance to develop an idea, and then get it on the air. It's fun, but it's not easy.

But that idea - IF IT SELLS - employs people. It creates jobs. From producers, to writers, to actors, to caterers, to make up people, to electricians, and more. That is a fortunate byproduct to the fact that I'm trying to create something I'm passionate about.

Any writer that tells you they write to create jobs is a liar. But any writer that doesn't understand that their work is putting food on people's tables is a dick. This strike falls in the middle of those two concepts.

The pyramid STARTS with the creation of the idea, and it widens out to include hundreds of people. But then, the people making the most money off the show - the studios or networks - seemingly want to marginalize and be greedbags to the very people who started that employment train in the first place.

I explain that - and I take the time to point out that writers aren't looking for pity. All I'm saying is, they do not deserve scorn.

DGA deal - not horrible, but not great. Thoughts

2008-01-18T03:48:00.000-08:00

Fact Sheet
DGA Tentative Agreement — January 17, 2008

Wage Increases

* Compensation for all categories except directors of network prime time dramatic programs and daytime serials increases by 3.5%, each year of the contract.

* Compensation for directors of network prime time dramatic programs and daytime serials increases by 3%, each year of the contract.

* Outsized increase in director’s compensation on high budget basic cable dramatic programs for series in the second and subsequent seasons:

o For ½ hour programs: 12% increase in daily rate and increase in guaranteed number of days to 7 days.

This feels good. It's a substantial raise. If it transfers to scripts, it will mean some sort of pay increase for writers who make "salary PLUS script"

+ Results in show rate increasing from $9,009 to $11,760.

o For 1-hour programs: 12% increase in daily rate and increase in guaranteed number of days to 14 days.

+ Results in show rate increasing from $18,010 to $23,520.

Residual Increases

* Residual bases increase by 3.5%, each year of the contract, except for reruns in network prime time.

* Residuals for reruns in network prime time increase by 3%, each year of the contract.

Also not bad, if you ask me. This actually helps non-prime time (IE basic cable WGA writers) more than prime time writers.

Healthcare

* Employers continue to make health care contributions at specially negotiated rate of 8.5%, secured in the 2005 Basic Agreement to address the impact of the growing cost of health care on the DGA Plan. Provisions permitting decrease in contribution rate by employers removed.

Other Provisions

* Second Assistant Directors to manage locations in New York and Chicago.

* Establishes a wrap supervision allowance of $50/day for the Second Assistant Director who supervises wrap on local and distant locations.

* Increases incidental fees and dinner allowances for Unit Production Managers and Assistant Directors.

I dont think this helps that much.

New Media

Jurisdiction over:

* All new media content that is derivative of product already covered under current contracts.

This feels important. For example, if somebody does an animated something based on a live action something, it would be guild-covered. That PROBABLY covers animation, or at least, it should. I'm sure if it does, IATSE will have a cow, but perhaps it can be grandfathered in.

Moreso - this is good news for "off shoots" of TV shows. For example, if you have a live action show on TV and then start doing web based "extended viewing content," it's covered... if I'm reading this right.

* Original content:

o All original content above $15,000/minute or $300,000/program or $500,000/series, whichever is lowest.

I'm not sure what this means. The $15,000 per minute is insane. NOTHING costs $15,000 per minute on the internet. That being said, $500,000 per series is not bad.

There is a legit concern that low level projects / pilots will be created for online to see if they take, then aired on TV. But... I can't even imagine a half hour anything being created for 299K.

o Original content below the threshold will be covered when a DGA member is employed in the production.

If this works for WGA members as well, it feels like a win. For example, I'm a WGA member. If I am hired for something on the web, then all of a sudden, anything I do becomes a WGA production under those auspices. It's vague... but it could be cool.

Electronic Sell-Through (Paid Downloads)

* More than doubles the rate currently paid by the employers on television programming to .70% above 100,000 units downloaded.

In success, this is better. But it's still kinda low.

o Below 100,000 breakpoint: rate will be paid at the current rates of .30% until worldwide gross receipts reach $1 million and .36% thereafter.

I feel like this sucks.

* Increases rate paid on feature films by 80% to .65% above 50,000 units downloaded

So if a movie sells 50K on Itunes (or anything else for that matter) the rate on movie doubles? And what does that mean for writers of the WGA? Not sure.

o Below 50,000 breakpoint: rate will be paid at the current rates of .30% until worldwide gross receipts reach $1 million and .36% thereafter.

Ick.

Distributor’s Gross

* Payments for EST will be based on distributor’s gross instead of producer’s gross, a key point in our negotiations. Distributor’s gross is the amount received by the entity responsible for distributing the film or television program on the Internet. We would not have entered the agreement on any other basis.

This is good. Producer's gross blows.

* Companies will be contractually obligated to give us access to their deals and data, enabling us to monitor this provision and prepare for our next negotiation. This access is new and unprecedented.

This is good. Because buckle up - the next negotiation is less than three years away.

* If the exhibitor or retailer is part \ of the producer’s corporate family, we have improved provisions for challenging any suspect transactions.

Ad-Supported Streaming:

* 17-day window (24-day window for series in their first season).

A little weak. The majority of streaming would happen in the first three weeks.

* Pays 3% of the residual base, approximately $600 (for network prime time 1-hour dramas), for each 26-week period following 17-day window, within first year after initial broadcast.

This is low. WGA members made another 50% (I think) the next time a show aired. So... on a 20K check, they made 10K more. This is an offer of 10% of that. Of course, in top 10 shows, it's gonna air again.

The good news for basic cable / kids is... this is the only place where they still rerun the shit out of stuff on TV too. Weird. The deal feels like it takes care of non-prime time people better.

* Pays 2% of distributor’s gross for streaming that occurs more than one year after initial broadcast.

Again, good for our non-prime time friends. Imagine, if you will, a rerun of Hanna Montana.

Clips

* Provides the companies with limited windows where they can distribute clips of feature films and television programs in new media to promote a program. Provides for payment for all other uses in New Media.

Baffling. Thoughts?

Sunset Provision

* Allows both sides to revisit new media when the agreement expires.

Um... isn't this what happens when a contract expires anyway?

So... in conclusion:

Lets be honest about what it means to us. All of these raises are awesome, but if IATSE doesn't do something to compensate us - script and story writers - for the gains that they'll probably receive from the DGA bargaining... it doesn't mean dick to us.

If this sticks, and it doesn't stick to us, it will be incumbent upon all animation writers to fight to see a cut of the monies that their shows create. Because if you think about how much a Spongebob or Fairly oddparent streams - if you think about how much they're downloaded... we won't see ANY of that if it's not covered.

We will be forced to go deal to deal, and negotiate this stuff ourselves. The stronger, more established, more powerful show runners will be able to fight for a piece of their successes... first timers or people with lousy reps will be forced to take what they can get, and what they will get is TAG/IATSE minimums.

In my opinion.

The floor is open.

Today's Daily Show

2008-01-15T21:55:00.000-08:00

Was REALLY good. Especially "Bush's Bucket List"

But that bit in particular makes me wonder... who is writing this?

Is it John Oliver doing all the writing duties? John and Jon together?

This is a show that, quite frankly, is missing ONLY it's correspondents. Everything else seems to be clicking.

If that's the case... Jon Stewart has proven himself to be the smartest, sharpest, most prolific host on television.

And sadly, since American Idol started today? Nobody saw it.

Writers strike, ratings and uh... whining and snark.

2008-01-13T09:21:00.000-08:00

Viewers aren't doing striking writers any favors, turning out en masse for NBC's new unscripted shows American Gladiators (14th place, 12.1 million) and The Celebrity Apprentice (19th place, 11.1 million).

Crap. I mean, this should could actually be used as torture against the Iraqis, it's so abjectly terrible. Plus, you know, that nobody is going to die. At least with the Anna Nicole Smith reality show you knew there was a good chance that somebody was going to croak. I would have prefered it to be her BEFORE she killed her kid, but still...

More not-good news for scribes: Celebrity Apprentice averaged 44 percent more viewers on Thursday than the Office-Scrubs comedy hour.

Well, the fact of the matter is... Celebrity Apprentice is awesome. It's as good as the first one was - where you cared about the characters and wanted to watch them compete. I know this sounds like bullshit coming from me, but Celebrity Apprentice is appointment television for me... and would be, quite frankly, even if there wasn't a strike.

Gene Smimmons. Holy God, he's awesome to watch.

Even more not-good news for scribes: In Chuck's old time slot on Monday, American Gladiators averaged an estimated 10.9 million viewers, or 2.2 million more than the comedy-spy series.

Meh. Not a fan of Chuck.

And the hits just keep on coming...A brand-new (scripted) Cold Case (20th place, 11 million) on CBS lost 1 million viewers from its unscripted Amazing Race lead-in (15th place, 12 million).

Cold Case? That show's still on?

A new (scripted) episode of ABC's Desperate Housewives (fifth place, 19.8 million) was treated like the rare find it was; the debut of ABC's new (and scripted) Cashmere Mafia (21st place, 10.6 million) was jettisoned by nearly half the Housewives audience.

Thank God for that, and thank God for the second half. Cashmere Mafia? Eat me. It's so desperately trying to be Sex In The City... the only thing it's missing are the previous show's haggardly stars, but good news! The movie is on it's way! Here's the thing - people aren't going to tune into shit just because it's ON. (Okay, Gladiators not withstanding, but I believe there to be a curiousity factor involved in that. Lets see how that turd floats up this week.

Good (and more bad) news for scribes: The CBS game show Power of Ten (49th place, 6.5 million) tanked in its prime-time return, sunk by the (unscripted) NBC game show Deal or No Deal (12th place, 12.3 million) and the (unscripted) ABC reality show Wife Swap (30th place, 8.4 million).

This entire paragraph might as well be in Latin. I have no idea of any of that stuff.

Sort of good news for scribes: Viewers seem very tired of Grey's Anatomy (54th place, 6.1 million) and Ugly Betty reruns (65th place, 5.1 million).

To be honest, and I love Grey's, I'm pretty tired of it this season. Could Meredith be more unlikable? And unwatchable in HD?

On the other hand, they're pretty okay with previously viewed CSIs (ninth place, 13.3 million) and pretty apathetic about all-new episodes of Women's Murder Club (37th place, 7.8 million) and Las Vegas (42nd place, 7.1 million).

Las Vegas never kicked ass, and the formula of "four women who get together and (fill in the blank) while talking about being women" seems to be dying a hackneyed and deserved death.

Perhaps Fred Thompson should have kept his prime-time job. The 18th season premiere of NBC's Law & Order (seventh place, 13.5 million) won Wednesday night, while the Saturday night Republican presidential debate on ABC (40th place, 7.4 million) got its teeth kicked in by the Democratic one (26th place, 9.4 million).

Fred Thompson should have kept the gig where he could have slept in and nobody called him lazy. And kept his Hollywood job where being A LITTLE smart in politics made you REALLY SMART.

Roger Clemens was a performance-enhancing interview subject for CBS' 60 Minutes (sixth place, 18.2 million), which posted its best numbers in two months.

Another example of steroids making things better.

Oh, shit. Here we go.

2008-01-11T18:31:00.000-08:00

Nothing like a little "Hey the directors are going to negotiate" for the axes to start falling.

Force majeure ax falls at ABC Studios
Nearly two dozen writer deals terminated
By JOSEF ADALIAN (Variety)

The force majeure ax has swung at ABC Studios, which today notified nearly two dozen writers that it was terminating their overall deals as a result of the strike.

While all the major studios had previously suspended deals for their scribes, the ABC Studios move reps the biggest move yet by a major to cut ties to talent.

Among the scribes cut off: Bill Callahan ("Scrubs"), Larry Charles ("Curb Your Enthusiasm"), Sean Bailey ("Gone Baby Gone") and the team of Joshua Sternin and Jeffrey Ventimilia ("That 70s Show," "Surviving Christmas"). Thesp Taye Diggs, who had a production deal at ABC Studios, has also had his pact terminated.

Other studios are said to be considering taking similar action.

"The ongoing strike has had a significant detrimental impact on development and production so we are forced to make the difficult decision to release a number of talented, respected individuals from their development deals," ABC Studios said in a statement late Friday.

Anybody who thinks the timing of this has nothing to do with the DGA (Director's Guild) announcing they were coming to the table is high. A bad high. Not a good high.

This is the beginning of the bad, for writers. A combination of the DGA negotiating, the studios axing people, and a hurry up offense (My guess) to nip this thing before the writers and actors can strike together.

How will the show runners react now that some of them are on the line?

Gonna be an interesting week.

John Oliver on the Daily Show

2008-01-09T20:43:00.000-08:00

Why is he the only correspondent?

Is it because he's British? Is he a part of a different union?

Just wondering.

Is the Simpsons Trying To Be Family Guy Now?

2008-01-07T23:47:00.001-08:00

The above clip is pretty funny.

The below clip will be offline soon, I'm sure, but still:

So in this episode, you can see:

Jon Stewart and Krusty.
Dan Rather doing backflips, like Adam West might.
There's a parody of political ad.
A shot at Dennis Kucinich.
A Mayor McCheese joke.
Regan and FDR fighting in a crossfire parody.
A Duran Duran video.
An act break that ends with a weird non-sequitor that we know will end in murder.

I dunno.

The Simpsons doesn't flow like that to me. Which is not to say it can't be funny. The old media is dead clip IS funny. But... it's a slower funny than family guy. Homer is slower than Peter, Lois is faster than marge.

The FG jokes are meaner, much meaner, which I like.

It was a new episode, and I watched it... mostly because there isn't a lot of new scripted television these days. But... I wasn't very fond of this.

I like my Simpsons to be Simpsonsy... (Early first decade, to be fair, but still) and my Family Guy to be Family Guyish... and never should the 'twain meet.

- Steve

Should be interesting: Daily Show and Colbert Return Today

2008-01-07T07:40:00.000-08:00

Stewart and Colbert return Monday night By FRAZIER MOORE, AP Television Writer 

Not a moment too soon to help make sense of things, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert will be back on duty Monday, ready to mock everything in sight.  

The New Hampshire presidential primary scheduled for the next day? A likely topic!  

The woes of Jamie Lynn and Britney Spears? Why the heck not?  

And they'll surely make hay of the writers strike that has kept them off the air, and kept their viewers satire-starved, since Nov. 5.  But how will they carry out their mission without writers?  

Boy, is that ever an excellent question.

The fact is, both of these guys pretend to be something they're not. Jon Stewart, a fake news anchor - Stephen Colbert, a fake Conservative blowhard.  How do they do these characters without WRITING them?   

Stewart has it easier: He has correspondents that go out on the street and interview people... I think that's his easiest answer. Improving interviewing Rob Riggle at the New Hampshire debate, that's not writing.  

But Rob Riggle sitting down and writing his answers to prepared questions is.  

Trickier for Colbert. I don't believe for a moment he can carry a half hour a day of fake Conservatism without a team of snarky liberals behind him making that work. Unless he comes on today and says "Today's show doesn't star Stephen Colbert, it stars Stephen Colbert..." He HAS to be breaking guild rules.  

Gonna be an interesting day.  - Steve 

P.S. No Golden Globes? Oh no! As much as I'd like to see the rest of the world felch Nicole Kidman for another year, I think I'll be okay.

Here's a question for you

2008-01-05T11:07:00.001-08:00

How many characters is too many characters in a story?

Nerd backstory: I was reading Green Lantern 26 yesterday, which was an epilogue to "The Sinestro Corps War" (I know, I know) but... here's what got me going.

The Corps has 7200 members.
Their enemies had the same amount.

Obviously, they didn't focus on that.

But in the book they have four green lanterns, nine guardians, and they introduce "The Alpha Lanterns," which are 12 new characters. It made my head hurt.

And then it made me think of writing for animation. I'll use my current show as a question.

Yin, Yang, Yo has three leads, but honestly, you usually see two of them, with the Panda being a running gag, and one villain. There may be the occasional angry mob, or marching army... but it's a buddy comedy with fighting. The ones that lean toward action tend to have more characters.

The same with Fairly Odd - When the three are acting on their own, and complications arise, the tighter dynamic seems to lend itself to better comedy. But when we needed to blow it out - make it bigger with action (like the TV movies or the Jimmy/Timmy crossovers) I think the comedy ratio changed.

So to me - Comedy=smaller cast, Action=Larger cast.

But there's too large, I think, even for action. For example, I really enjoyed the first few seasons of Justice League and Teen Titans but when it became a gigantic cast - "Titans around the world" and "Justice League Unlimited," I felt like I lost a lot of characterization.

Not to say it wasn't good, not to say I didn't watch and enjoy. But to me, there was a difference.

They had a hell of a lot more action figures to sell, but to the detriment, at points, of story.

Just a non-strike related, non-ASIFA archive related thought on this Saturday morning.

Writerless Leno / Writerlaiden Dave

2008-01-04T23:30:00.000-08:00

So... this has been weird to watch.

1) Letterman's back, and the show makes me laugh, but I swear to God if Paul Schaeffer doesn't stop killing actual laughter with a musical sting at the end of every punchline, I'm going to fly to New York and kick him in the dick.

It is weird, tho, that even though Letterman is in second place in the ratings, he's not the underdog here. His standards are higher - and should be - he's got his staff. He's got the ability to get better guests.

And yet...

2) Leno has never been looser. It's been interesting to watch, actually. Without his writers, Jay has had to rely on his chops more than ever - chops which we haven't really seen in a while. It's easier to pick safer material when you have a dozen people writing for you. (By the way, this isn't to say that his writers only write safe stuff... but in the end, the stuff that's picked is the stuff that's picked.)

There have been jokes with edge, a surprising amount of sexual material, an obvious reach into the "bag of jokes from three months ago before the strike" but... it's weird. It's like he's enjoying himself.

This doesn't absolve the whole "writing a monologue" debate, which is a WHOLE 'nother debate. But as I watch this all unfold, I think Leno is finding his inner comedian again. Not the host, which he's honed over the years, but the "guy with a beef" that used to sit on Letterman's couch, and has a couch of his own now.

Just thinking.

Jib Jab on the tonight show

2008-01-02T20:53:00.000-08:00

I dunno.

Felt a little done to me.

You can click here if you want to see it

From Brad Bird: Respect.

2008-01-01T21:59:00.000-08:00

Bird wants respect for toon scribes
'Ratatouille' writer chafes at misconceptions

By STEVEN GAYDOS
Since Brad Bird is writer-director of three of the best animated films of the past decade, "The Iron Giant," "The Incredibles" and "Ratatouille," it's no surprise to hear him extol the virtues of both Warner Bros. toon legend Michael Maltese and "Lawrence of Arabia" scribe Robert Bolt.

Bird, whose own name appears on that shortest of shortlists, that of writers who were Oscar-nominated for their screenwriting on animated features (for "Incredibles"), combines the whimsical genius of Maltese and lofty ambition of Bolt in this year's awards contender "Ratatouille." He chafes, however, at any discussion of the greats of animation writing that doesn't make clear his belief that "good writing is good writing."

"The whole question of writing for animation is skewed" says Bird, whose next project will be his live-action debut. "There isn't a giant difference between animation and live action. You need characters, stories, themes. It's called good storytelling."

Bird feels misconceptions about the writing of animated features emanate from both sides of the fence -- from those who can't imagine "serious" work from the makers of "cartoons" and from those inside the animated field who can't imagine that any writer who doesn't begin as an animator can ever fully embrace the medium.

Bird explains that although he did begin his career in animation, "I write scripts first, before the work gets to the storyboarding stage. But I write with the knowledge of what animation can do."
Once Bird has made clear that in his view there are no lines separating genres, he expands on the artists he admires in both the animation and live-action camps.

From the Disney canon, Bird cites "Lady and the Tramp" and "Pinocchio" as examples of storytelling with "strong story beats and well-delineated characters." He also admires Nick Park of "Wallace and Grommit" fame as "an artist with a singular point of view" and "Spirited Away's" Hayao Miyazaki as "a master of great storytelling."

And then there are his fellow artists at Pixar, which he calls "the home team." " 'Toy Story's' power comes from its talking about death under several layers of action," says Bird, who sees the film's "real message (as) 'Do you use your life or do you prolong it and become entombed?' "
And then there's Maltese. Bird calls him "the King of the Warner Bros. shorts" and says that "95% of the finest days in the Chuck Jones career had Maltese attached."

On the live-action writing front, Bird rhapsodizes about Bolt's "Lawrence of Arabia," which he recalls seeing as a youth and, "Though I didn't understand it, it overwhelmed me. It told me the world was a much more complex place than I ever imagined." He also cites Steve Zaillian, Alvin Sargent, Robert Towne and Billy Wilder as "heroes."

It's no surprise, however, given Bird's directorial accomplishments, that he reserves a special place in his pantheon of film talents for one of the directing greats.

"Alfred Hitchcock is the one who taught me that there are people making these movies. I kept seeing these movies that gave me chills, from 'Shadow of a Doubt' on through his more famous films, and I kept seeing his names. I thought, 'Aha, it's the same guy giving me these chills. And his name is Alfred Hitchcock.' "

----

And, probably because I agree with it (and enjoy the shit out of his work), I will take THAT opinion over the "if you didn't start in animation, you can't be a part of it" clique that is the vocal, evangelical, there's only one way to do it, version of animation zealots.

G'night, everybody.

Pilot Night On Adult Swim

2008-01-01T21:10:00.000-08:00

So, last night in Colorado before I head on back to LA.

Night ends early here. Up in the mountains... not a lot to do but since DirecTV gives me east coast feed, theres adult swim early.

Some thoughts.

Fat Guy Stuck In The Internet - Baffling. But I couldn't take my eyes off it. Would not watch again, tho.

The Drinky Crow Show - Completely dada-istic nonsence, but I really liked the way it looked. Drinky crow makes me laugh. (Tony Millionairre - is that his real name?) Curious. Might give a second look.

Superjail - Okay, I hated this the first time I saw it. Hated it with a passion that burned like a thousand suns. Then, somebody smarter than me pointed out it's like "If Willy Wonka ran a prison." So I watched it again, and I'm sorta hooked.

That's as far as I got,. actually, although Tivo (or the DVR equivalent) will save me.

The History Of Animation - At Least According To Itunes

2007-12-31T10:14:00.000-08:00

So, here's an interesting coincidence.

As I'm talking about it here, as I want to debate it with Stephen Worth elsewhere... Itunes has put up "The History of Animation" for sale. Since I can't copy and paste off Itunes, I'll transcribe as best I can. The bold stuff is ITUNES text, not me.

THE HISTORY OF ANIMATION

"While the technology of animation has changed radically during it's 100 year history, the goal remains the same: To create characters wth characgter. Take a time-traveling trip with us through some of the classic eras and key characters of Toontown - and meet some of the most compelling picks from the current crop. Below, you'll find animated shows and shorts that are classic and modern, hand-drawn and created on a computer, for kids and for adults only, but all memorable."

It breaks down as follows:

"The Golden Age"
Hand drawn animation dominated the screen from the nineteen-teens through the mid '50s in the Golden Age of Animation. Why are these shows and shorts golden? Because their luster has never tarnished - these timeless toons are every bit as funny today as they were decades ago."

Includes: The Three Little Pigs, The Rabbit of Seville and other Bugs Bunny Cartoons, The Brave Little Tailer, I Eats My Spinach, Duck Dodgers in the 24th and a half century, Dumbo, Donald's Crime, and Cinderella.

"The classic TV age"
When theaters stopped showing shorts in the mid '50s, animation found a new home on the smaller screen. These new cartoons, crafted specifically for TV, left behind a legacy of colorful characters from Yogi Bear to the Pink Panther to the retro-futuristic Jetsons."

Includes: Robin Hood Yogi and three other Yogi Bear shorts, A Scooby Doo, Several Pink Panthers, "The Birth of Astro Boy," "Elroy in Wonderland" from the Jetsons, A Jonny Quest and Birdman and the Galaxy Trio.

"The present: For All Ages"
If the Golden Age of Animation ended 50 years ago, the current state of animation must be the Platinum Age as cable TV, computer graphic imagery (CGI) and generations of viewers inject new life into the art form. Witty, warm and wonderfully imaginative, these entries are both kid-approved and adult friendly."

Includes: Fosters' "Good Wilt Hunting Part I," FOP's "Abracatastrophe," Pixar's "One Man Band," SpongeBob, Cars, AVATAR, a Jimmy Neutron and "The Danish Poet."

"The Present for adults!"
Foul-mouthed. Irreverent. Insane. Despite the often inapproproate language and behavior displayed in these cutting-edge shows, it somehow seems appropriate... cartoons started as entertainment for adults, after all, and now the medium has come full circle with these often brilliant and hilarious entries."

Includes: Southpark's "Make Love, Not Warcraft," Robot Chicken, Family Guy's "To Live and Die In Dixie," Aqua Teen Hunger Force's "Universal Remonster," Afrom Samurai's "Revenge," A Venture Brothers episode, a Morel Orel episode and "The Second Renaissance" from the Animatrix.

So... a lot of stuff chosen. A lot of stuff NOT.

Opening it up for discussion!

The ASIFA ARCHIVE AGENDA

2007-12-29T19:07:00.000-08:00

*sigh*

I'm a member of ASIFA. I've hosted the Annie Awards. I like a lot of the people involved in it. I support the organization.
But god almighty, I cannot stand the narrow, if you can't draw you don't even deserve to be a part of animation history attitude of their Archive. So... I'm tossing it out here for debate.

To see their top ten "most important topics," click on over here. There is intelligent, decent commentary, as always. Stephen Worth is a library of information about the history of this business which - even though I couldn't draw if you put a gun to my head - I love being a part of.

But, as always, there's this abject hatred of animation script writers that drives me nuts. Apparently, here was the big point for the top ten discussions about animation: #8 - Animation writing.

That being said, I'm opening it up for discussion here. And, as a dues paying member of ASIFA, I figure I can cut and paste just like everyone else. My comments will be in BOLD AND ITAL.

2007 Review: 8 Writing Cartoons

As the ASIFA-Hollywood Animation Archive completes its second year in operation, it's time to review the accomplishments of the past year. Over the next week, I'll be posting a countdown of the ten most important subjects we've covered in 2007. See if your list matches mine. Click on the link to see more on this topic.

NUMBER 8: WRITING CARTOONS

One of the best things to happen to animation in the past few years is the growth of blogging among animation professionals. Topics that used to be discussed only in obscure trade journals or at private symposiums are now discussed publicly on the internet, where participants from all over the world can benefit from the exchange of information.

Agreed. Regardless of your opinions, it's been nice to share stories, history and information. Hey! So far, we're on the same page!

One of the principle catalysts for discussion on the net is John Kricfalusi's blog, All Kinds of Stuff. A series of John's posts on writing for animation created a wave of comment across the "blogosphere". (1)

Good god, I don't know where to start. But what the hell... lets try.

(1) Agreed. And I like John K's blog. Most of the time, it's informative. It's fun to read. Yes, everything is touched with his opinion and point of view, but the guy is talented and smart and I like to visit his blog. Besides, who's blog ISN'T touched by the bloggers P.O.V.? I'm just as guilty.

A prominent cartoon scriptwriter vehemently disagreed with John's opinion that cartoons should be written by cartoonists. (2)

(2) I have my doubts about this. I would be willing to say that "prominent cartoon script writer" (whoever it was) was more trying to make the point that there are more than one ways to write a cartoon. And if he disagreed with anything, it's the same thing I vehemently disagree with, which is that script writers have no place in animation.

Maybe that person DID say that cartoonists shouldn't write cartoons. But if he did, that makes him a moron. Okay? No animation script writer truly thinks cartoonists shouldn't be writing cartoons.

Are we clear? Can we move on?

But when he was asked to name his favorite golden age cartoon writer, the scriptwriter was unable to come up with a single name... This isn't particularly surprising because THERE WERE NO CARTOON SCRIPTWRITERS prior to 1960. (3)

(3) So what if there were no cartoon scriptwriters before 1960? What does that mean? There were no computers either. Or Wacom tablets. Or internet. Or, courtesy of the era, probably not a lot of minorities and women in positions to create cartoons either. Should we go back to that, or how about we just accept the fact that things evolve and there's more than one way to do something? Good Christ, it's like listening to my Grandfather complain about new music, children and all their "hipping and their hopping."

Many people working in animation today have very little idea of how cartoons were made in the first half century of the medium. But Walt Disney was happy to tell you how he wrote his cartoons...

...and it was the same at every other golden age animation studio...

Here's the Terry-Toons story department...

...and a "script" for an MGM Tom & Jerry cartoon...

...and a page from the "script" to Max Fleischer's Mr. Bug Goes To Town...

...and this one from Warner Bros by my pick as the greatest cartoon writer of all time, Warren Foster. Check out the link below for a complete storyboard by Foster from the pilot episode of The Yogi Bear Show.

For that, you should go to the ASIFA ARCHIVE SITE - It's their images and film, it's worth watching, and it deserves your support.
After the first of the year, I'll have some more storyboards to post.

Stephen Worth
Director
ASIFA-Hollywood
Animation Archive

So, to Steve, I say this:

There are people who got into cartoons because of The Simpsons, or South Park, or Family Guy. THAT is the animation writing they aspire to. That's what THEY find funny.

There are also plenty of people who got into it for Spongebob, and Ren and Stimpy, and the Flintstones and the classic Warner Brothers cartoons. Hell, that's where my initial love of cartoons began.

But what *I* like in a cartoon, and what I enjoy seeing in a cartoon, is different now. It doesn't EXCLUDE the classics... but includes stuff being done right now that I think has it's own level of importance.

It doesn't make me the absolute authority on all things writing, it doesn't make me "the rightest person in the debate." But it doesn't make me wrong, either.

So I propose this to the director of my archive. Post five scripts you like. FIVE. Five scripts that were written since 1960 that you, as the director of this archive is open minded enough to look at words on a page that turned into cartoons and go "Hey, this is good enough to be recognized."

Use that encyclopedic knowledge of yours and give me some examples of scripts you think deserve to be archived as well.

Come on, man. I'm giving you 47 years of history to find five cartoons where the scripts were written first, and animated later. Give script animation writers some examples of what they can aspire to, since we're part of ASIFA as well.

I bear the Archive and it's director no ill will. And I also know, by the way, that I am WAAAAY out numbered in this discussion on the blog-o-sphere - that's simple math. The artist to writer ratio on any cartoon is heavily (and justifyably so) tilted toward artists.

But what I'm asking doesn't seem unreasonable. Can you do it? Will you even try?

Re-evaluating my "it's not good"

2007-12-28T23:20:00.001-08:00

I was going to respond to Hulett's response, but... figured, what the hell. Lets put it all in a topic.Steve posed the question:

"So ... does this '07 strike have the trajectory of the '88 strike?

1988: WGA goes on strike. Carson returns (writing his own monologues.) WGA settles.

2007: WGA goes on strike. Jay, Conan, and the rest return. Letterman's writers writing, everybody else adlibbing? WGA ... ???"

I have my doubts about that now, as I reconsider things. Part of that reconsideration is the E-mail update I received from the WGA about the matter. I'm sure it will be on DeadlineHollywoodDaily by this time tomorrow, so I have no problem posting to discuss:

"To Our Fellow Members,

We are writing to let you know that have reached a contract with David Letterman's Worldwide Pants production company that puts his show and The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson back on the air with Guild writers. This agreement is a positive step forward in our effort to reach an industry-wide contract. While we know that these deals put only a small number of writers back to work, three strategic imperatives have led us to conclude that this deal, and similar potential deals, are beneficial to our overall negotiating efforts.

First, the AMPTP has not yet been a productive avenue for an agreement. As a result, we are seeking deals with individual signatories. The Worldwide Pants deal is the first. We hope it will encourage other companies, especially large employers, to seek and reach agreements with us. Companies who have a WGA deal and Guild writers will have a clear advantage. Companies that do not will increasingly find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. Indeed, such a disadvantage could cost competing networks tens of millions in refunds to advertisers.

Me: I sort of agree with this. Yes, it will be seen by the vast majority of the American public as a chink in the armor. And unless people are sampling late night shows, and realizing "Oh, shit... Letterman is getting better jokes, better bits and better guests," it will continue to look like a chink in the armor.

But I also trust Letterman to beat this topic to death because not only can he and only he, do it from a moral high ground... What's to stop Judd Apatow, or Joss Whedon, from writing a piece for his show and freelancing under the new WGA contract? Or celebrities helping? Or constant, incessant top ten lists and sketches that point out the writer's side of the debate?

CBS is now in the hellacious position... of giving an hour a day to someone who is going to tear them apart for their corporate CBS position.

Thoughts continue:

"Second, this is a full and binding agreement. Worldwide Pants is agreeing to the full MBA, including the new media proposals we have been unable to make progress on at the big bargaining table. This demonstrates the integrity and affordability of our proposals. There are no shortcuts in this deal. Worldwide Pants has accepted the very same proposals that the Guild was prepared to present to the media conglomerates when they walked out of negotiations on December 7.

This is a big piece of what's swaying me. They cracked someone. They made the deal work. And Letterman, who gets more of his show in success, and was paying the rent on the Ed Sullivan Theater while this was all going down, had the most to personally lose.

And yet, they did the deal with the WGA.

Finally, while our preference is an industry-wide deal, we will take partial steps if those will lead to the complete deal. We regret that all of us cannot yet return to work. We especially regret that other late night writers cannot return to work along with the Worldwide Pants employees. But the conclusion of your leadership is that getting some writers back to work under the Guild’s proposed terms speeds up the return to work of all writers.

And there's something to that, provided the American Public that watches Dave, Jay, Stewart, Colbert, et al see the difference in quality and react to it. Think about this bullshit with the NFL on the Patriots game. Greed would have said 60 percent of the country would have missed it. Pressure changed that.

It also lets other shows that might not be "#1" realize... if they play ball, if they do what's right, if they try to find a way to make the WGA deal work... maybe they get to start working on their shows again.

You gonna tell me the guys at CSI don't have the ability to push for change? Isn't that how Family Guy/Futurama/Simpsons and the PJ's (yikes) finally went WGA?

Side-by-side with this agreement, and any others that we reach, are our ongoing strike strategies. In the case of late-night shows, our strike pressure will be intense and essential in directing political and SAG-member guests to Letterman and Ferguson rather than to struck talk shows. At this time, picket lines at venues such as NBC (both Burbank and Rockefeller Center), The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and the Golden Globes are essential. Outreach to advertisers and investors will intensify in the days ahead and writers will continue to develop new media content itself to advance our position.

Pressure. Clout. It's what Steve Hulett says the WGA needs to win their fight. Interesting point: Letterman is NOT number one. Leno is. Where's the clout in getting Letterman to agree to the deal?

The clout is... he can BECOME #1. The clout is, the other shows will look weak in comparison. Maybe this is a chink in the armor. But I think - as I spend the day thinking about it - that it's not. I think, maybe, it will make anyone else that doesn't try to do the same thing look like colossal dicks.

Perhaps corporations don't care about that.

But showrunners? Executive Producers? Stars of popular anythings? They do. They want to be back to work. Back to creating. Back to being able to prattle on about how cool they are in "Desperate Housewives."

And I think that's about to become very apparently with Letterman's return.

Should be interesting to watch.

It's not good.

2007-12-28T15:28:00.000-08:00

Even if Letterman spends 60 minutes an episode making fun of the AMPTP for their antics, tactics and tantrum...

...it's still brought us the writer-free return of Leno, Conan, The Daily Show and Colbert. (How is Colbert going to play a character when that character isn't him? How does he do that and not write it?)

At least the NFL network got a big dose of "screw you and your alleged monopoly" this week. Somebody got told that regardless of their power, they couldn't just do whatever they wanted to.

Shame that windsurfing idiot John Kerry couldn't have a little more passion about the television industry as a whole, as opposed to one f***ing football game. But hey! Look! Our government cares about something! Sort of.

Merry Christmas, and merry 100th post!

2007-12-25T14:58:00.000-08:00

...to all of you.

Even those of you I periodically disagree with.

Today, for me:

1) Got a JVC HD Hard drive camcorder so I can (but probably won't) make my own short films.
2) Got a book on raising your dog Jewish, which I found to be hilarious.
3) Made an artichoke soup.
4) DID NOT WORK.

Four is more amazing than anything else.

I hope all of you have a great holiday. I like the fact that the 100th post here is venom free. Can't promise that will be the case for the comments, but the post... wishes you all well. :)

- Steve

The bummer that is the return of late night talk.

2007-12-23T22:07:00.000-08:00

So, total bummer.

I know the other side. "People are out of work" but we know what it's really about: "The networks are putting pressure on the hosts."

I suppose it starts with Letterman - the fact that the WGA is making a deal with him and his company, which they can do fair and square, didn't put pressure on the other late night networks to make deals...

...it put the networks in the position to put pressure on their hosts to get back to work.

Yes, only Letterman will have writers.

But Jon Stewart's mind isn't going to simply shut off because he doesn't have writers. This is a funny, brilliant comedian who can think and write on his feet... and now will, in the midst of the strike.

Yes, only Letterman will have the good guests. Because the "A" listers aren't going to want to cross a strike line.

But if Viacom and GE can force their hosts back to their hosts chairs, don't you think they're going to do the same to the rest of the talent in their stables? Or anyone else who wants to be on TV? Fox is about to create a whole pack of new psuedo stars, just as NBC with celebrity apprentice.

Here comes the "B" team.

The problem here is that these shows are the crown jewels of their networks, whether you like them or not. Leno and Conan are the faces of NBC. Letterman, that of CBS. Kimmel, ABC. Carson Daly, the face of... shit, I don't know.

NBC is already advertising "ALL NEW!" You think America is going to give a crap that there are no writers? You think the hosts are going to intentionally suck to prove the point that they need those writers? It's going to be business as usual, but at a much lower standard.

I don't have an answer. I'm just tossing it out there for discussion. This feels like rank-breaking, no matter how it spins. It's the beginning of something... but of what, I don't know.

IA, AP, WGA and minimums

2007-12-23T00:50:00.001-08:00

So, Yahoo/AP was doing a story about what a bleak Christmas it was going to be for Hollywood. Since this started, I think, in a pretty fair manner, I read it.

Liked some, annoyed by others, had my own very unscientific calculations I wanted to toss out based on what they were tossing about as fact. Why not? Everybody's doing it!

"By SANDY COHEN, AP Entertainment Writer Sat Dec 22, 12:39 PM ET

LOS ANGELES - Nearly two months without paychecks. Scores of shuttered shows. Thousands out of work. The Hollywood writers strike suggests a bleak Christmas for many in Tinsel Town.

But just like a movie script, this story has a twist: many striking writers remain upbeat despite the financial and emotional strains the walkout has brought to the season."

Hey, now that's a pleasant surprise. Most of these articles go into the strike talking about how the writers strike is screwing over everybody and NOT the writers. At least this one is taking pains to point out, hey, the writers are feeling financial and emotional strains as well.

And it's talking about them being upbeat. Usually it's how, now that the strike is nearly 50 days old, the writers are starting to fold. So, two paragraphs in... maybe this will be a little even handed!

Since members of the Writers Guild of America went on strike job Nov. 5, more than $350 million in wages have been lost, said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles Economic Development Committee.

Ouch, there's a pretty big number with no real breakdown on what that means. Writers wages? Producer wages? Studio bonuses? A little help here. That's a mighty big number. Eeep. This article might be teetering.

Writers, though, are accustomed to sporadic employment and saving their pennies, and they're inspired by the feeling that they're helping their profession and the labor movement at large.

Yay! Something that doesn't portray writers as effete hat wearing idiots! We actually DO understand that our jobs are transient! And we do believe that this strike is about more than whether or not have to choose between Bentleys and Lamborghinis! I like you Sandy Cohen, AP writer.

"We're swept up by the romantic notion of being on strike and doing the right thing," said Luvh Rakhe, a writer and strike captain for the ABC show "Cavemen." "By strengthening the union movement in Hollywood, everyone who's in a union benefits."

Ugh. "Cavemen." Still, "Everone in a union benefits." This is true. After all, for every one cent the writers guild manages to secure, every other guild gets their raises as well, including IATSE (who gets 4.5 cents, really.) So, hey! Maybe IATSE'll figure out that this is everybody's fight!

But not everyone sees it that way.

Oh, balls.

The strike against the studios has also forced nearly 40,000 "below-the-line" workers — including electricians, carpenters, welders and prop masters — out of work, according to the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees. Unlike the writers, who are buoyed by feelings of righteousness and will presumably benefit from the strike's outcome, these workers are simply jobless at what should be a festive time of year.

Um... the writers are jobless as well. And the writers are jobless because they're fighting for something they believe in. Just because they're on strike, doesn't mean they have jobs. By the very definition of strike, they don't.

The strike has been "devastating" for IATSE members, said spokeswoman Katherine Orloff.

"They've not only lost their paychecks, they're losing hours that contribute to eligibility for health insurance and pension coverage," she said. "Everybody wants to go back to work, whether they support the strike, don't support the strike, are angry at producers or are angry at writers."

Thank you, Katherine Orloff. Yes, everybody wants to go back to work. While we're pointing out the obvious, we all need air, puppies are adorable, and cancer is bad. But it sure would be nice if IATSE could muster even the tiniest piece of support for the WGA by digging at the AMPTP for their part in this.

But as we've seen before, nobody in IATSE management seems to be wired for that. It's too much of a pissing match now.

Christmas presents are hardly a concern when "people are going to start losing their homes and their businesses," she said. "Gifts are almost frivolous ideas at this point. This is about survival."

So the WGA is responsible for the sub-prime mortgage crisis? Who knew?

Most writers and below-the-line workers earn middle-class incomes. The average writers-guild member's salary is $62,000 a year, according to the WGA. IATSE salaries are similar. Strike or no, employment is inconsistent for both groups, with nearly half of writers-guild members and 10 to 15 percent of IATSE members without work during the year.

Anybody else catch that?

Writers make what IATSE people make, but 35% MORE WGA people are out of work than guild members. Especially when we start, WE MAKE THE SAME MONEY. WE HAVE THE SAME UNPREDICTABLE LIVES. WE'RE THE SAME F***ING PEOPLE TRYING TO MAKE DO HERE.

"As a writer, you have to develop the instinct of squirreling money away," Rakhe said. "You're just used to a lot of uncertainty in the first place."

The WGA prepared its members for the possibility of a strike a year in advance, so many writers saved money and started buying Christmas presents early.

And what did our guys do in IATSE? Saved up venom. You would think with ten times the members, maybe they could have armed their weapons and took a defensive crouch.

"This is the worst holiday in this town that I've ever experienced," said Jim Brooks, longtime writer and producer of "The Simpsons." "This is not dancing-in-the-street time. This is shuffling in a line, carrying a sign time."

Studios, though, are still celebrating, with Disney, Universal and Paramount throwing big holiday bashes like they do each year.

Of which I went to one of those parties. It was nice. I had a lovely slice of Turkey and a whiskey sour. And then I went home.

Those same studios, said "Law & Order" scribe Joe Reinkemeyer, are the "Grinch that stole Christmas from all of Hollywood."

However, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which represents the studios, blames the writers.

"Because they walked off the job, tens of thousands of other people who had no stake in this dispute are losing hundreds of millions of dollars," said spokesman Jesse Hiestand. "Many of those other workers will never have the kind of six-figure incomes enjoyed by WGA writers and it is a real shame that the holiday season is being dimmed by the writers' decision to go on strike."

Note here that when the studios talk about it, the writers are now making six figures and the IATSE folk will never see that kind of money. That's gotta be encouraging for IATSE members to know they have a ceiling that they'll never break out of and, chances are, their union probably won't strike over.

It's still horsecrap. Anybody want to toss out some numners as to what Editors make? Animation writers? Animation people? All sorts of other IATSE jobs? Using their minimum agreements to see how it goes? Let me help here.

Six figures is about 1923.00 per week. However, when I was struggling, I didn't take my vacation week. So I made 54 weeks of checks over 52 weeks. Now, that weekly goes to 1851.00.

My choice, but if we're in a world where we're tightening belts, that's a good way to do it. Anybody want to fill in the blanks with some real numbers on residuals?

Not minimums, but what working IATSE people are paid on a weekly basis. For the sake of our discussions: Board artists, color stylists, art directors, Prop designers, etc.

How close are WGA and IATSE when we're in the world of minimums?

The difference is, I think, the WGA low number may very well be the IATSE high number when it comes to the creative side of the entertainment industry.

But it's also the difference between working on an idea and creating it. The person who created it - be it Caveman, Law and Order or Judging Amy - will ALWAYS get more because they're at the top of that pyramid, with writers pretty close behind. So to me, this article says a few things:

* Writers and IATSE members aren't as far apart as you'd think, especially fiscally. Remember, these agreements are about minimums, not maximums... so we're all starting at the same place.

* Writers and IATSE members start to take different roads when there's opportunity to be exploited. Writers created starts them reaching for higher rungs on a ladder, and those rungs get pay increases on an exponential level, because those pay increased are negotiated by agents, not someone willing to say "2% more? Sure, that's good this year for everyone."

* Writers and IATSE members are at the mercy of each other. If IATSE were to go on strike for something, WGA would shut down as well. The only difference is, if there were a different union that was less contentious, you would see writers support. Imagine how fast this strike would have been over if IATSE's 150,000 members started backing it.

- Marmel

Tired. But wanted to post a non-micah post. Let the clearly less explosive debate begin.

Of course SAG gets a waver

2007-12-20T20:16:00.001-08:00

The fact is, SAG is backing the WGA across the board and if this strike doesn't settle by June, the WGA and SAG will more than likely be striking together.

The Emmys, and the Oscars? Networks make money on those shows. And as much as I want to see Bruce Villanch write "He does (fill in the blank), she's (pun based on the previous fill in the blank)," the WGA would have been fools to cut them wavers.

More to the point, anonymous poster number 428 made a valid comment: Nobody's really watching the SAG awards for entertainment. So why shouldn't they be kind to people who have been kind to them?

Needless to say, if the "IATSE AWARDS" were being televised, and needed writers, they'd have to see if Carson Daly's dad was free.

Micah's Post

2007-12-16T04:24:00.001-08:00

(Steve's preamble)

..because things don't go away on the internet, they simply get shuffled lower on the Google search. Outside of the Army Ranger stuff which you can read about HERE and draw your own conclusions, here is his POV'd blow by blow about what happened at Nickelodeon back in 2001. I have my own points of view, which I will save for later in the debate.

(Note: I changed the link to Micah's actual comment on it, per his request.)

Wednesday, Nov 07

(Micah's commentary, copied from mediabistro.com)

I came to this guild having had a "successful" career writing Animation for $1400/week for five years. During that time, I wrote on several of Nickelodeon's highest-rated shows. My writing partner wrote and directed 1/4 of the episodes of SpongeBob SquarePants and I was responsible for 1/5 of the episodes of The Angry Beavers. The current value that those shows have generated for Viacom? $12 Billion dollars. My writing partner topped out at $2100/week. In the year 2001, tired of not receiving residuals for my endlessly- repeating work (even though the actors and composers for my episodes do), I joined with 28 other writers and we signed our WGA cards.

So, Nickelodeon quickly filed suit against our petition for an election, and set about trying to ferret out who the "ringleaders" were. In the meantime, they canceled the show that I had created 4 episodes into an order of 26. Then they fired the 3 writers who'd been working on my show. Then they fired 20 more of my fellow writers and shut down three more shows, kicking almost their entire primetime lineup for 2002 to the curb, and laying off 250 artists.

Then, once the WGA's petition for election was tied up in court over our illegal firings, Nickelodeon called in the IATSE Local 839 "Cartoonists Guild" â€” a racket union which exists only the screw the WGA and its own members â€” and they signed a deal which forever locks the WGA out of Nickelodeon, even though we were there first. Neato!
Then Nickelodeon's brass decided--out of thin fucking air-- that myself and two other writers had been "the ringleaders" of this organizing effort, so they called around to Warner Bros. Animation, the Cartoon Network, Disney Animation, and Fox Kids, effectively blacklisting the three of us out of animation permanently.

And why did Nickelodeon do this? Why were they so eager to decimate their own 2002 schedule, fire 24 writers, break multiple federal labor laws, sign a union deal, and to even bring back the fucking blacklist? They did all of that to prevent us from getting the same whopping $5 residual that the actors & composers of our shows get.

For five lousy fucking bucks, they destroyed three people's careers and put 250 artists out of work and fucked up their own channel for a year.

Ahh, but my episodes run about 400 times a year worldwide, though, so obviously Sumner Redstone (Salary in 2001: $65 million dollars) and Tom Freston (2001 salary: $55 million) were right to do what they did... myself and those other 23 writers might have broken the bank, what with each of us going to cost them another TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS each! OH NO! That... that's... FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS!A YEAR!

So don't come crying to those of us who have EXPERIENCED what the AMPTP plans for all of the rest of you, that people who are deciding to stand up to bully-boy tactics like that are the crazy bunch of "horads" lustily marching "through" the streets searching for blood. The AMPTP are the barbarians sacking Rome in this scenario.
The AMPTP and their glittering-eyed weasel lawyers are a bunch of lying, blacklisting, law-breaking scumbags, and the fact that they haven't budged off of ANY of their proposals in the last three months proves that what they have in store for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU is exactly what they did to us at Nickelodeon, and what they can do any day of the week in daytime animation. Or reality.

Strike or no strike. That's their plan: to winnow down your membership, to snip away at your MBA, to chew away at your health & pension plans until there's just nothing left of the WGA. Why? Because they've had a good strong drink of how much money they make off of animation when they don't have to cut the creators in for any of the cash, and now they want to extend that free ride to all of live action as well. THAT is why they have pushed for this strike at every step, with their insulting press releases, with their refusals to negotiate, etc.--because they're HOPING we go on strike, and that enough cowards and Quislings come crawling out of the woodwork after six weeks that they can force us to accept the same deal that Reality TV show writers have.

If you doubt me, go read their contract proposals again... there's not ONE of them which isn't an insult and a deal-breaking non-starter.
So can we PLEASE stop hearing about how it's the current WGA management which is the fucking problem here? Because, frankly, that canard is getting a little stale.

Or perhaps you prefer presidents like the President of the Guild back in 2001 who just threw up her hands when we were fired and blacklisted out of our careers and said, and I quote, "oh well, it was a good try"

Answering Alex' Question

2007-12-13T20:44:00.000-08:00

"Why are the studios (at least by what I've read) coming across as such miserable Scrooges"

In my opinion, it's because there's a gigantic disconnect between what the writers see as money they deserve, and what the studios feel is a new deal.

For example:

A script pays 21K. A residual for the first reuse of that show pays 10.5K.

But if the network is reairing that on the internet, that 10.5K goes away. But for the internet reuse, the studios offer $250. To a writer, that's a $10,250 pay cut. To a studio, that's $250 for something they've never paid for.

Clearly, I side on the "10.5K" part. Somewhere in the middle is where this will probably end up.

But to answer your question: Why are the studios being so prickish?

Well, I think their Bullying, demanding, walking out - and then attempting to pin the blame on the WGA... all that might have worked in 1988, but the same New Media that the studios want to keep for themselves is the same new media that allows writers to communicate with each other, get their words out in the 'blogosphere, and not be rolled over by the fact that the people they negotiate against have a stranglehold on main stream media.

And because of that, people who are not used to being poked and made fun of, or being called into account for their words and actions, are suddenly finding themselves in the spotlight by a group of people who make fun of things of a living. It's making them testy.

So that's where this is all coming from:

Moguls with thin skins (some thinner than others) are battling cynical writers with short fuses and plenty of time to push their buttons.

Go team cynic!

Much ado about animation and reality

2007-12-12T12:26:00.000-08:00

A response to

THIS POST FROM PAUL HAGGIS

And

ANOTHER POST FROM LAETA KALOGRIDIS

"As a non-prime time/non-guild covered cartoon writer, I hope the WGA gets Feature Animation. There's no reason for it not to.

TV Animation - at least for those of us stuck within IATSE - is a dead/done deal this round (in my opinion), because the WGA can't fight for what they deserve AND wrestle IATSE/Union 839 writers into their guild at the same time.

It would be a waste of energy and a division of focus to do that. Writers have momentum and unity on their side - I hope the WGA doesn't let the AMPTP divide them over something that's basically an issue of labor law.

The studios picked our union for us - in 1940, and (in the case of Nickelodeon) in 2001 - regardless of what they might say.

But getting out of a union, or changing unions, is a much bigger fight than fighting with your union for things your union can fight for.

That being said, aiming for the things that haven't been decided yet? Reality? Feature Animation? New Media? Go for it. That's a battle that can be won.

And that's a battle for the future of all writers - day time animation, prime time animation and feature animation alike.

You guys can check out the TAG board:

http://www.animationguild.org/

Or the blog written by the TAG's rep, Steve Hewett:

http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com

...to see the union that non-prime time animation writers are working with.

It's a branch of Tommy Short's IATSE, and none of us are happy with the contentious relationship he's got with the WGA..."

Really?

2007-12-07T23:20:00.000-08:00

You're fighting over animation?

I had no idea, and nobody contacted me.

Maybe, by those standards, I'm already in!

Make No Mistake of Where I stand

2007-12-03T23:15:00.000-08:00

Just because I opine about the WGA's actions toward animation, and how I wish things were different, doesn't mean I don't back the strike, the strikers, and their goals 100 percent.

I do.

But this forum is about a very specific subsection of the writing community, and I try to keep the debate specific and honest to my feelings about that issue.

But when push comes to shove, I am a card carrying member of both unions, which means in a strike, I support my union... and in a non-strike enviornment, I wish improvement in the guild that represents me.

The strike is the right strike at the right time for the right issues. And while I might wish that strike included us, the WGA still fights the good fight, none the less.

And I hope, in 18 or so months when it's our turn to put these issues on the table, our union/guild/alliance/etc fights with the same passion.

Sitting at the Children's table

2007-12-02T12:42:00.000-08:00

So, a disheartening story.

There was a point where all the writers at Comedy Central walked, pushing for WGA coverage for their shows. Including animation.

Comedy Central correctly gave the Daily Show and the Colbert Report the WGA status they deserve, just like Leno, Conan, Letterman and all.

And then, at the point where it was time to push for animation? Everybody went back to work. Ta da?

If you want to know why animation writers are disheartened with the WGA - why while I enjoy the vibrant conversation, I just don't have the patience to spend time with their animation caucus, it's stuff like that. What's the point?

We all band together and then, once the popular kids get what they want (and deserve, BTW), the nerds are left out in the bleachers with their shorts hiked over their heads.

It's also ill-conceived.

In a world where residuals are going away because the second and third window is being placed on the internet, kids cartoons are RUN INTO THE GROUND, over and over again. Think about residuals on Spongebob, or Fairly Odd, for God's sake.

It's a bummer - because I belong to both unions. I personally think the WGA fights harder for it's members than 839 fights for theirs... but the WGA loves to dump us out at the last minute, to lighten the load for liftoff.

Change, I think, will have to come from within.

Ideas are worth something.

2007-11-30T17:47:00.000-08:00

I sometimes check out Huffingtonpost.com, and read their strike coverage.

Invariably, as soon as there's a strike story, someone with a grudge against writers complains about the WGA. Or the writers.

To them, I say this: Come up with an idea.

Here's the harsh reality of the writer's strike. Ideas cost.

Whether it's a marketing idea at Coke, or a new drug that cures cancer, or that widget that rolls the toilet paper backwards you finally sold to QVC, ideas cost money.

But when those ideas are whimsy, or imagination, or something intangible, like a TV show...

...when those ideas are jokes, which everybody thinks they can come up with but most people can't...

...when those ideas are stories, which are difficult to construct...

...that's when everybody starts thinking maybe they should be free. After all, nothing was invented, or built or sold on a shelf, right?

To every person who says that the story tellers in our society don't deserve a cut - a REASONABLE FAIR SHARE - of the income that we generate, I say "eat me."

Just because something is fun doesn't mean it's done for free. And trust me, after an afternoon of network notes, it ain't all fun either.

I stopped painting with my fingers and writing stories to pin up on a refrigerator a long time ago. Do I do stuff for fun? You bet. Do I do it for a mass audience? No.

You want to make up your own stories for free, you can put 'em on YouTube. You know, YouTube, where Viacom pulled their content because it was interfering with their revenue streams.

Me, personally, I like being paid for what I do, and I'd like to make a little bit more in success.

I know I'm not curing cancer.

But with any luck, I'm defeating boredom, one script at a time. Or maybe I'm making your kid laugh. There's nothing I like more than running into a parent that says they watch something I wrote with their kid, and they enjoyed it.

It's the "over and over" again part that gets me sometimes.

Still - I've learned to accept it in animation. I got into knowing the deal and while I'd love to change within, it is what it is.

But for the small group of people who think writers are being selfish in defending themselves against the encroachment of the internet, the loss of their residual viewings, or the right to be paid for downloads, you're being selfish. You're the one who wants something for nothing.

This town is built on ideas.

And those ideas are worth something.

People who make those ideas feel for those who have lost their jobs because of the strike. It would be awesome if that vocal minority of those who GOT jobs because of those ideas felt for the writers, as well.

Come on, IATSE. Step up. :)

2007-11-25T14:54:00.001-08:00

From Dateline Hollywood Daily:

Other Unions Rally With WGAE Tuesday; Foreign Writer Guilds Protest Wednesday

Writers Guild Of America East announced today a "Labor Community Solidarity Rally" for Tuesday, November 27th. "As the WGA strike enters its 4th week, in a major show of support by the city’s labor community, there will be a massive Solidarity Rally to thank the thousands of union members from every industry who have joined us on the picket lines from New York to Los Angeles and stood with us to preserve decent working standards against corporate power. The rally’s message is 'We’re all in this together, and we demand a fair deal!' " It takes place in NYC's Washington Square Park from 12 Noon to 1:30 PM and joining the WGAE writers will be members of the Writers Guild of America, West, SEIU, SAG, UNITE-HERE, UFT, national and NYS AFL-CIOs, and the New York City Labor Council and celebrities. Officials will include Randi Weingarten (UFT), Ed Ott (Central Labor Council), Gary Lebarbera and Dennis Hughes (NYS AFL-CIO), Sam Freed (SAG NY President), Richard Masur (former national president of SAG).

On Wednesday, the WGAE plans "International Solidarity Day" supported by the International Affiliation of Writers Guilds (IAWG) in Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, Canada, UK, Mexico and France. In NYC, the striking writers will picket in front of Time Warner Center /Time Warner Studios in Columbus Circle from 10 AM–2 PM.

Are these talks, or are they diversions?

2007-11-25T14:33:00.000-08:00

A few things will happen this week.

* The strike continues. Will the pickets be as large? Or larger? If the strike rolls on full force, even with talks happening, it will show the companies the writers aren't still sleepy from their Turkey coma.

* Will the showrunners return to run shows? Many have said they would return to their shows IF talks continued. But the fact is, so what? There's only so many scripts left in the pipe anyway. At this point, it's almost moot... except for the wedge it might drive between the haves and the have mores.

* How do movie writers feel about this? Probably the same way we do, actually... That this Thanksgiving, they've been at the kids table just like us. After all, the immediacy of this strike is in television, late night and daily up front, then series television. The city had been preparing for a strike and was stockpiling movies for YEARS. That being said, there's a whole lot of movie writers that aren't pitching and writing movies right now.

* What will IATSE President Tom Short have to say about things now that people are back at the table. We're part of a union that's 140,000 large. This would be an excellent time for IATSE to weigh in, throw their weight behind their fellow entertainment professionals. And, considering the venom that was spewed from IATSE when this first started, I wonder if our people will be a little more supportive.

* Will the guild put the DVD residuals back on the table? Personally, I don't know if it's important... but they've got to get something to surrender it. In five years, DVD's are going to be as relevant as CD's and VHS tapes. I saw a commercial today for "On Demand" where it showed a guy (natch) desperately clawing at a DVD box to get to the movie he bought. Why? Because DVD's are for stupid people. Cars are coming with screens and hard drives. And your nano plays movies. See where this is going? New Media will soon just be "Media." I'll take more of the future for less of the past.

It's going to be an interesting week in which, to be honest, most of us in 839 will be spectators. I personally don't think anybody was going back to the table unless there was some sort of framework in place... because neither side can afford to look like dicks at this point.

But I have been wrong before. Probably, even, in this post.

Hope you guys had a good thanksgiving.

Something to think about:

2007-11-23T21:58:00.000-08:00

From Jonathan Handel's blog over at Huffpost. To read the whole thing, click on below...

Multi-Guild Residuals -- Almost Ten Times the Fun

...but here's a little something to chew on while you're choking down your Turkey.

A four-cent per DVD increase sounds like a no-brainer. But in the world of Hollywood unions, four cents is actually almost forty cents. This is true for a simple reason: the WGA isn't the only union in town.

As it turns out, all three guild agreements (WGA, DGA and SAG), plus the IATSE agreement, have similar DVD residual formulas. Any amendment to the WGA's DVD formula will almost certainly be made to the other unions' as well. It's called pattern bargaining; the deal for one is the deal for all -- but with a twist: SAG's formula is three times as large as the WGA's, and the IA's is four and one-half times as large. (The DGA's is the same as the WGA's.) New media formulas can be expected to mirror each other across unions in the same fashion.

So, if writers get a four-cent raise, actors get an extra twelve cents. That's not because actors are three times better than writers, but because there are so many more of them on any given movie or TV program. The actors split the residual among themselves based on a formula that reflects both salary and time worked on the show. Thus, each actor's share is less than the writer(s)' share. (Writers too have to split among themselves when there's more than one writer on a project.)

The DGA raise would match the writers' -- four cents. Most of that would go to the director. Yet, 40% of the DGA membership are below-the-line workers who receive a miniscule share of DVD residuals (less than one-fifth of a penny per DVD). Doubling the formula would make little difference to them, which is one reason why DGA support for a strike over residuals is so tepid.

The IA raise would be 4.5 times the writers' -- an extra eighteen cents per DVD -- yet IA members receive no residuals directly. Instead, the residuals are used to fund the IA's health and pension plans. So, residuals matter to IA members, but in an attenuated way.

Bottom line: whatever increase the writers achieve in DVD or new media has to be multiplied by a factor 9.5 to determine what the studios will be paying out. (9.5 = 1x for the WGA, 1x for the DGA, 3x for SAG, and 4.5x for the IA. If you want to read the contract language for yourself, check out the WGA agreement (Art. 51.C.1.b), DGA agreement (Sec. 18-104), SAG agreement (Sec. 5.2.A.(2)), and IATSE agreement (Art. XXVIII(b)(2)).)\

So, somebody explain to me how the Writer's Guild of America gets 1 cent for every 4.5 cents that IA gets, and yet we, as writers, receive no residuals and (allegedly) and our pension plan is weak in comparison?

The below funny Ninja Video...

2007-11-22T21:18:00.001-08:00

...was actually found on http://www.artfulwriter.com.

Great site.

Jesus, God, but this made me laugh.

2007-11-21T23:29:00.000-08:00

Hey, Tommy Short.

2007-11-20T19:47:00.000-08:00

I don't think you're a bad guy.

I think you have your own set of priorities. And, as always, one person's priorities is another person's hurdles.

But I will say: I wish you were kinder, and had more solidarity, with your brothers in the WGA. Because you have a powerful, sizeable union that could do much to help.

Me? I'm an animation writer and a live action writer, and I am torn. I will honor both of my contracts.

Me? I wish my union fought a little more stronger for our brothers in the other union. Like the Teamers.

Yeah, I get the fact that SAG and the TEAMERS support is both wonderful and conditional. But it's support.

A few days ago, writers that work under your banner decided to pitch in and buy lunch for people that AREN'T.

Writers supporting writers.

C'mon Tommy. I know, deep down, you probably have heart, ethics, fire and resolve. TAG in (pun intended) with this fight. Because you can help.

I don't know you.

But I believe in you.

You can do this. How can we help?

- Steve Marmel
IATSE/WGA/SAG/AFTRA

"The gift cards were a hit"

2007-11-19T19:09:00.000-08:00

That, from Andrew Goldberg, who organized the assistants picket.

We donated 150 $6 gift cards to 150 assistants who were affected by the strike.

Good job, you guys!

- Steve

Buy an assistant lunch!

2007-11-17T16:49:00.001-08:00

UPDATE: We're 40% of the way to covering the lunch! Keep spreading the word!

Or, more to the point, buy a recently laid off and/or possibly soon to be laid off assistant lunch.

Here's the E-mail I received:

"Friday's announcement that the writers and corporations are returning to the bargaining table after Thanksgiving is fantastic news, and we should all congratulate ourselves for putting the screws to the studios and making the public aware of our side of the story over the past two weeks, but let's remember that the ultimate fantastic news would be a fair deal. So, let's not allow our effort or creativity to wane these last few days before the holiday!

“ASSISTANTS' PICKET” – MONDAY, 11/19 @ 12PM-2PM at the Main Gate (Pico & Motor) at THE FOX LOT. For assistants and other “below-the-line” employees (particularly those who have been laid-off by the media conglomerates) who support the WGA and would like to picket in unity with the writers. For assistants and “below-the-line” employees, this is a chance to show the writers they support them, and to show the media conglomerates that they need to take responsibility for their own decisions and not blame the writers for their lay-offs. For writers, this is a chance for us to celebrate the assistants and “below-the-line” employees, and to recognize them for the sacrifices they’re being forced to make as we fight for a fair deal.

All writers from all strike teams and studios are encouraged to attend the picket. It's a great chance to acknowledge the assistants, plus we are expecting some press, so a good turn-out will look excellent.

Best places to park are on Motor (south of the main gate), Cheviot Hills Park parking lot (not sure precisely how legal this is), or Westfield Mall parking lot.

And here's the Email I sent to you guys:

"Dear Tag 839 type person;

Chances are, by now, you know somebody’s who’s been affected by the writer’s strike. And if you’re like me – a writer in IATSE 839 – The Animation Guild – chances are you’re impacted a lot less than our brothers and sisters in the WGA.

That being said – more than a handful of you have asked what we could do, or say, to show that just because we’re not out with the WGA writers and just because we're not covered by the WGA, they have our support.

On Monday, the assistants who have been affected by the strike are picketing, and I thought it would be nice if we – writers in the Animation Guild (TAG), Local 839 IATSE - bought their lunch.

No fanfare, no press release, we’re not putting on suits and handing out Churros (although, to be fair, that was pretty cool)… we’re just making a promise to pick up the tab for Monday’s lunch.

So click over to http://www.paypal.com and donate some moolah.

The Email to send money is Marmel@marmel.com (Sorry, I had to move quick, so I used my e-mail account.) .

In the subject line write “Sandwiches for Strikers” (Apparently, they're getting Quiznos)

You can pay via your Paypal account, or by credit card.

Donate whatever you feel comfortable donating – zero pressure. And know – this isn’t an official 839 thing, or IATSE thing or a me thing – it’s just us, as individual TAG 839 animation writers, doing something small.

If there’s money left over – I’ll donate it to whatever charity the assistants planned on donating their extra cash to – purportedly a charity to help other below the line people affected by the strike.

All the best,

Steve Marmel
An individual person."

IATSE vs. WGA, courtesy of Deadline Hollywood Daily

2007-11-15T08:29:00.000-08:00

Click on this for the whole story....

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/bitchslapping-between-iatse-wga-why-tom-short-is-pissed-at-verrone-et-al/
And god bless Nikki Finke.

Bitchslapping Between IATSE & WGA: Why Tom Short Is Pissed At Verrone Et Al

...But comment about the following here:

Sources tells me that Short's furious letter sent on Tuesday was prompted by a Los Angeles Times profile on Dave Young that ran the day before and one quote in particular from the WGA chief negotiator -- "Much to his delight, the 48-year-old labor leader says he himself was treated like 'a rock star' last week at a host of rallies and pickets that he orchestrated all over Los Angeles and New York."

A source close to Short tells me he objected not just to Young's choice of words, but more to Young's seeming enjoyment of his new-found notoriety while IATSE members were thrown out of work. Young, for those not in the know, is not a Hollywood writer; he has been a union organizer of garment workers, carpenters and construction laborers.

Here is what Short says specifically about Young in his latest letter: "As the motion picture and television industry looks at the possible cost of over $1 billion and the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, your executive director David Young is quoted in the Los Angeles Times as delighted he's being treated 'like a rock star' at rallies and says, 'I just lay back and look at the havoc I've wreaked... I'm not going to apologize for that.' This is hardly the point of view of a responsible labor leader, someone dedicated to the preservation of an industry that has supported the economies of several major cities for decades.

Short ended his letter on a somewhat concilatory note -- "it's time to put egos aside and recognize how crucial it is to get everyone back to work, before there is irreversible damage from which this industry can never recover." But it still begs the question why Short isn't also bitchslapping the AMPTP which, after all, is the side now refusing to enter back into settlement negotiations with the WGA. (For details, see my LA Weekly column, Deals, Lies & Backchannels.)

"That's a good question, a really good question," a source close to Short told me today.

Also today, Verrone wrote the following missive in response to Short's letter: "As I’m sure you know, for every four cents writers receive in theatrical residuals, directors receive four cents, actors receive 12 cents,and the members of your union receive 20 cents in contributions to their health fund. To put it simply, our fight should be your fight. We’ve received support from the Teamsters, the actors, many IATSE members, and unions throughout the world.

But I'd miss the Bitching

2007-11-14T11:46:00.001-08:00

Steve has suggested a townhall meeting between artists and writers.

I oppose this with ever fiber of my being.
Artist and writers hanging out together is a horrendously bad idea for several reasons.

1. Artists may come to realize that writers are only human. Currently they fear us and the power we wield (crowd scenes.) If they figure out we're human and fallible they may actually try to speak to us.

2. Artists may infect us with their love of animation. We must stay focused on the money. We only do this for the money and caring about our work will only weaken us.

3. Artists might become more industry saavy. They might go out and get real agents that put the artist's interests ahead of their own relationship with the studios. Then they'll ask for more money, that would cut into our salaries!

4. And this is the worst one. Artists may learn from us. They may learn how to be better story tellers and writers. This might lead them to better jobs like producer or showrunner. Jobs we have now!

I call upon all writers and fellow members of the WAA to boycott this meeting.

Okay, enough bitching. Lets bridge some gaps.

2007-11-14T08:51:00.000-08:00

A question for Steve Hewitt, Matt Wayne, Nicole Dubac (hahaah! Congrats on the win! Now you get to be pimped to do stuf!) and anyone else who can make this idea happen:

I would like to believe the majority of people, when placed in the same room, would find themselves somewhere in the middle on these issues, or at the very least, forced to have civil conversations about it.

Writers who understand the importance of directors and board artists, directors and board artists who understand the importance of quality writers.

Perhaps it's time for 839 to set a "town hall" on this.

A symposium with writers, and artists, and a room full of both, discussing problems and answering questions. Everything from the prime time guys (if we can get them) to the 839 writers, to artists from both.

I would see this as a discussion as to how things are now, not a history lesson about the way they timed things on Huckleberry Hound or the way the writing was done on "Superfriends." That was then.

History's important. I'm not denying that. But it can't be a free for all about who didn't know who UB Iwerks is. That is a different discussion.

Lets talk about what's happening today. But lets try to do it proactively.

I mean, it will be hard for anonymous people to come in and drop grenades, but... then again, I'm not trying to pitch a fragfest, either.

I'm trying to toss out the idea of an honest "townhall" type environment where people can talk about frustrations, share ideas on how to make things better and NOT walk away all pissed off and even further apart.

What do you think?

Think we - as a "Guild" or a "Union" or whatever the heck we are, can all sit in the same room and speak to each other like peers? I'm up for it if there's enough other people who are as well.

Thoughts?

Class.

2007-11-11T22:49:00.000-08:00

Mr. James J. Claffey, Jr.
President
IATSE Local One
320 West 46 Street
New York, NY 10036

To Our Brothers and Sisters of IATSE Local One:

This letter is to express our heartfelt and vocal support of IATSE Local One's strike against the League of American Theatres and Producers. Just as you have stood with us in our current strike against the motion picture and television studios and networks, so, too, do we stand with you as you seek the fair and respectful contract that you have earned and deserve.

The careers of many of our members began and continue in the theater. We recognize the stage as an arena of inspiration, a training ground, an artistic platform from which our visions leap to life. Without your members, the work of our members could not be realized. All of their imagination and creativity come to nothing without you.

Know that IATSE Local One can rely on us to work with you and join you as your and our struggles continue. Contact us for whatever assistance you require. We're all in this together.

In solidarity,

Michael Winship
President
Writers Guild of America, East

Patric M. Verrone
President
Writers Guild of America, West

A big congratulations to Nicole Dubuc and Matt Wayne

2007-11-11T04:09:00.000-08:00

For getting on the 839 Executive Board. And big old props to Nicole Dubuc for being a trustee, which is reserved for the top three vote getters.

Remember, the fate of bringing script writers and artists together now rests in your hands.

:)

I kid, I kid!

Seriously, we ("Script writers") wanted a voice on the board, and we got not one, but two. No shenanigans at all. Maybe that's the start of the whole "Changing things from within our own union" thing that we beat to death on this board.

Again, no pressure.

:)

I'm serious! I'm serious!

Thanks for taking on the responsibilities guys.

- Steve

P.S. Once you solve the writer/artist rift, we'll send you something easier to handle like the Middle East.

And now, a word from... your guess is as good as mine.

2007-11-10T07:49:00.000-08:00

(Posted on the TAG board. Only of interest to me because tomorrow, they announce the election results.)

Anonymous said...: most animations studios have more than a few artists whom are independent creators outside of their studio jobs and can write just as well, if not better than the jaded, tunnel visioned writers from the WGA.

the majority of WGA writers working in animation are hacks. after years of hearing most of them freely admit that they would love to be writing for films or other projects over animation, excuse me if i'm not ready to heap respect upon them. as a visual artist and creator i've had to continually correct edit these jughead's "scripts".

one of the few places where John K. is absolutely correct in his convictions is his opinions on animation 'writers'. with few exceptions, they simply don't undertsand the artform.
And now, I'd like to dissect this, but going backwards:

one of the few places where John K. is absolutely correct in his convictions is his opinions on animation 'writers'. with few exceptions, they simply don't undertsand the artform.

Bad is bad, my friend, whether it's bad board-driven writing or bad script-driven writing. But I like how you say "one of the few places where John K. is absolutely correct," as though you disagree with him elsewhere.

Of course, If you do disagree with him, it could be because you're a Cal Arts graduate and he loves to piss all over that school. In other words: "When he dumps on you, he's right. When he dumps on me, he's a dick."

the majority of WGA writers working in animation are hacks. after years of hearing most of them freely admit that they would love to be writing for films or other projects over animation, excuse me if i'm not ready to heap respect upon them. as a visual artist and creator i've had to continually correct edit these jughead's "scripts".

Two points on this, if I may:

1) I don't know what position you've had to "correct edit jughead's" scripts (I don't even know where to start trying to correct and/or edit that) but was it your job to do so? On a script driven show? Then, thank you. Because we're all on the same team here.

2) And of course the majority of WGA writers working in animation freely admit they would love to be writing films or other projects. They are paid more. And get residuals. And a better pension. You gonna tell me an animator wouldn't step over the face of a basic cable executive to get a shot at a feature film? Of course he or she would.

most animations studios have more than a few artists whom are independent creators outside of their studio jobs and can write just as well, if not better than the jaded, tunnel visioned writers from the WGA.

I love the math here. "A few artists" who can write just as well than the entirety of the WGA. I'm sure there are. Emphasis on "few," just as I'm sure there are a few WGA writers who can draw better than some artists. Writing is art, just as drawing is art, just as timing is art, and editing is art, in its own way.

I'm sorry you can't respect anything that you can't or won't do, but that's your bag of cats, not ours. And finally:

Anonymous said...

Of course.

In Defense of Writing For Adults

2007-11-09T08:44:00.000-08:00

Hi. I'm Steve Marmel.

Unless you're one of the people I work for or work with, you probably don't know me... but chances are your kids might.

It's nothing creepy - I don't pose as a 13 year old girl on Myspace - I've been an animation writer for nearly ten years now, starting with the worst freelance "Batman - The Animated Series" script that was never produced, through Johnny Bravo, Fairly Oddparents and now, over at Disney on "Yin Yang Yo."

Consequently, I have a "written by" on a lot of stuff that is shown over and over and over and over again. That's probably why your kids know my name (although they probably pronounce it Marmle instead of Mar-Mel, like I was some sort of Kryptonian Jew.)

For writing animation, I get no residuals, but I knew that going into it.

As an animation writer, I am represented by a different union - Local 839 of IATSE, which stands for the International Association of Theatrical Stage Employees. I get a very nice health plan out of it, and some sort of pension, but that's it. My union, or alliance, is sort of a combination of a trade organization and Allstate. We're also not on strike.

I'm losing you, aren't I?

Okay, okay. Back to my point.

Most of what I do isn't to entertain you. So I don't expect you to care that I don't get another penny. In fact, considering how shrill Cosmo's voice is, and how often you hear him say the same lines repeated on Nickelodeon, I can only imagine that you probably think I owe you money. Fair enough.

But most of the people who are on strike are the people that DO entertain you. 24. Sopranos. Scrubs. Lost. Heroes. Shows like that, for people like you, that are interested in stories instead of watching B list celebrities skate, dance, date or lose weight. (Not a fan of reality, btw.) I'm not going to bore you with percentages, or residuals history. I'm not. I'm just going to ask you:

Don't you want to reward the people who are getting into this to entertain you? The human adult?

They're not trying to teach your kids a lesson, or babysit your child, or bring a new generation of young folk into the wonderful world of fart jokes (guilty!). These are sophisticated and smart individuals, passionate and creative souls, who do something that only a handful of people on the planet can do well.

Entertain adults.

Aren't these the people you should be supporting?

- Steve

From the 839 board to here...

2007-11-08T22:42:00.001-08:00

A reply to Steve Hewett's recent post about the WGA strike.

True, but the WGA collects residuals as well, AND negotiated residuals for their projects.

And primetime animation.

I like my 839 health plan. I think it's awesome. But there's no reason we shouldn't get more.

Especially in animation - and especially in CHILDREN'S animation - where they rerun the crap out of the stuff we do.

There were a lot of different emotions in the room. Anger: "Why are we such second-class citizens?"

Because they are allowed to be. The fact is, board artist should be paid like writers. And there should be a formula that allows for residuals to be paid out on both a script and board based show.

* Unions and guilds all achieved residuals of one kind or another in the early 1960s. Residuals for the WGA and SAG went straight into members' pockets.

But they ALSO have health care, Steve. That's the point. There's no reason there shouldn't be both.

You're in the middle of a three year contract? Take a shot - during the next round of negotiations - at getting residuals for your writers: Both script and board.

What's the worst that could happen?

Quick things

2007-11-04T09:32:00.000-08:00

1) You'll notice a put one of those "sign a word to get the post up" things for comments. I didn't want to moderate, but I was getting tired of seeing comments like "Great Post!!!" from screen names like "Hung Like a Donkey Thanks To Levitra."

2) Wherever I go, especially up in Valencia where most of the crew/driver/below the line folk live, I keep getting asked how long I think it'll last. What I realized is... everybody's opinion is really sort of based on what they want the answer to be. The real answer is "when it's over."

3) The Packers play today. Three and a half sweet hours of football based serenity.

Have a good Sunday.

Residuals: How I'd do it (but nobody asked)

2007-11-03T12:34:00.001-07:00

Hey there.

Okay, so I'll start the discussion, because every time we all get together, it turns to this anyway. And while I have no control over this situation, if anybody ever asked me - or if Nicole and Matt make it into the Legion of Super Animators (The 839 board) and have some sway over the discussion - this is what I think.

There are two types of writers in animation. Story board people, and script people. There are two types of productions in animation, board based story telling and script based story telling.

With that in mind, my little math here ONLY works within an 839 production, because those are the shows where story and script changes as the show evolves. On a prime-time script driven show, I do not believe that to be the case. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

I think the hypothetical residuals should be split 80/20, depending on the production.

On a script show - lets say Fairly Oddparents or Yin Yang Yo - the script writer does all the heavy lifting for the story telling - from premise, to outline, to three drafts of the script. Because the script is the blueprint, acting, direction, setting, and visual gags are all laid in there. At this point, a board person will tell this story... but it's already been arc'd out.

On a board show - lets say Spongebob - a writer will write a detailed outline and then off the board artist goes. Here, I would switch it - give the board artist 80 percent of an imaginary residuals, and give the person who created the story and wrote the outline 20 percent.

And in a John K world where productions don't even have keyboards because script writing is unimportant, the storyboard artist could go from premise, to board, and keep 100% of any hypothetical residuals.

How the production worked would be created by the person who created the show, which only seems fair.

There's my brain dump. Have at it.

Between a rock and... well, another f**king rock.

2007-11-02T21:14:00.000-07:00

So, a friend of mine wrote (and said I could post) this:

"Anyway, I'm dying to post on your site but bc most of my background is WGA live-action, I sorta feel like an animation impostor. But I've written a bunch of animation and the project I'm doing right now with ******** is animated, so I'm silly to feel that way. My question to you is this: Do most of the members of the WGA even give a flying f*** about animation writers? I know I didn't -- until I became one.

Is animation even one of the main things on the table? I'm not sure the guild has ever or will ever care about us. They'd sell us out for a hundredth of a point of DVD sales. No matter how this strike resolves, do you believe it will actually benefit animation writers?? I'd really, really, really like to believe that, but I'm not sure I do."

And to that I say, so far, you are right. The strike rules specifically carve out 839 / IATSE projects in television, while making a grab at animated features. Features, I suppose, are a gray area. TV Animation has been IATSE for as long as I know.

The fact is, there isn't an animation writer on the planet that wouldn't prefer to be represented in a way that gets them residuals on reuse of their efforts. And the fact is, the WGA has tossed animation writers to the wolves in return for... I don't know what. I wasn't part of the WGA at the time.

The fact is - Fairly Oddparents, Spongebob... shows like that, they rerun MORE than most shows when they first air. Syndication? No. Because they are owned lock, stock and shmock by the channel that paid for them. But on those channels? I can tell you by the BMI royalties (music) that they have the crap played out of them.

And writers are paid once.

If given the choice, I would rather see the union I am within - 839 - fight for the same rights that the union I am also in - the WGA - for the job I do... which is the same job I do for both unions.

I would rather see Story Board artists - who are not part of the WGA - get the same respect that any writer gets, when it comes to animation.

Do I have answers?

No.

But I do know what I think I'd like to see.

And now, a word from IATSE.

2007-11-02T11:37:00.000-07:00

"OPEN LETTER TO ALL IATSE MEMBERS AND LOCALS ENGAGED IN MOTION PICTURE AND TELEVISION PRODUCTION.

As you are aware, the Writers Guild of America (WGA) is currently in negotiations for a successor contract to the current agreement that expires on October 31, 2007. While the IATSE remains hopeful that a new agreement can be reached between the WGA and the Employers, there is a potential for a work stoppage.

The IATSE has over 50,000 members in two countries engaged in motion picture and television production. Any work stoppage may have a profound and long-lasting impact on you and your families.

The IATSE contracts contain provisions that require us to continue to honor our contracts. These "no strike" provisions require the IATSE to notify our members of their obligation to honor these contracts and continue working. Any individual member who chooses to honor any picket line is subject to permanent replacement (our emphasis)."

So, just to summarize.

SAG: Supports WGA.
TEAMSTERS: Supports WGA.
UNION 839: Reminds us all we could be replaced. You know. Because... they're required to do so.

I'm just saying.

Confessions of a Triplicate Mind: Day 1

2007-11-02T03:36:00.000-07:00

So, here we are, at the beginning of what could be a long and messy strike. I say "could be," because I tend to be an optimist about stuff, and I'd like to believe that perhaps the WGA's brinkmanship will be rewarded with serious negotiations...

...but I have my doubts, because so much money is involved.

It's gone past the simple negotiations of one piece of talent, one representative, and 12 lawyers and business affairs people (slight sarcasm, yah, but you get my point) to becoming a larger debate about writers and writing.

In a world where a dog skateboarding on "You Tube" is seen more than "Viva Laughlin" on CBS, how do you define the importance of writers?

But then: The above question says more to their importance than their irrelevance, I think.

The debate isn't about the now: Now, it's all about reality shows and dance contests and all that crap that I hate. (Honesty.) It's about what happens when the pendulum swings back and suddenly, people want scripted things again in a digital age. Or if, I suppose.

It's about what ideas are worth in success, which is the frustrating part. Nobody's asking for a ridiculous amount more upfront (I think). They're asking for a little bit more in success: In success, I might point out, where everybody's making more money.

But then again, good TV is like creating a really good new medicine. A lot of money up front to create it, and then a lot of time to see if that's paid off. Look at Studio 60. The whole season is out on DVD right now, BTW. Get it, if you'd like a set of coasters with creator commentary.

So as this thing starts, I have three minds, all of which I'm trying to balance, all of them which I'm going to have to strive to remain ethical and consistent with, which won't be easy.

* The WGA mind - which supports my union, supports it's members and is proud to be part of something bigger than myself. As a friend of mine said today - others have walked this line and fought this fight for me, it's only fair that I do the same.

* My Hyphenate Mind - Which is about to executive produce my first live action, WGA covered single-cam,era idea, something that I've waited my whole career for. It's been very hard to watch this unfold at the exact same time - a little like getting a holiday gift and then realizing it came from China and it's chock full of extra lead.

* My Union 839 Mind - Which continues to produce cartoons in the midst of all this, because the cartoons I produce are not covered by the WGA. 839 is part of the IATSE which I always tend to find myself conflicted over - they represent writers, but we're 8% of their 839 (am I right?) - and we're not even called writers. We're... "Story Persons" or something like that. And you don't need to be a forensic scientist to know the divisions between writers and artists within 839 is deep indeed.
There are good things about 839 - but I also tend to find animation representation to be super limited - a small number of agents, and a limited number of talented people that are in bed with a small number of companies, which creates an "eggs in one basket" mentality that makes it very hard to push for "in success" pieces of the pie.
Everything substantial I've ever gotten in animation - outside of their Health care - has been through the effort of an agent, a lawyer, and individuals in a larger company that believed in me outside the parameters of my union minimums. And that, by the way, includes the studios I work for.

And within all of that, I have friends who are producers and directors, family, co-workers, people I work for, people who work for me... all of whom have their own individual agendas inside a million larger issues.

It's no wonder the debate has gone to brinkmanship... there are too many moving parts. Everybody has to fear the car falling apart, or nobody's gonna take it into the shop.

There's so many sides to this it sometimes feels as though my head's going to explode, but it really boils down to attempting, to the best of my ability, to act with integrity and be proud of my actions when this is all over.

It's day one.

That's where my mind is at. All three of them, actually.

How about yours?

- Steve

P.S. Sorry about the duplicate Emails. Outlook for Mac is ASS.

Hey, board artists!

2007-10-31T22:33:00.000-07:00

So, the strike's coming, but it doesn't affect 839 because... well, quite frankly, 839 is cheaper than the WGA.

That's it, really.

Don't think for a minute that what I do is any different than Family Guy or the Simpsons (not quality, I'm just saying process). It isn't.

I open up final draft, I type, I hand to a talented artist and it becomes a cartoon.

The only difference is, I'm paid once, out of my salary, and then the money is done.

So let me ask you this: And it's hypothetical. You, board artists and directors, believe you are cartoon writers (and I don't disagree.)

There's a union that represents WRITERS - and they rep writers on prime time shows that probably make 5x what you make... AND they get residuals.

In an open playing field, would you:

1) Fight for change within 839 and hope that, like other writers in Hollywood you were able to get more money, residuals and a larger contribution to your health and pension?

OR

2) Move to the WGA because, as a board artist, you ARE a writer and maybe there's a cast to be made that you be treated as such?

That's the STRICTLY HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION we should all be asking ourselves, because the unions are the unions, the rules are the rules and it exists way outside the realm of what any one of us can decide.

Thoughts?

T minus 72 hours.

2007-10-29T00:27:00.000-07:00

At the very least.

There's a federal mediator coming in to "help" the WGA negotiations... Which means that by this time Thursday, every writer in Hollywood will have been evacuated to the Superdome.

Will Sean Penn or Anderson Cooper float in to save us?

More on the Biersch thing

2007-10-25T00:34:00.000-07:00

So...

...a lot of strike talk was discussed, and to be honest - much of it was tongue in cheek but SOME of it was really poignant.

Both 839 (Steve Hewett) and the Writers Guild of America were represented... and I thought it was interesting... because everybody there was passionate about the impending writers strike. I tried to corral them to the same table, to see if it would explode into two angry wet cats clawing at each other, but in the end, they were both civil and I couldn't manipulate an "Accidental cage match."

An evening's worth of theories:

1) Regarding a strike: There's movement. I don't think there's going to be a strike on November 1st, because people are talking. I could be wrong. That being said, I stick by my Strike Pool choice.

2) Script writers are acutely aware of the board/director animosity towards us. But they are also - by and large - willing to open conversation with people that they, in general, consider peers who write a different way. It would be nice if certain animation professionals (Rhymes with Shmon Shmay) would stop poisoning young animators minds - the same way the Taliban gets 'em young in Afghanistan.

3) A nice long discussion with the WGA about the fact that as long as TV Animation is considered the bastard child of a bastard child, we know that animation writing will be the first thing surrendered to up the residuals on a box DVD set, or digital downloads. We think, in general, we are a disliked minority within our own union where we are labelled "story revisionist monkey" or some such nonsense, and a disposable subsection of another. Is it any wonder we spend most of our days reading comic books and playing video games?

4) We could use a little bit more diversity in our field.

5) Whatever AGEISM exists in prime time television does not exist in TV animation. The writers ran the gamut, from newbie kids to old school types. There was a lot of history there last night, and it was cool.

That's that for that. It's 1 AM, and I am wiped.

Again: Good to see you all. Post. Reply. All that stuff.

And I'll probably pull another one of these together mid January.

:)

- Steve

We animation folk are an honest lot.

2007-10-24T00:43:00.000-07:00

So, to start the story, Jack Thomas put the "over under" at $150.

To reserve the Gordon Biersch, I had to slap my credit card down and guarantee a certain amount of boozing and dining would happen. $700 worth, to be exact. I figured, with 80 people RSVPing, that wouldn't be an issue.

But when I arrived at Biersch, they informed me there would be one check for everyone -- which put me in the position: Trust my animation brothers and sisters to chip in on appropriate levels, or raise a stink.

I trusted my kinfolk.

So the evening starts at 6:20 - I get there early to connect with the Biersch folk - and run into Stan Berkowitz and his lovely wife. Word was spread: Anything not paid for becomes the responsibility of Marmel Dynamics (My loan out company), and a small wicker basket was placed out for people to toss what they felt they drank, ate or whatever into it.

Like Church, I suppose, but with funnier people.

Here's the math.

The bill was 849.00, not counting monies paid via credit card.

I probably enjoyed about 40 bucks of food and drink, two people who work on the same floor as me at Frank G. Wells promised another 40 between the two of them, I paid $7 to the nice valet people and I picked up the tab of the nice lady from the WGA who came out to meet animation professionals.

That means I needed to pick up $742 in cash to break even. I picked up, I shit you not, $723.

The pot was off by 19 bucks. I can live with this.

So while everyone is arguing about money, and a bunch of animation professionals converged on Gordon Biersch to eat, drink and be curmudgeony... everyone was talking about residuals and strikes...

...everyone had a good time and pitched in their fair share.

I know things are more complicated than that.

But then again, maybe it's as simple as that as well.

Thanks for not sticking me with the tab, guys. See you all in three or four months.

:)

- Steve

In Praise of Not-Writers

2007-10-19T12:44:00.000-07:00

Funny LA Times opinion piece about the glories of "not-writing" and how it relates to the current strike unpleasantness.

As a professional writer, I've always been pretty good at not writing. Not writing, in fact, is one of my chief skills. I can not write anywhere -- on a plane, in a coffee shop, in my office -- and I often feel that a day spent without not writing is a day wasted. I even keep a notebook by the side of the bed, in case I wake up with an idea at 3 in the morning and don't want to write it down in case I don't forget it.

STRIKE POOL! Your comment is your entrance.

2007-10-15T17:55:00.000-07:00

And it's five bucks per guess, honor system.

Everyone gets to pick one day - if it happens, the person closest to the guess wins whatever the pot is.

Since we don't have any control over it, and all we're doing is idol speculation, I figure we might as well make it official.

Ties split.

Comment here and pick your day. By commenting and picking a day, you are tossing $5 into the pool. And with any luck, it'll never even happen that we'll have to collect.

I'll start. I choose Friday, November 23rd.

Who's next?

Kumbaya! Remembering Eek! the Cat

2007-10-14T23:29:00.000-07:00

Fifteen years ago this Fall, Savage Steve Holland and Bill Kopp’s Eek! the Cat (soon to be Eek! and the Terrible Thunder Lizards, then Eek! Stravaganza) premiered on FOX Kids (defunct as of 2002, sadly). I was 11 when Eek came on and it was pretty special, with its movie parodies, celebrity voices, self-reflexivity, and sometimes dark sensibility (Eek himself routinely seemed serenely fatalistic and even a bit perverted).

Eek debuted at the tail-end of an era where toy tie-in Saturday ‘toons were still common, if not the (shaky) rule. Fittingly, its playful disregard for Saturday morning comedy conventions often gave it more in common with original, new wave cable cartoons like Doug, Ren & Stimpy, Duckman, Beavis and Butthead, Rocko’s Modern Life than its own network sister shows. In fact, during its run, Eek’s S&P-defying innovation did not go unnoticed by mainstream entertainment press. Here’s a short Entertainment Weekly piece on the show’s hilarious S&P notes.

*Page 3: ''I found the shot of Rambo blowing Santa Claus to bloody smithereens excessively violent. We would like to edit this so we don't see Santa exploding.'' *Page 4: ''Even though it is Eek's fantasy, it will not be acceptable to show the child walking into the surf to commit suicide.''

Eek!'s frequent reformatting occassionally made it hard to find -- and even understand -- (is it just my imagination or did Eek once show up in the Thunderlizards's universe?), but the show's sincerity, strangeness, and refusal to ever talk down to its audience remains permanently in my mind. And for that, my "tween" years are thankful.

Much more about Eek! here and here. Interviews with showrunners here.

Meet the New Guy

2007-10-14T23:19:00.000-07:00

Steve has given me permission to start blogging here. You may have gotten brief glimpses of my work here or here, and you may have enjoyed (i.e. tolerated) longer glimpses of my work here. Anyway, I love cartoons and they make me laugh, so that’s why I’m here.

Writer-Palooza III on October 23rd

2007-10-13T10:21:00.000-07:00

If ya didn't get an invite, I didn't have your email addy.

I find it interesting...

2007-10-12T21:15:00.000-07:00

...that the animation guild is talking more about writing today than they have since, I dunno... forever?

An ill wind blows.

2007-10-09T18:55:00.000-07:00

But ill for who, when it will start REALLY blowing and how long it will blow, is anybody's guess.

Nobody wants a strike.

But everybody wants a union they believe will fight for all them.

In the Writer's Guild, I am a writer. In 839, I'm a "story person." In one guild, I get residuals, ownership, protection...

...and in the other, I get what I negotiate for. That being said, I am compensated well, and have no complaints. I have a generous employer that respects what I do and pays accordingly.

But the job I do that's covered in 839, is the exact same job I do for the WGA. And quite frankly, I find that baffling.

So on November 2nd, or December, or whatever it is... whenever the strike happens, if it happens...

...every animation writer - storyboard or script - should take a peek and see what the WGA is doing, and whether they accomplish their goals or not.

It affects all of us.

Doh.

2007-07-29T22:07:00.000-07:00

'Simpsons' Leaps to Big Screen Success
by Brandon Gray
July 29, 2007

Cashing in on 18 years of pop cultural prominence, The Simpsons Movie drew a stellar estimated $71.9 million on approximately 5,500 screens at 3,922 theaters over the weekend. The $75 million animated feature helped propel the weekend to the highest attendance on record for the final frame of July.

Good for them.

Good for us.

And even though this cartoon was hand drawn, I'll bet the characters were still more three dimensional than anything you'd see in "No Reservations."

It's been a while, I know.

2007-07-14T21:59:00.000-07:00

Really, what it comes down to, is this.

1) While I have been reading blogs, I haven't really had time to write them.

2) If I surrender this site for any reason, someone will seize it, and it becomes a link to porn.

3) After the 'con, I think I want to clear out the authors and start from scratch - get seven people to write once a week. Any takers?

And with that, goodnight for now.

:)

Kevin Gamble, I would take a bullet for you.

2007-06-21T23:59:00.001-07:00

In the shoulder, sure, and the left one, because I play the Wii with my right arm.... but still.

From the George of the Jungle "discussion" at Cartoon Brew where Kevin Gamble, the Executive Producer of the show, stuck his stick into the hornets nest of daring to defend his cartoon:

"

06/21/07 6:17pm

Kevin Gamble says:

Oh man! Holy smokes, this is awesome. An network friend of mine just emailed me and said “you are a brave man to step into that shark pit with your real name”. Look at all these responses! This is awesome! This is like a nerd gang fight. Waaaarriors, come out to plaaaay!

And they’re off!

Mel says: Jay Ward’s stuff was never visually brilliant but the writing was first class. This very episode also has a subtext about the stupidity of selling out to big moneyed interests. When’s the last time a contemporary, ‘cutting edge’ corporate-backed piece of cartoon crap dared seriously broach that subject?”

REPLY: We don’t, Mel. And we probably never will. That’s the point. A story about big bad corporate interests? What nine year old wants to watch that? None of them. Because they don’t give a shit about corporate finance structures. BECAUSE THEY’RE NINE.

LISTEN UP, GUYS. You all drone on about how evil I am to use phrases like “kid relatable” and how I’m a horrible corporate monster or how I use “myopic angling” (whatever the hell that is). Here it is in plain, easy to follow, angry artist terms:

IF YOU MAKE A SHOW THAT KIDS DON’T WANT TO WATCH, YOUR SHOW WILL BE CANCELLED.

How’s this for an example: If Kellogs made a Breakfast cereal for kids that was an amazing fusion of 12 year old Bourbon and limes, I would leap out of my pants and buy a dozen cases. But guess what? the cereal would fail in 2 months and be taken off the shelves, and the guy who green-lit it would be fired. So Kellogs is probably never going to make that cereal (much to my chagrin).

“why not make a show that funny to you, me, and kids”. Because if I said that in a pitch, I’d never sell a show. Shows that run on kids channels have to hit hard with kids. It has to appeal to 6-11 year old kids. Anybody else it attracts a fun bonus. Kids first. Everyone else a way, WAY distant second.

Elliot Cowan says: “Kevin - just for fun let’s assume that you’re correct and everyone here has completely missed the point. Your defense still doesn’t justify why it is ugly.”

REPLY: Come on Elliot, surely you understand that art is subjective. Some people think Basil Wolverton’s stuff is amazing. Some people think it’s a slightly nicer version of what you’d find doodled on the inside cover of a 9th Grade math textbook. Who’s right?

The art director on my show, Josh, is AMAZING. He’s got a clothing line that he does on the side that sells in Toyko, London, New York and Paris. Apparently some people think he has talent. Man, I took my 5 year old neice to see a small Monet showing here in town and she declared all the paintings as being “messy” and “outside the lines”. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Vincent says: “This is patently ridiculous. Johnny Bravo A great show? Failed because of his V shape? Who writes this crap? How much money was wasted to have someone study Johnny Bravo and decide that his shape was what drove people away from that show?”

REPLY: I was trying to be nice. I’d say Johnny Bravo failed to get a big audience because it’s about a 30-something guy who spends all his time trying to get laid and has no success in doing so. Me? I love the show. Because I’m a 30-someting guy with a similar success rate! I can totally relate! But to Skippy Skipperson, age eight, Johnny Bravo is a big fat guy with no friends because he’s fat and a poo-poo-dum-dum head. Skippy would rather watch Fosters, which has a funny blue character named Blue who says really funny things and does funny stuff. How is that so hard to understand? Our show’s main character hits trees. A LOT. It’s big and funny and goofy and it’s designed to make kids laugh.

Don says: “I think Kevin does deserve a kick in the nuts. Using kid’s tastes today as a scapegoat for bad designs is atrocious. ALSO: “One last thing….your knowledge of flash animation was demonstrated very clearly in the earlier video. Please leave the flash talk to the professionals, like Jayson”.

REPLY: Kick away, Don! For Christmas, my aunt bought me a puffy green sweater that has this massive reindeer head knitted on the front, and a red LED light on the nose that you power with a 9 volt battery. She thinks it’s “absolutely the funniest thing in the world” and declared it “the best design ever”. Do you have one of those sweaters? Why don’t we just agree to disagree and say we each have a different sense of style. Throw me a link to your work and show me what good design is, please!

I’ll spot you the point on the Flash thing. I don’t know Flash to save my life. I can open a scene to view it, but that’s about it. This is my first Flash show, having come from 3D. I can’t even draw a stick man – I came from live action. But I’m not claiming to be an artist. I haven’t even watched the interview (it’s just to painful, I get about ten seconds in and just moan about how bald I look and close the window in disgust). Did I even try to talk tech on the show? I don’t remember doing so, but I guess I did. Eesh, that was a bad idea. Point taken, I’ll STFU next time!

DanO says: “its fitting that you mention the Muppet Show, a show made over 20 years ago that can still entertain people of all ages today as much as it did all those years ago.”

REPLY: Dan, I may be crazy here, but do you honestly think today’s 8 year old boys will sit still and watch a musical variety show featuring Crystal Gayle & Julie Andrews singing love songs? I don’t. I think they’d probably fall asleep, or more likely just switch over to the Xbox.

Rose colored glasses, man. The show was great back in the day. American Idol, I guess, would be the latest incarnation of that genre? Which is a shame, because I’d pay good money to see another “Pigs in Space”.

I’m 34 – when I was a kid, I LIVED the Transformer cartoons. They were AWESOME! My first gig in animation 10 years ago was as a coordinator on the CG Beas Wars series. Jackpot! I was so excited! So I went back and watched a bunch of the old 80’s episodes on VHS to get back in the groove. Know what? Man, the rose colored glasses didn’t just fall off, they EXPLODED all over my face. It’s old stuff, old style, old storytelling. It wasn’t at ALL what I remembered. The kids of today want different things. My neice won’t watch Totoro because she can’t get through the first 15 minutes because it’s too slow. Which is a real shame. But what can you do? Go all Clockwork Orange on them and force them to watch what’s “good for them”?

We’re making cartoons for kids. If kids don’t turn on the dial and dig it, we’ve failed.

My job is to make sure that for half an hour a day, when a kid turns on his TV and sees my show, that he forget about everything else. I want him to bask in the glow of the TV, and feels like my show is speaking directly to him, telling stories he relates to, by characters he understands and cares about. So for twenty two minutes he can tune out mom & dad fighting in the kitchen about the gas bill, and forget about that asshole bully who made fun of his goofy plastic backpack, and not think about how hard math is and stop thinking that he’s stupid because everyone else in his class seems to get it, and how unfair it is that Susy next door has a kick-ass brand new bike while he’s got a shitty rusty hand-me-down that his brother gave him before he went off to fight in some stupid war in a place he can’t even spell.

That kid is going to watch my show; he’s going to see George hit a tree and he’s going to laugh. He’s going to watch a groaner of a gag that you and I and all the animation nerds have seen a thousand times before and he’s going to laugh too, because it’s new to him. He’s going to laugh and have fun and for twenty two lousy minutes, none of the stuff in his life that crap that grinds him every day is going to matter.

Because I make stories for kids; for six to eleven year old kids. I make stories for those kids, which I think is the greatest job in the whole god damned universe.

And I know my crew feels the same way, and we all do the best job we can with the time and resources we have at our disposal. Every episode of George ships to the networks still warm, having just coming out of the D-Beta machine. We’re busting out asses to make a great show for those kids, milking every last second out of every day until we are absolutely and completely out of time.

And if some 30-something art nerd doesn’t like what we do, well, I don’t really give a rats ass. My team and I make it for the kids, and they’ll decide what sucks and what doesn’t.

Love,
Kevin Gamble,
Producer, “George of the Jungle”.

www.crypticent.com
www.studiobproductions.com"

PIng! Pong! Now, a post from Cartoon Brew I disagree with

2007-06-06T22:08:00.000-07:00

It's Underdog, folks. And he hasn't been on TV long enough for three generations of dogs to have died in the real world.

Usually I'm pretty on board with Jerry Beck over at Cartoon Brew, but the rage on this - in the comments section, not in his post - and in the animation community, seems pretty silly. To me.

Cartoon Brew, which we likey. Even when we disagree... ey.

Underdog was a cartoon about a dog that put on a costume and battled crime. It has been turned into a live action movie about a dog that puts on a costume and fights crime.

Is it stupid? Yeah. Is it good stupid? Who knows. Spider-man 3 thought it was art, but it was ass. Maybe this knows it's not art and will be something else. Something better than ass.

It boils down to this: I'm up for giving it a chance. If something you love from your generation is "upgraded" for the next one, it can go one of two ways. Batman Begins, or Nipples on the Batsuit. The first Spiderman, or a maskless Tobey McGuire sitting on a rooftop, clearly five carmel apples to the wind, losing a battle to both Venom AND Funyons.

But Underdog was a knock off of Superman. And now, somebody knocked it off.

My Jury's out.

And with one response, Amid from Cartoon Brew becomes my hero.

2007-05-30T13:53:00.000-07:00

First, go here:

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/internet-blogs/the-great-upa-debate

...because from there, I backlinked and found this quote from Amid Amidi:

"Faulting Tell-Tale Heart for its lack of “expressive and skillful stylized animation” is like faulting Norman McLaren’s Begone Dull Care for its lack of pictorial imagery. It completely misses the point that animation is an infinitely rich graphic art filled with all types of visual possibilities.

That is exactly what the UPA artists were trying to prove with films like Tell-Tale Heart though that lesson apparently still hasn’t sunk in with people like the head of ASIFA-Hollywood’s Animation Archive who wish to limit the definition of what constitutes quality animated filmmaking. It’s depressing that somebody in charge of a project dedicating to promoting and educating people about the possibilities of this art form is so limited in his own understanding about what the possibilities of the art form are."

...countering the usual "everything sucks but what I think" opinions that were recently countered over HERE as well.

- Steve

When an outline is a premise

2007-05-27T15:36:00.000-07:00

Hey there! Finally found something that "doinked" me enough to post about.

Apparently, there was some discussion about "long premises" on the TAG BOARD
because, suprise, if you ask people to complain, they do. Damndest thing.

Here's the post in question:

"A short while ago we posted "Complaints TAG Gets." We also sent out letters and printed an article in the newsletter.

And whattayaknow? E-mails flowed in confirming that yes, there are execs in 'toonland who insist on outlines (mislabeled "premises") that studios don't pay for. Who would have thought it?

I also got a phone call from the creator of a show asking: "What's TAG's position on two or three page "premises" that have guarantees of outlines and script (and accompanying fees) attached to them?"

The answer is, premises longer than a page which are part of an outline and script payment guarantee aren't the issue. It's long premises that end up orphans -- that is, without an outline, script or money trailing behind them -- that are the problem.

I keep wondering what studios think they're doing. Who the hell wants to waste long days of their lives working for free?"

So here's the deal. I don't know who complained to TAG about this. And, for the record, on any show I do - SCRIPT DRIVEN STUFF mind you - a premise is a page, maybe a little more.

Outlines? They're 3 to 4 pages and on 11 minute comedy cartoons, I avoid them. I find they hamstring the writer and that once the story starts being written, it takes a life of it's own. But the problem is, a network or studio has signed off on the outline and anything aside from that is a surprise. Premises are the "spirit" of the story... a spring board, if you will.

But the minute you go into a board driven show, that premise has a different responsibility. Because on a board driven show, you go from premise to a pitch board, to a final board. That means a network has two bites at the apple on that story - the thumb pitch (which is invariably loose) and the final board, which at that point, is done.

Compare that to a script driven show where you can tweak it at the premise stage, the first draft stage, the second draft stage, the final stage, the record script... and then finally the board.

Is it any wonder that executives, studios and networks want to see more detail in the premise for a story... if that story is more of a "spirit" of an idea that blows into a full fledge board?

That being said - there are board artist / story artists that are amazing at this - that can go from a logline to a finished cartoon - and it's better than almost anything out there. Dave Thomas, for example (El Tigre) always amazed me with his ability to take an idea and blow it into a full board with dialogue that's true to the characters, heart, story and big, big laughs.

But the freedom to tell those kind of stories in that manner of production comes with trust. Not every story board artist can do it, just like not every person who considers themselves a writer can write. The difference? A shit first draft can be turned into a better second draft and a solid final draft.

But a drawn board is pretty much finished. As well it should be, or that board artist is doing a hell of a lot of redrawing, and re-re-drawing.

If you ask me, the "bigger premise" debate is more "give us more information about what this story is" before you move on to the storyboard issue.

I reiterate. Premises I look for are about a page. Outlines, if I need them, are around 3 or 4 pages. And then, there's the script. And if a writer I trust drops in a premise I like, I may not even request an outline, but they'll still be paid accordingly.

It boils down to "What kind of production are you on?"

As always, I suppose. As always.

Since May 5th, I know.

2007-05-23T23:50:00.000-07:00

So... twofold.

One - I've been busier than hell.

Two - I'm trying to figure out what to do with this 'blog... but I'm smart enough to know that if I, for any reason, let it go, it would be snapped up and end up pointing to a gay porn site.

So... what to do, right? Here is what I'm thinking.

1) Start moderating discussions. Honestly - that every debate turned into a flame war didn't help this place become a calm, rational spot to discuss writing. I'd like to change that.

2) Keep anonymity - But filter it. And yeah, that means me filtering, I guess. The fact is, every decent site has that kind of check and balance and I think the whole "lets leave it wide open" experiment failed. All Bees nest, no honey.

3) Have other authors. But perhaps knowing that the 'blog will be moderated will help bring other voices here. Hell... I really like it here and even I got tired of the constant fighting. To that end, I'll be deleting all author privs... and giving it to people who want to post regularly.

So that's the update that's open for discussion. One last "open for discussion" before I change the focus and reinvest in it.

Thoughts?

Are you Sponge Bob, Fairly Oddparents, or Family Guy?

2007-05-05T13:16:00.000-07:00

...because that is really what it boils down to.

All this angst about "artists vs. writers" is all crap when you boil it down to one simple question: What Genre are you writing in?

Spongebob type:
A creator has a clear vision for a show - an artist that knows EXACTLY the kind of comedy he or she wants and that driving vision drives the show. Usually surrounded by people with their exact vision on the board staff, which is good, because it is a board driven show. If the show even has "script writers," its for premises and outlines... nothing more.

This show exists, in my opinion, on character and gags. The stories are light, the direction is light... it's visual funny more than verbal and everything about the show supports that. If this show had a script, it would probably be one page per minute, and rightfully so.

Fairly Oddparents type
A creator has a strong vision for the show, but wants it to play more like a sitcom than a cartoon. The creator, or the writer brought on to "run the writing" run the show from premise (a page) to outline (three pages) to script (14 to 15 pages). This show is longer on the script page for any of the following reasons.
* There is an intentional choice for there to be verbal word play (which doesn't mean puns... it just means there's verbal jokes along with visual jokes).
* There is an intentional choice for there to be verbal jokes and references that appeal to the parents that are watching it so they don't turn the television off and, in some cases, maybe even enjoy the show.
* There is an intentional choice to run the process so there are the following steps: Premise, writing team (which I would say should include the director) breaks the story; Outline, writing team breaks the story, "A" draft of the script, writing team punch, First draft, address network notes, second draft, address network notes, final. Then, the board pretty much follows the script, with a board artist punching what has been written and approved by the Executive Producer, the Story Editor and, ideally, the director.
During this process, if there's time, you do a full pitch with a punch up session with artists and writers.
This cartoon is a mix of visual gags and verbal gags, doesn't have a story arc, and is a sitcom in the sense that things revert to normal at the end of every episode.

Family Guy type:
If you're a board artist who hates working scripted shows, then this is the type of show you hate. This, Simpsons, King Of The Hill, South Park... the board crew is in service to the script. Period. It's run like any other television sitcom - the script is the law, and everything else is beholden to it.

If you live in the world of prime time animation, and you work on a show like this... and you board on a show like this, that's it. You are, most of the time, a pencil to the writer's page. And you know that going into it.

Although I've never seen the script I wonder if the "chicken fight" scene in Family Guy in family guy was scripted to the punch, or if the board artist was given free reign to do as he or she chose.

This is also the kind of show where "writers are hailed as gods" when the big fights blow out, I'm sure.

Conclusion

It boils down to this. As a writer, if I'm working in cartoons, I would prefer to be on a show like Fairly Oddparents, or Family Guy. Or Yin Yang Yo, for that matter. I want to work where my words and thoughts are the driving force for the cartoons I'm a part of making.

As a producer, I choose to work the way I like to work, which means script first, giving board artists and directors wide latitude in changing, plussing, cutting or tweaking. I never have a problem with somebody taking a risk, as long as they don't get upset if I change it back.

I also understand that I am a job, not a career, to an artist in a job like that. And I also understand that the limited input or production pressures might not attract a specific group of very talented people. And that is completely okay.

Screw it. I'll take the bait.

2007-05-04T21:36:00.000-07:00

Good God, there's so much disconnect here, I might have to reply sentence to sentence, but I will.

WHAT A LOAD (etc) writes:

"maybe they don't understand YOUR version of story structure with the typical cartoon writer's devotion to having an A, B, and C story (jammed into an 11 minute cartoon)"

Fair enough. But if the EP hired the writer, who hired the board artist; and the EP told the writer to write the kind of structure that drives you nuts; and it was obvious what kind of show it was before you took the job - then you need to suck it up and walk it off. You took the job knowing what you were walking into.

When I was a comedian, and I was "hosting" because I wanted to get better, I had to take all sorts of shit jobs that I didn't want to take in cities I never wanted to visit, so I could get stage time I needed to get better.

When I worked on Cow and Chicken, I knew it was a board driven show. To complain about that, to be furious about it, would be insanity. It was a really good experience, but clearly, it's not my first choice in narrative.

You take a job, you do the job. Soap Box stands are for those who can afford them, or are willing to sacrifice for them, or have enough toy/merch money they dont need to worry about those decisions or create the show.

"with a complicated and confusing "story arc" (a term people love to throw around to make it sound like their nonsensical scripts are justifiably over-written) and endless stream of bad puns and weak catchphrases."

For shows like Spongebob, you're right. You don't need a complicated story arc. But when it comes to boy's action, you do. It matters to the kid. And whether you want to admit that or not, the kid is who you're doing that show for. You don't like story arcs then don't board on those shows. Ta da.

"I've seen whole scenes torn out by artists"

oh the horrors! maybe this was in the interest of actually meeting the deadling and turning in a board that actually works within the timeframe of the cartoon.

And if the artist is right, and it works, then that artist has made an excellent decision. But if the artist has tossed out something that's important to the story arc you don't care about, or the story that you don't care about, then it's not great and all you've done is create conflict.

One of the things on "Danny Phantom" that made people's lives easier is when a board artist would come to me with the script, and point out things they thought were confusing, or unneeded. That artist usually read the script first, and thumbed stuff out on the script, rather than simply plowing ahead from page one as though the script was the word of God.

Those were the best episodes, by the way - the ones where there was collaboration.

"gags destroyed, and character arcs lost in favor of the artist going off on some tanget they think is "cool" visually, rather than holding to the integrity of the story."

i don't believe this for a minute since most storyboard artists are so browbeaten by the system that makes writers gods and board artists shit that very few have the bravery to dare deviate from scripts. but for the sake of argument, let's say that's true: cool visuals are why kids watch cartoons. period. be grateful the artist cares enough to try to make it cool. the clever wordplay and pop-culture references that make you and your sit-com buddies chuckle is lost on young viewers because they actually have taste.

Ill split the difference with you here. Yes, pop culture references are probably lost on kids. Clever wordplay, maybe not so much, depending on how it's written. But, at least from my experience, I like to put things in there that make their parents laugh as well. I try to make the comedy work on dual levels, because parents are the ones who keep the TV on, and turn it off.

Parents, by the way, are the reason we have to deal with S&P, not the kids. To me, it's important to not bore or offend the parents in a kids' cartoon so you can continue making it.

"And when the artist is approached about this in an effort to find an agreeable solution"

now you're REALLY creating fiction. this never happens. ever. writers don't give a good goddamn about artists no matter how many cocktail parties you throw or blogs you take up saying "we like you." bullshit.

Unless you've wired every animation production in Hollywood, you don't know that. Maybe you've worked for writers that don't give a good goddamn about you, but then again, you've got a pretty dour attitude and I can't say that you wouldn't get your attitude reflected back at you like a mirror.

if writers wanted to make nice with artists, they'd quit their bitching and learn how to write for animation and stop denying the overwhelming lack of quality in cartoon scripts.

So, do me a favor: Give me the names of some cartoon writers that you think are good examples of animation script writers and why. Name people you LIKE. That you RESPECT. That would work for and with without complaint. Who do you feel should be teaching the rest of the writers?

and by the way, blaming an artist for "killing a gag" is every bit as chickenshit as a board artist blaming the overseas studio for killing the board with bad animation... if your precious gag didn't work in the storyboards it's most likely because you didn't give the artist enough information to make it work. you guys forget that just because you can visualize it in your head doesn't mean everyone else can, and if it's not on the page it's going to get lost in the shuffle.

Agreed. Somebody was telling me that they worked on a show where the script would read "And the fight begins" followed with a "TBB" which stood for To Be Boarded. Yipes. I try to write just enough direction in action to keep the plot going, or if I have an image in my head that's really important to me, spell it out... but I also leave it loose so that the board artists don't feel totally confined by the words on the page.

Split the difference. Trust the team and the process.

i'm not saying there aren't shitty storyboard artists out there... there are plenty of shitty storyboard artists.
but storyboarding is about ten billion times more complex and requires about a million more seperate skill sets than being a scriptwriter. it's a harder job. period.

I dunno about that. It's a longer job, to be sure. It's a lot easier to tell who's great and who sucks, that's also to be sure. And with writers, there are a lot more people who think they can write and think they're funny and aren't, and don't know it.

The stand up comedy analogy is when actors and B celebrities go up on stage and take valuable stage time away from good comics who want to get better. You just... wait for them to get out of the business, and they don't, and it's soul crushing.

and shitty writers make an already impossibly hard job even harder.

maybe you'd get better results form your board artists if you helped make their lives just a tiny bit easier. being overworked breeds deep resentment and i'm sure lots of board artists hack out their work because if the script is shit to begin with, why should they break their backs to polish a turd?

oh... right... it's their "job" to "punch up" the script... add that to the already daunting list of "duties" a board artist has.

go write a bad pun.

See, and here I could say "go doodle something on a napkin and wonder why you didn't get a 20 episode pick up," but I tend to not go there.

Here's the way, I think, it works right now:

Cartoon Network: Artist driven, board driven, gag driven cartoons.

Nickelodeon: Mostly script driven shows, except for Spongebob. Before anybody goes "See?!?" Oddparents and Neutron are ALSO successful, and they are scripted shows.

Disney: Mostly scripted animation, but they are also beginning to do board-driven shows.

Now... go find a production you'd like to be a part of, where your contributions will be appreciated in a way that you feel they deserved to be, and you can work in a way that you want to work - and maybe, just maybe, you'll be a happier person.

- Steve

I'm looking for a few good authors.

2007-05-03T00:51:00.000-07:00

Hey, all.

So, as I get ready to zip off on an international tour - well, Canada - I want to throw this out to everyone: Writers and non-writers alike.

Writers: Who here would like to be an author. I want to keep posting, but I also want other opinions and viewpoints here. Any writer would like to post, this is an invitation.

Artists (and writers): You remain welcome here, anonymous or not. It's yet to get super personal and the points you bring up are good. Peridoically, I learn something. I'd love some direction on the kind of things you'd love to see writers 'blog about, even if you are just teeing it up for flaming.
I had a lunch today with an artist friend who opened my eyes to a theory on voice direction that I had never thought of before. It will absolutely help me cast everything I do in the future - in both the cartoons I do AND the live action show I have going.
I'd love more of that here.

- Steve, who is so tired I accidentally almost ate a dog treat