WGA Site: http://www.wga.org/subpage_member.aspx?id=2204
LJ Comm: http://community.livejournal.com/wga_supporters/
TL;DR: The writer's contract expired and now they want a little more money on home video sales and a little money, period, for that "Brand New Wild n'Crazy Thing", the internet. They didn't get it. They went on strike.
Who can blame 'em?
I heard that the DVD sales thing was the biggest part of the strike. Basically, back in the old days, it was OK for there to be low royalties on VHS sales, as only a few sad-sacks who wanted an entire season of The Next Generation taking up a whole shelf for $200 would buy them. Now, you can get entire seasons for $50, in a small size, and DVD sales have gone through the roof.
part of it is that they got screwed out of royalties for video tapes because the technology was too new and the companies claimed they didn't know if they would make money. Now that dvd's and internet veiwing and downloads are popular the companies are still saying "It's too new we don't know if we are going to make any money" and the writers have called bullshit to that. personaly I think the writers are correct here though it's anoying to have to watch reruns of the daily show I hope they do well
There's also the fact that unlike VHS, DVDs don't deteriorate with age, reducing the likely hood of a consumer buying the show again.
That's untrue. If stored improperly, th glue holding the two layers of DVD together can degrade, causing the DVD to become unwatchable. We've had it happen with several discs in our collection. (However, we have over 700 movies/TV seasons in our collection, so there's a lot of discs.)
Quote from: Damaris on November 11, 2007, 11:16:47 AM
That's untrue. If stored improperly, th glue holding the two layers of DVD together can degrade, causing the DVD to become unwatchable. We've had it happen with several discs in our collection. (However, we have over 700 movies/TV seasons in our collection, so there's a lot of discs.)
Either way, internet downloads damn well don't deteriorate with age, unless being encoded in an obsolete format counts.
Quote from: Jigsaw Forte on November 11, 2007, 01:26:40 PM
Quote from: Damaris on November 11, 2007, 11:16:47 AM
That's untrue. If stored improperly, th glue holding the two layers of DVD together can degrade, causing the DVD to become unwatchable. We've had it happen with several discs in our collection. (However, we have over 700 movies/TV seasons in our collection, so there's a lot of discs.)
Either way, internet downloads damn well don't deteriorate with age, unless being encoded in an obsolete format counts.
Even Then, you could probably just download an obsolete program to play it. And a s far as i can see, VLC is the only media player that you need.
Quote from: Jigsaw Forte on November 11, 2007, 01:26:40 PM
Either way, internet downloads damn well don't deteriorate with age, unless being encoded in an obsolete format counts.
Wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Apart from obsolete formats, you also have disk crashes, bit flips on the disk drive/backup tape (Damaris has mentioned optical disk rot) and DRM to contend with.
e.g. http://www.boingboing.net/2007/11/07/mlb-rips-off-fans-wh.html
Quote from: Tapewolf on November 11, 2007, 01:49:15 PM
Quote from: Jigsaw Forte on November 11, 2007, 01:26:40 PM
Either way, internet downloads damn well don't deteriorate with age, unless being encoded in an obsolete format counts.
Wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Apart from obsolete formats, you also have disk crashes, bit flips on the disk drive/backup tape (Damaris has mentioned optical disk rot) and DRM to contend with.
e.g. http://www.boingboing.net/2007/11/07/mlb-rips-off-fans-wh.html
So we have absolutely no way of preserving our media completely effectively? i am sad.
Quote from: dannysaysnoo on November 11, 2007, 01:54:48 PM
So we have absolutely no way of preserving our media completely effectively? i am sad.
Short of stone tablets, no. One of the reasons I like mag tape is actually it's relative simplicity - imagine trying to reconstruct a SACD player in 50 years' time. Much of it is deliberately obscured for DRM reasons, whereas for audio tape all you need is something that can pull a length of the stuff across an electromagnet at exactly 15 inches a seconds. The other advantage is that although it degrades, we know how to restore it, and we can do a pretty good job of restoring celluloid as well. Digital mediums? Too early to tell, but I'm not holding out much hope.
Ironically the best way to preserve things is multiple redundant copies. Napster, for example, had episodes of
The Burkiss Way which even the BBC have lost.
the screenwriters' guild is on strike?
Good. Screw 'em. Maybe we'll get some almost-decent movies, now.
Now if we could just get the VFX guilds to strike, too.
Or just a small-scale nuclear drop on Hollywood itself.
Can you tell I don't like Hollywood?
Well this explains why my agent suddenly stopped calling. Fucking writers :<
I wonder if this will force Hollywood to hire overseas writers...like from Japan or the UK*.
(* My mother likes the show "Are You Being Served?" ... and I can see why! XD )
Quote from: KarlOmega1 on November 11, 2007, 10:16:54 PM
I wonder if this will force Hollywood to hire overseas writers...like from Japan or the UK*.
(* My mother likes the show "Are You Being Served?" ... and I can see why! XD )
If none of them ever want to work on a Hollywood project, or any US TV project ever again, then yes.
Media wise, I am hoping that sooner or later crystal encoding will become common and cheap enough to work fine, or, failing that, once you get flash memory down to as cheap as hard-disks - that stuff seems so far to be good and while you may have a limited number of write cycles, you don't need many for archive use.
I am looking forward to being able to buy 2-inch-square or so, unbreakable cubes(all the hardware needed to read it is inside, and the rest of the space is filled with plastic) that can store oh... 100gb of data, for perhaps $25-50. The technology is around, its just not quite cheap enough yet.
Of course, so far, I haven't had any trouble keeping two hard-disk copies of all my files, and hard-disks are pretty cheap any more.
As for DRM, with any luck it will die a horrible, horrible death, and we will finally be rid of this blight to mankind. Fortunately, the internet seems to agree on this, and, if you look around, there are plenty of ways to remove DRM. I *am* worried about the TC chips however.
-RobbieThe1st
Quote from: Raist on November 11, 2007, 02:18:48 PM
the screenwriters' guild is on strike?
Good. Screw 'em. Maybe we'll get some almost-decent movies, now.
Now if we could just get the VFX guilds to strike, too.
Or just a small-scale nuclear drop on Hollywood itself.
Can you tell I don't like Hollywood?
SIGGRAPH on the east coast. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIGGRAPH) >:3
Quote from: RobbieThe1st on November 12, 2007, 12:04:22 AM
Media wise, I am hoping that sooner or later crystal encoding will become common and cheap enough to work fine, or, failing that, once you get flash memory down to as cheap as hard-disks - that stuff seems so far to be good and while you may have a limited number of write cycles, you don't need many for archive use.
Flash isn't for long-term storage. Like E2PROM, it's basically a charge store and will revert to it's default state in around 20 years, less if exposed to UV or other radiation sources. The nanomechanical memory that someone was developing might be better, though.
I'm not sure what you meant by crystal encoding. Technically that's how phase-change media works, but that's probably not what you meant...
QuoteOf course, so far, I haven't had any trouble keeping two hard-disk copies of all my files, and hard-disks are pretty cheap any more.
That's what I'm doing at the moment, but the software I'm using (rsync-backup) doesn't have provision to tell if the data on disk has changed (md5sum or suchlike)
And now stagehands for Broadway have gone on strike. That includes Monty Python's 'Spamalot'! D:
Hmm, this could benefit small independent production companies like mine! Especially the non-profit ones, since as 501(c)3's, they do not have to be unionized.
You're assuming that nobody that works with you wants career advancement. If they're content to work with non-union cos for the rest of their professional life, fine. Just don't expect too many people to be excited about that.
The sirke has sperad to many actors as well, who are supporting the writers on this matter,
Quote from: BillBuckner on November 12, 2007, 11:08:12 AM
You're assuming that nobody that works with you wants career advancement. If they're content to work with non-union cos for the rest of their professional life, fine. Just don't expect too many people to be excited about that.
I'm the writer and director. I have complete control of myself! :mwaha
*No he doesn't!*
Who said that? :erk
wait, the major entertainment industries are reeling from a crippling strike, leaving the market open for any uppity Indie houses who want a piece of the action?
*strikes heroic pose* Alondro, get me character designs, a script, and keyframers and animators to work under me. I'll lead your animation project!
Quote from: Raist on November 12, 2007, 06:55:44 PM
wait, the major entertainment industries are reeling from a crippling strike, leaving the market open for any uppity Indie houses who want a piece of the action?
*strikes heroic pose* Alondro, get me character designs, a script, and keyframers and animators to work under me. I'll lead your animation project!
*chuckles* Already got most of those things.
I R preZEEdent (http://www.unitedpawsstudios.org)
I need more time these days to work on it.
oh wow, you've got Ursula Vernon!?
I don't recognize any of the other names below hers.
Mayhaps I should attempt to join your team.
Or mayhaps I should continue puttering along on my own. I'll worry about it when I have time.
Quote from: Raist on November 11, 2007, 02:18:48 PM
the screenwriters' guild is on strike?
Good. Screw 'em. Maybe we'll get some almost-decent movies, now.
Now if we could just get the VFX guilds to strike, too.
Or just a small-scale nuclear drop on Hollywood itself.
Can you tell I don't like Hollywood?
I think they've been planning this strike for awhile which is maybe why they haven't released a whole lot of good movies as of late.
You watch tv and with this glut of reality shows, it seems like the writers have been on strike for the last 6 years! :^P All they need for a show like that is a producer with a couple half assed ideas and a couple of fame-hungry idiots who will sell their dignity out for a couple grand. Can you tell I don't like network tv? ;^P
Quote from: Darkmoon on November 12, 2007, 12:37:38 PM
The sirke has sperad to many actors as well, who are supporting the writers on this matter,
i don't think its 'support' so much as it is 'oh crap, people are going to realize i am funny as a brick and cant form a complete sentence if my life depends on it'
Quote from: Brunhidden on November 14, 2007, 09:35:16 AM
Quote from: Darkmoon on November 12, 2007, 12:37:38 PM
The sirke has sperad to many actors as well, who are supporting the writers on this matter,
i don't think its 'support' so much as it is 'oh crap, people are going to realize i am funny as a brick and cant form a complete sentence if my life depends on it'
Really, I'd support the writers much more than the actors. Most actors barely have the IQ to hold a comprehensible conversation for more than a minute. The few that do have any brains are the ones who know enough to keep their mouthes shut.
But, I can't support the writers cuz they get paid way more than I do. :P
Hey, I just found a vid on YouTube that has a very clear explanation on what this is all about. For some reason, I didn't quite understand it all until now :B
Why They Fight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ55Ir2jCxk)
And I say, I agree with this.
Quote from: Raist on November 12, 2007, 11:17:24 PM
oh wow, you've got Ursula Vernon!?
I don't recognize any of the other names below hers.
Mayhaps I should attempt to join your team.
Or mayhaps I should continue puttering along on my own. I'll worry about it when I have time.
I recognize Ursula Vernon and two more besides...
Tracy Reynolds and
Shawntae Howard
It looks like you've got an all star cast of artists behind you, Charles. :3
Yeah, now I just need to get a pile of money behind me too.
*thinks of all the painful clinical studies he's going to have to sign up for* At $1000 a pop, I could fully fund the project with a mere... 500 studies...
...
I'm going to need my veins replaced after this... :<
Quote from: techmaster-glitch on November 22, 2007, 07:59:39 PM
Hey, I just found a vid on YouTube that has a very clear explanation on what this is all about. For some reason, I didn't quite understand it all until now :B
Why They Fight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ55Ir2jCxk)
And I say, I agree with this.
Considering the commission that they START with is more than most minimum wage work will earn in three years for about three months of writing, no, I don't agree. In fact, the REASON 48% of writers are unemployed is because they DON'T NEED TO WORK! They can go with out work for about three years with a single gig if they managed their money like a minimum wage slave. Hell, the national unemployment rate is around 4%. There are jobs to be had if those damn prissy writers would actually take one as opposed to their current arguments about the job that make about as much sense as the "but I might chip a nail" argument. If they're able to pick and choose jobs, they are not getting sympathy from me.
So, your argument is "Writing isn't a job". OK.
Quote from: Valynth on November 23, 2007, 02:56:21 PM
Considering the commission that they START with is more than most minimum wage work will earn in three years for about three months of writing, no, I don't agree. In fact, the REASON 48% of writers are unemployed is because they DON'T NEED TO WORK! They can go with out work for about three years with a single gig if they managed their money like a minimum wage slave. Hell, the national unemployment rate is around 4%. There are jobs to be had if those damn prissy writers would actually take one as opposed to their current arguments about the job that make about as much sense as the "but I might chip a nail" argument. If they're able to pick and choose jobs, they are not getting sympathy from me.
Or, you know, maybe they are unemployed because there is only so much writting work in Hollywood. Try and find out how many writters are between jobs and looking for a new one as opposed to between jobs and being lazy, why don't you, before you make broad sweeping generalizations about the character of a large group of people. getting work in entertainment is not so simple as knocking on some door and saying 'hire me'.
And, lazy or not, the fact remains that they took a
voluntary pay cut to help grow the home video market with the understanding that thier previous pay levels would be reinstated once the market had taken off. The hove video market has taken off, in spades, and they have not had that pay reinstated. The question is NOT whether thier work is worth what they want to be paid, it is a question of getting thier previous pay levels reinstated as they were originally
led to believe they would.
For the issue of recompense for internet material, how is an internet broadcast any different from a TV broadcast once you get past the technology of delivery? Maybe the Internet thing is greedy, and they don't deserve it (I don't necessarily agree with that, better writting gets better viewership gets better revenue, and good writting deserves reward), but they aren't getting paid for thier work, they aren't getting credit for thier work in some instances, and there is an injustice here, if not the grave one they make it out to be.
Quote from: Reese Tora on November 23, 2007, 03:26:05 PM
Quote from: Valynth on November 23, 2007, 02:56:21 PM
Considering the commission that they START with is more than most minimum wage work will earn in three years for about three months of writing, no, I don't agree. In fact, the REASON 48% of writers are unemployed is because they DON'T NEED TO WORK! They can go with out work for about three years with a single gig if they managed their money like a minimum wage slave. Hell, the national unemployment rate is around 4%. There are jobs to be had if those damn prissy writers would actually take one as opposed to their current arguments about the job that make about as much sense as the "but I might chip a nail" argument. If they're able to pick and choose jobs, they are not getting sympathy from me.
Or, you know, maybe they are unemployed because there is only so much writting work in Hollywood. Try and find out how many writters are between jobs and looking for a new one as opposed to between jobs and being lazy, why don't you, before you make broad sweeping generalizations about the character of a large group of people. getting work in entertainment is not so simple as knocking on some door and saying 'hire me'.
And, lazy or not, the fact remains that they took a voluntary pay cut to help grow the home video market with the understanding that thier previous pay levels would be reinstated once the market had taken off. The hove video market has taken off, in spades, and they have not had that pay reinstated. The question is NOT whether thier work is worth what they want to be paid, it is a question of getting thier previous pay levels reinstated as they were originally led to believe they would.
For the issue of recompense for internet material, how is an internet broadcast any different from a TV broadcast once you get past the technology of delivery? Maybe the Internet thing is greedy, and they don't deserve it (I don't necessarily agree with that, better writting gets better viewership gets better revenue, and good writting deserves reward), but they aren't getting paid for thier work, they aren't getting credit for thier work in some instances, and there is an injustice here, if not the grave one they make it out to be.
Do you honestly think the guys behind the why we fight video care about actual employment? Odds are they only took the figure of writers who are not employed TO WRITE. There is a significant difference between the two, not to mention they can wait off of one writing gig for a year or two before they become seriously strapped for cash if they managed their money right.
Also, have you seen how much crap Hollywood is pumping out? They'll make a movie out of almost ANYTHING, I mean you can't look at the latest releases as say "Oh the Hollywood people actually looked around for that plot talent," because quite frankly they didn't otherwise it wouldn't suck so horribly.
There's also the fact that even an additional 4 cents on every DVD sale results in over 100,000$ simply by all the rental places buying the DVD's.
Also, the pie chart is purposefully misrepresented. The studio gets no where near the amount they show, retail ALONE takes 5.00, and then you have actors, directors, CGI people, and in some case extras that also have a little slice of that chart. Pretty much everyone in the credits gets a piece of the chart as listed at the end of the movie. In otherwords, the writers want the rest of the crew to take paycuts so they can get even more of a respectable slice of the sales since very few writers are needed compared to the rest of the crew in movie production. Hell, two writers can be all a group needs to produce a movie or television series.
i suddenly have a desire to see how hard it is to submit a script to hollywood....
Quote from: Valynth on November 23, 2007, 07:14:24 PM
Do you honestly think the guys behind the why we fight video care about actual employment? Odds are they only took the figure of writers who are not employed TO WRITE. There is a significant difference between the two, not to mention they can wait off of one writing gig for a year or two before they become seriously strapped for cash if they managed their money right.
No, you brought it up, I responded. You are assuming a lot without any reference to facts or real statistics other than what the writters themselves said.
Quote from: Valynth on November 23, 2007, 07:14:24 PM
Also, have you seen how much crap Hollywood is pumping out? They'll make a movie out of almost ANYTHING, I mean you can't look at the latest releases as say "Oh the Hollywood people actually looked around for that plot talent," because quite frankly they didn't otherwise it wouldn't suck so horribly.
Oh, I don't disagree with that most of it is trash, but this proves my point; hollywood is putting out as much junk as it can raise the money to produce. Hollywood is desperate for new scripts that it can put to movie and make a little more scratch.
Quote from: Valynth on November 23, 2007, 07:14:24 PM
There's also the fact that even an additional 4 cents on every DVD sale results in over 100,000$ simply by all the rental places buying the DVD's.
Also, the pie chart is purposefully misrepresented. The studio gets no where near the amount they show, retail ALONE takes 5.00, and then you have actors, directors, CGI people, and in some case extras that also have a little slice of that chart. Pretty much everyone in the credits gets a piece of the chart as listed at the end of the movie. In otherwords, the writers want the rest of the crew to take paycuts so they can get even more of a respectable slice of the sales since very few writers are needed compared to the rest of the crew in movie production. Hell, two writers can be all a group needs to produce a movie or television series.
Yes, the pie chart only represents the amount that writters themselves get, and there are other costs, but it also doesn't represent the fact that writters only get 0.3% of the first reportable gross in residuals from the first million copies sold. A team of writers might spend a year or more on a single project, and, assuming that the DvD they make even sells a million copies, (unlikley, for a lot of direct to DvD junk that's put out) they would only make ($30 * 1mil *0.3% = )90,000 dollars, which is split amongst all the writters.
In a team of, say, five writters, you would have $18,000 each for a year's work, adn that's for one decent direct to DVD movie.
As for comparing this to minimum wage, we are talking about trained professionals, not people who flip burgers for a living. Even a McDonalds employee can expect to make mroe than minimum wage. (you also ahve to take in to account the cost of living in California is MUCH higher than the national average, especially in the hollywood area)
however its still a matter of when a writer says "i was the one who put in the 'this is Sparta *kick*' line and all i got was $18 K, its still a little unfair that you do not have recognition or are suitably rewarded for making that movie a hit. however the way movies go now it pisses them off more because the movie makers think they can just shove a big name actor in and itll make a good movie but the writers are just to be yelled at when they screw up.
Bah, this whole thing is crap. That's like every single person who was involved in bringing a successful drug to market wanting a percentage of the profits.
That's why real companies pay wages. That's what you signed up for, that's what you get... so shut up.
Oh, it takes them a year to write this stuff? Seriously? A whole year and these movies and shows are the best they can come up with? You know, that makes me feel even less for them than just a little while ago.
Quote from: Alondro on November 23, 2007, 10:45:18 PM
Oh, it takes them a year to write this stuff? Seriously? A whole year and these movies and shows are the best they can come up with? You know, that makes me feel even less for them than just a little while ago.
Writters sign on with a movie, and are involved with the production. A script isn't ususally just written and handed over to a production studio. The script that gets shown to a studio is a rough idea of the movie, it gets refined durring pre-production, modified durring production, and maybe even re-ordered and changed durring post-production.
It's not that it takes a year to write the movie, it's that it takes anywhere from half a year to a couple years create a movie, and the writter is on-board for that time.
Quote from: Alondro on November 23, 2007, 10:45:18 PM
Oh, it takes them a year to write this stuff? Seriously? A whole year and these movies and shows are the best they can come up with? You know, that makes me feel even less for them than just a little while ago.
actually it takes like a week to 'write' it, but the year part is re writing it every time someone points out an inconstancy, the director does not like that scene, a PR representative says this here might be racist, a choreographer says to change an action/fight scene, someone with an ambiguous job title says there should be more sex here, here, and here, and by this point one of the changes you made just summoned one of the previous people to come back again to insist it be re written again
this is the creative process, and without it many movies would be five hours long, many tv sitcoms may actually be funny, and anything labeled as 'drama' would cease to exist
I'd like to bring something to the attention of Val. To say that extras get a small part of the gross is BULLSHIT. I work part-time as an extra and we don't get jack or shit from the movie other then our set pay rate during production. The minimum wage for extras is $10 an hour (here in Canada) and we get paid for a minimum of eight hours a day. That means if I get called in for three hours I get paid for eight. After we're done signing in the extras are all herded into one room that (on any set) is called 'Background Holding' where we all sit around and wait to be brought out. Then when we are brought out, we're the equivalent of props that can talk. We're not actors we don't even get to speak (speaking credits you as an actor and therefor get's you a LARGE increase in pay). So yeah we get no piece of the pie we're more likely filed under the same category as paying for the rentals they needed to film the set.
Now this isn't to say that sets don't treat extras right cuz alot of them are fucking awesome as far as how much they pay and food supplied.
I liked the way it was in the little dinner theater Murder Mystery comedy I used to act in some years ago. It was fun. Everyone added to the writing as we rehersed, and often came up with some very funny parts.
I still recall the time Kage was there for a show and I did my multiple movie deaths death scene. It was great!
Quote from: Netrogo on November 24, 2007, 08:14:55 AM
I'd like to bring something to the attention of Val. To say that extras get a small part of the gross is BULLSHIT. I work part-time as an extra and we don't get jack or shit from the movie other then our set pay rate during production. The minimum wage for extras is $10 an hour (here in Canada) and we get paid for a minimum of eight hours a day. That means if I get called in for three hours I get paid for eight. After we're done signing in the extras are all herded into one room that (on any set) is called 'Background Holding' where we all sit around and wait to be brought out. Then when we are brought out, we're the equivalent of props that can talk. We're not actors we don't even get to speak (speaking credits you as an actor and therefor get's you a LARGE increase in pay). So yeah we get no piece of the pie we're more likely filed under the same category as paying for the rentals they needed to film the set.
Now this isn't to say that sets don't treat extras right cuz alot of them are fucking awesome as far as how much they pay and food supplied.
Whooaaaa there cowboy, rope up them hormones right now. You should note that I said "in some cases." If you had a different experience then you are part of the "many cases."
Also, you get paid 10$ an hour for eight hours a day in three hours to essentaly be filler? I'd kill for your job. I'd be lucky to find a commercial job that pays 6$ an hour for eight hours a day in ten hours a day all of which I'd be cleaning/stocking/dealing with public/basicaly earning my pay.
the important question is, how many days a year does an extra work? :3
regardless, extras are paid for a very important skill many have yet to grasp: the art of not talking
rhubarbrhubarbrhubarb
no, actually, I second Valynth. $10 an hour, minimum $80 a day to basically stand around and look pretty, or sit in a room full of people?
... probably a pay cut from my current job, but I assume you can do other stuff in the "background holding" room.
especially if you're making an adult movie....
Buh dum dum...
Oh yeah don't get me wrong, background is great. The only downside to it is it's an 'on call' job. Which means I only work when my agent calls me. Sadly because of the strike she hasn't called once this past two weeks :cry
Quote from: Netrogo on November 25, 2007, 08:42:49 AM
Buh dum dum...
Oh yeah don't get me wrong, background is great. The only downside to it is it's an 'on call' job. Which means I only work when my agent calls me. Sadly because of the strike she hasn't called once this past two weeks :cry
Net, have you been in anything we might have seen?
Quote from: dannysaysnoo on November 25, 2007, 08:56:17 AM
Net, have you been in anything we might have seen?
... that you're willing to admit to? ;-]
I was in the movie adaptation of Repo! The Genetic Opera. I was also in this mini series that's supposed to come out next year called The Summit.
Oh and Llearch I'll admit to anything. Hell I did some fetish videos earlier this year. Mind you they were only tickle fetish videos so it was fully clothed, horrible acting, and lots of laughing. But they are still hosted on a porn site XD Frankly I'm more ashamed of having worked with Paris Hilton on Repo! :<
We're all ashamed for you.
Paris Hilton?!.. !!!!????!!!!!????!!!???! :O
You are among the damned... L:
I know, I know >.<
Although there was one good thing to working with her. She single handedly resulted in all the extras getting paid for an extra three hours of work, because she couldn't get ONE word right in her lines. So her stupidity was a blessing, even if we had to put up with watching her strut around like the preppy bitch she is when not on set.
Plus there were other cool people on set thankfully. Paul Sorvino, Alexa Vega, Sarah Brightman, and Bill Moseley to name a few. Also unlike Hilton they all ate their meals in background holding and hung out with us. Sorvino even sang opera for us when we were between takes (Fyi he sings AWESOMELY!!! Yes so good that I make up words like awesomely to describe it).
As long as you didn't touch her, you are still 'clean'. :3
If you did, you must be dipped in sulfuric acid for cleansing. >:3
Quote from: Raist on November 12, 2007, 11:17:24 PM
oh wow, you've got Ursula Vernon!?
I don't recognize any of the other names below hers.
Mayhaps I should attempt to join your team.
Or mayhaps I should continue puttering along on my own. I'll worry about it when I have time.
Hey, Alondro? I've thought about it. Can I join United Paws?
Do I need to provide a portfolio or something?