Posts by Peter Cox
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
If it's the same stuff he's been posting on the Theatreview thread, I agree with you.
This bit on the 30th isn't so terrible:
I welcome the opportunity to now talk with SPADA and discuss these terms in a calm and reasoned way over the next few months. This entire non-negotiation has been calamitous for our industry and has retrenched all players in a way that may take years to undo.
It has been a civil war, brother against brother, sister fighting sister, and I pray it ends, now.
I do hope that no party drags the chain and puts more blocks in the way of fair and reasonable discussion. Let us attempt to build some bridges.Ok. I’ll start. I apologise unreservedly and sincerely for any and all offence I may have unwittingly caused.
Ok. Let’s talk.This is okay too:
There is no doubt that starting a negotiating stance with the only "gun" you have (to quote SPJ) is a somewhat dubious tactic and its origination was by international union collective FIA, as I understand it, as a way of requesting that producers actually talk to NZAE.
As I said earlier the resulting furore was escalated by apoplectic people furious that somehow NZAE had the temerity to invoke anything.
The worst people on that thread are the idiots who are clearly from The Standard or similar. Oh, and Roy Billing once again, stirring things up. Thanks Roy.
-
Yeah, I was kind of disappointed not to see an actor or two engage a bit more with us on that. But a lot of them are genuinely concerned if they get too stuck in behind this action, they'll get a bad rep and producers will be less inclined to want to cast them as a result, which is something I can fully commiserate with.
This is where I feel some actors might have some gratitude to Trotter/The Standard etc - because they've been so vocally sticking up for them. I'm not sure I'd feel any different in their position, at least when this thing was at full invective a month back or so. I'd probably also take one look at 'publicaddress' and think 'bastards not helping', and not want to engage either. I have casting decisions over actors for a start. It's concerning, but I think it'll be something that'll fade when people don't feel so heavily on the firing line with all this. Still, would have been nice for Graham Dunster to bother answering some questions in regards to the statements he's made on here.
Problem is, when you see emails like that from the MEAA, it's hard not to attack the MEAA for blatantly disguising the facts to cover their asses, and the NZ Actors feel like you're attacking them, or even that we're simply 'deluded by the mass media' or similar kinds of things that get said by Trotter/The Standard, and reinforced by the antics of Holmes.
That's why I'm a lot more sympathetic to Robyn Malcolm & Helen Kelly than certain other people around the place. I suspect she knew she was going to take it on the chin, but simply saw some people who felt too threatened to go into the public forum, against some big, powerful people, and stuck up for them.
But by the same token I get equally furious at the MEAA for creating the situation and continuing to cover up their mistakes to cover their own foolish mistakes. To save face in public is one thing... but to try and disguise the situation to your own members...
I get angry just thinking about it.
Tough situation all round...
-
Oh, and the point I never actually managed to make with this:
I suspect they feel somewhat ripped by the broader NZ media, who did go pretty over the top at times, and it felt like 'union bashing', frankly.
Was that the actors probably feel attacked from all sides at the moment, but in time I think they'll feel less so, and the various people who have criticised this particular campaign are not necessarily to be lumped in with the Laws/Holmes/Kiwiblog crowd, and are completely prepared to lend support to the overall cause itself.
Okay, that's my ramble for the day; back to work ;)
-
@Peter Cox - agreed. I hope Equity do meet with and forge relationships with the other NZ industry unions.
Yeah, it's not completely their fault, though. Everyone's working on it. I'm feeling optimistic.
I wouldn't mind seeing a more clear line of exactly where the MEAA stops and AE starts though.
-
Having just ripped into Roy Billing, I should point out, he was genuinely trying to stick up for the rights of NZ Actors, and I shouldn't dump on him for that. I'm sure he's a good guy. But there's definitely a line between support and outright interference that's been crossed there, and he should have known better, particularly if he's going to start joining in with the PJ is some sort of evil overlord rhetoric. That sort of s**t has actually wound up causing a great deal of damage to AE's cause.
But one of my colleagues, when we were discussing employers' attitudes to actors in soap operas, said in his opinion actors were regarded as "always the fly in the ointment, and if it wasn't for them, this programme would be really good.
Yeah, that attitude has always made me angry too. I hear people harassing Shortland Street acting sometimes, and I always inform them of the kind of ridiculous turnaround they have. It takes a brilliant actor even to look half competent under those kind of conditions. They don't rehearse the same way they would in any other type of TV drama, or film, let alone theatre.
That's always been the sign of a good director too - the ability to recognise where actors need to be in order to give a performance. I've always felt the best writing came from actors too, or at least people also trained to be actors: Harold Pinter, for example, who I spent a good 2 years blatantly trying to reproduce before I figured out I wasn't angry, jewish or living in london in the 60s.
Also Sam Shepard. Kind of bummed I missed True West that was put on recently. Damn great play.
-
What? That their *union* did a poor job? Have I missed someone bagging actors in general?
I suspect they feel somewhat ripped by the broader NZ media, who did go pretty over the top at times, and it felt like 'union bashing', frankly. By the same token Chris Trotter's 'Peter Jackson is evil and anyone who doesn't agree is a scab', apparently including me, didn't help either. I it was a bit concerning to see his first article officially endorsed by Roy Billing as a board member of the MEAA. Not cool, Roy, not cool at all. Nice of you to drive a wedge into the NZ industry from your comfortable spot in Aus, far away from the fallout.
Anyway, as for the Paul Holmes/Michael Laws part: it wouldn't surprise me if much of the (one would hope, constructive) criticism of the MEAA's handling of this thing would get mixed in with that kind of 'actor's are stupid' type rhetoric.
But time heals all wounds as they say. I don't think these ones are terribly deep in the end though, anyway.
Everyone in this, including the leaders of AE are very intelligent, decent people with a great deal of passion and desire for the success of the NZ industry. They're as big a fans of PJ as anyone else I'm sure. I, for one, am optimistic that this will turn out for the best for everyone and the NZ industry will actually be stronger as a result.
Really glad the Hobbit stayed though, phew.
-
Some of us speculated that they probably would have, actually - and that failure to adjust for local industrial relations culture may have contributed to the problems.
I find it extremely unlikely they would have never balloted their members until after the fact, nor consulted with their other industry unions.
-
From what I'm hearing, the version of events described in the MEAA newsletter is the one subscribed to by a large number of actors.
It's early days yet. I'm sure the actors feel very hard done by in this whole thing. I'll bet some aren't terribly fond of some comments made around here also, but, unlike Paul Holmes, I don't think they're stupid, just under-resourced and thrown in the deep end by the MEAA.
I think when they sit down with their fellow industry unions they'll see that we're more than happy to help them and things will start to improve. I for one though, am not at all impressed with the MEAA and how they've handled things. I'm glad for their support of an under-resourced NZ Union, but the AE would probably be well served by asserting their independence and negotiating themselves and in unison with their fellow nz guilds for reasonable standards, such as is done very effectively in the US.
The MEAA don't seem to care less for the other NZ Unions. If they did, this would have played out very differently.
-
The later message dated the 28th October on the NZ Actors Equity website appears way more reasonable than that MEAA newsletter.
It is indeed. I think it's safe to say most people's beef is with the MEAA and not AE, which is not to suggest AE are pawns or whatever, but simply that the far better resourced MEAA should have done a far better job, and were ultimately quite irresponsible in the way that their actions effected the NZ industry. It's not AE's fault, but the MEAA should have known better before it hauled out the big guns. They wouldn't have bloody run it like that in Australia. Why to the NZ Industry and AE members not get the same respect?
Nor is blatantly disguising the truth of their actions to their own members, in an obvious bid to cover their own asses, something that is going to endear the MEAA to the rest of the NZ industry, nor, in the long run, their own members, one would imagine.
-
Campbell also has some ideas about leveraging opportunities out of this situation for our screen industry
I really liked that last Gordon Campbell article for a great many reasons:
Perversely, the delays – and the beat-up over the Union Threat– worked in this country’s favour as the location both by virtue, and by default. Given the details in the final deal, some on the left will be happy to believe Jackson was working in a tag team with Warners all along, to ramp up the production subsidies. I don’t share that view. One could just as easily make the argument that Jackson had been working against Warners all along, to counter their plans to move elsewhere – and by that logic, he could be seen as inflaming the dispute at a crucial juncture to foreclose Warners’ options, while on the side helping to compensate them with extra millions from the government. Such conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen and a complete waste of time – given the dearth of proof either way, and the lack of transparency.
This especially. Anything to tone down the conspiracy Jackson hate rhetoric that has floated about. Hasn't been helpful at all to anyone. By the same token people like Holmes could obviously take it down a notch or 12. At the end of the day though, even though I haven't completely agreed with some of his previous articles on the subject, GC has simply put a lot more effort into thinking about the complexity of the issues than 95% of the NZ media.
It's a pity that some people seem to havr turned his points into some kind of crazy conspiracy theory issue. It's good to see GC specifically addressing that in his last couple of articles.