The ongoing double strike in Hollywood could cost the economy $5 billion-plus.
  • RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.caEnglish
    26·
    1 year ago

    Incorrect. Hollywood bigwig blowhards who routinely cheat on their accounting and taxes like it’s breathing and treat the people who actually create the products like an underclass of garbage … that’s who cost the economy $5b.

  • Margot Robbie@lemm.eeEnglish
    261·
    1 year ago

    If they actually cared about the economy, then give the actors and writers what they want and the strike ends, and we can all get a move-on with things.

    That’s the point of the strike, and the solution is right there in front of the studios.

  • local_taxi_fix@lemmy.oneEnglish
    25·
    1 year ago

    Wow, great job with the pro-company/anti-worker framing there Yahoo finance. This is the fault of greedy corporations, not workers demanding a fair share.

    • BrainisfineIthink@lemmy.oneEnglish
      7·
      1 year ago

      Yes it is. What exactly is the strike costing the economy? Actors and writers opting to forego their own wages in the interest of the collectively not being robbed by the members of the 1% and the mega corporations they run are not stealing money from people. The only thing the strike is doing is lowering the profit margins and short term value of the companies that only got said value by hoarding the wealth generated from the IP and likenesses of the people on strike.

  • coffee_poops@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    14·
    1 year ago

    “the economy” is just rich people. No one gives a fuck about “the economy”, we care about fair wages. Shut up you rich jerks and just pay people enough to fucking survive.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      11·
      1 year ago

      That’s why they ended pensions and have, and are continuing to push all retirement into Wallstreet. That way the average person is chained to “the economy”, because otherwise you’re completely correct.

  • UrLogicFails@beehaw.orgEnglish
    3·
    1 year ago

    The amount the studios are losing from the strike could have paid for the WGA/ SAG requests easily, which makes the studios holding out feel even more ridiculous; but I think it’s not about the money for them.

    I think they want to send the message that they hold the power, not the workers, to disincentivize/demoralize future strikers. On top of that, I think they are salivating at the thought of never paying a “creative” again; and AI writers rooms and owning the likeness rights of every extra they ever use would certainly make it easy for them.

    The studios are dreaming of the day they can ask a computer to generate Iron Man 7, and it’ll spit out the script, generate CGI acting (including a rubbery PS3 looking RDJ), and it won’t ever need to touch human hands.

    The studios want to frame the strike about money (and that is certainly a big issue), but this could very well be a strike for the future of Hollywood’s “soul”; which is why I think the studio heads are willing to take such a bath to keep it going

    • Ertebolle@kbin.social
      2·
      1 year ago

      The thing the studios don’t seem to appreciate about this is that once they can have an AI generate Iron Man 7, so can any other schlub; you can say you want to watch a movie where Iron Man enters a mini-golf tournament with Genghis Khan and the 1927 New York Yankees and it’ll make one for you.

      There are 3 possible outcomes, basically:

      1. AI is never more than a curiosity as far as movie making and this whole argument was pointless;

      2. AI gets good enough to replace a lot of the capital-incentive grunt work of movie making, like VFX, but not high-level creative work like writing / directing / production design, so making AAA movies gets cheaper and the big studios lose power while indie studios gain more;

      3. AI gets as good at making movies as humans are, in which case we don’t need studios at all.

      None of these are good for them; the status quo is actually the least bad outcome. The real game, I suspect, is that they hope that they can convince writers that AI is a big enough threat to a) make concessions in other areas to stop it and b) be grateful they’re still employed at all; a world where AI actually replaces creative talent on films is a world where we don’t need studios at all anymore.

    • thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      That’s the case with most businesses. Investing in your human resources always nets a positive ROI, but corpos can only see one quarter at a time.

  • relative_iterator@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    Any chance a co-op studio could replace or compete with the big studios? I’m sure the biggest hurdle would be raising enough capital but it would be nice to see the actual actors and film crews taking ownership.

    • elouboub@kbin.social
      01·
      1 year ago

      Why don’t they create their own co-op studio with blackjack and hookers? Their combined talent should be able to, right?

  • squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    It is not the strikes that cost the US economy money, it is the greed of absurdly overpaid executives who want to wring every cent of profits out of workers.