The Hot Blog

Heat; there may be some journalistic merit to posting this letter. Yet... it's sort of gossipy. I could have sworn that you -- David "HEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaattt" Poland -- stated you were finished with gossip.

Sure; this post is just an attempt to type out HEAT in a rather silly way. However... where does the line begin and end for you in terms of gossip? Since I see a letter meant for a certain pair of eyes and when they are not seeing them. It turns into something completely different.

That aside; 180 films in productions? A 180? No wonder they want to strikes because that level is simply asking for trouble from your union. It's also creating a glut of shit in the theatres for 24 months to come.

If you take the "S" off of "STRIKE" and put it on the end of "UNION." Everything will make sense. Still... a 180 projects at the current time? Blimey.

This is not gossip, it's a wake up call.

You just know that one or two of these filled-out forms will leak and that some web site or rumor monger (like Nikke Finke herself) will post them or use the information to try to generate hits.

1. You are listed as a writer on the film, XXX.
XXX had writers?

Here's a prediction for sometime before lunch today:

Although I think, that in a free and open society, where markets rely on transparency, that the WGA should be able to ask it's memebership what's going on, but the producers will jump in, like they did on the Script Authorization Program, and site the confidentiality clause and say it prevents writers from discussing their work, which they will say are secrets owned by the company.

But on a lighter note, Dave, are you feeling any of the myth about how "ready," "smart," and "anticipated" (your terms) those disaster averting buyer/studios are, or can be? Are you feeling 2008 in the pipeline, or Don huffing and puffing ahead of the faux (his term) strike?

"XXX had writers?"

Yes. Indeed, they should not be called writers, but instead, right-ers. Because XXX (or, as it should be called, xXx) is a brilliant, brilliant film.

I'm only being partially sarcastic, btw.

I don't know. A couple of those sound like "are you now or have you ever been a writer on project xxx?"

Have to love that the secretary-treasurer of Hollywood Teamsters Local 399 said while it's not Teamster policy at the moment to tell its members not to cross the picket lines nevertheless he won't do it and encourages others to follow suit.

Meanwhile, Patrick Goldstein gave the studios one HELLUVA BLOWJOB in his column today reducing every writer into a cliche filled stereotype. Can you imagine any semi-intelligent journalist saying that all directors are screaming ego maniacs or all actors are spoiled, unprofessional brats but apparently its an accepted truism that all writers are uncompromising elitists who hold up productions by telling actors what to do, refuse to change one line of dialogue - but thats only if they aren't three sheets to the wind.

Roy,

we need you in byob post. noah's trashing "blade runner"

DP I know you love using the word, but 'redacted' is not what you're doing by simply blanking out names and projects.

I posted this in BYOB - Halloween, too:

No one seems moved by Dave's "Need to Know" post of a seemingly leaked, official, information gathering, WGA communicae to a member. So, was he possibly played, or is he possibly playing the strike through The Hot Blog?

Hend - I might post on that, but don't assume you will like what I have to say. If approached from a WRITER'S point of view, what Scott has done with the director and final cuts of BLADE RUNNER is terrible.

It is clear in Dick's novel that only Deckard questions his "human-ness" and Dick was going for the more profound idea that the Replicants were more human than the emotionally dead Deckard. That his budding feelings for Rachael become more darkly ironic when it is revealed that she is also a replicant.

That said, it's not like I'm going to throw out my laserdiscs (I have both versions) or three different soundtracks.

Are you standing by the authenticity of this letter?

It is 100% legitimate, T Holly... sent by the union to working writers for specific projects.

I'm not quite sure why this is such drama for you.

An authentic letter sent to one? Perhaps you think my opinion is less than humble, (which it is, is not), you owe it to yourself to run a follow-up as to why you think the AMPTP isn't having a cow over it, considering they're tripping all over themselves on the Script Validation Program, claiming company secrets and waving the confidentiality clause-flag in the WGA's face.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: