and of course eisner would never just say something because it makes him look good. now if the wga
turns down an offer, even if it's a bad offer, they look bad.
i say wait for an announcement from the wga. everything is just speculation.
[#78080]
Written by: traumadoc [07/02/2008, 21:58]
why does anyone care if the strike is over or not
they are all fools
fact of the matter is, if the strike isn't forced to be resolved soon they will
all give-in and go back to work. when they start losing their homes and cars
are repossessed the writers will go back to work. when the producers start
losing higher bonuses, they'll solve the strike.
we, the viewing audience are damn little babies. "we want to watch tv, boo hoo
hoo" !!! go outside. watch movies. tv will come back and you will not die
without it.
this is a sad excuse for american culture and business.
[#78081]
Written by: joshua42 [07/02/2008, 22:17]
you come to a site called eztv and berate people they could be doing more worthwhile than watching tv?
wow, like going on websites, berating people to do more with their lives?
this site, particularly this news site, talks about everything tv related. coming here to complain about
people being interested in tv, now that is what i would call childish.
[#78099]
Written by: iamjacksTV [07/02/2008, 22:53]
this is more bullshit tactics from the amptp trying to make the writers look bad
if they don't agree to a deal similar to the amptp.
the director's don't even have a real deal yet! all they have are some "agreed
points" on a memo, and they can stretch out the detailed negotiating until june!
directors can work on many more projects each year than writers. writers need
residuals so that they can pay their actual bills, when they're in between projects.
the writer's strike in 1988 lasted five months, kids. because the writers held
out for what they wanted. i hope they do it again.
besides, the wga has the oscars by the balls right now. for the next
two-and-a-half weeks, they have all the leverage.
| 1 of 1 |
