, is an outspoken critic of the proposed change, and is urging WGA members to vote “No” on the referendum because he believes it will diminish the value of all movie writing credits. “This is a flawed plan and will be exploited by the producers and the studios, and will weaken the status and position of the writer in the process,” he told Deadline.
“I was probably asked about 12 times during the press – what was it like to work with ‘A-list writer?’ What they were hinting at – insinuating – was that I – a young-ish gal – couldn’t possibly have written that whole movie by myself! Especially one with cops and men being men,” she continued. “Surely there was an answer as to how the screenplay came to be and that answer was not me! Everyone WANTED to assume the experienced guy did the work. He was the accomplished dude and I was a woman.
He also noted that the guild’s Inclusion & Equity Group is concerned “that the status quo disproportionately affects women and writers of color, for whom these resume gaps can be a substantial barrier to future employment.” August wrote that “most of the status quo arguments I’ve heard for the past twenty years foretell grave consequences if additional writers were listed in the end credits. Some common predictions:• Studios or producers will hire friends just to get their names in the end credits• All I can say is, maybe! We’re screenwriters; it’s our job to imagine scenarios.
Here’s their back and forth, in which Gibson presents several scenarios in which producers and others may attempt to abuse the new credit:: The new rule uses the term ‘only participating writers’ as if it is the dam that will hold back the flood poised to dilute our credit. It will not. As it is understood now, it sounds reasonable. But that is for one reason and one reason only – everyone knows only the WGA can affix writing credits. We alone have that power. Now you want to give it away.
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CNBC - 🏆 12. / 72 Read more »
Source: DEADLINE - 🏆 109. / 63 Read more »
Source: marieclaire - 🏆 102. / 63 Read more »
Source: hellomag - 🏆 24. / 68 Read more »
Source: RollingStone - 🏆 483. / 51 Read more »