Should actors get royalties when they take no risk?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Should actors get royalties when they take no risk?
Should actors get royalties when they take no risk?
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
>a germ*n wants the past forgotten
lmao
post your ethnicity
Hey pollack, don't you have toilets to clean?
It is weird that so many people want royalties instead of just higher base pay. 98% of projects completely flop.
Why wouldnt they want to keep getting paid for the rest of their lives?
because royalties don't just get tacked on, they are at the cost of something else, usually higher base pay. What is the point of getting paid 2 cents every year for the shitty one season netflix show that no one watched when you can instead just get paid even just 1k more.
I assume it would depened on the pay of the royalty. 1 cent per view per episode for the rest of your life sounds good, especially since you already got paid for acting anyway
>Why wouldnt they want to keep getting paid for the rest of their lives?
Of course they would want to, but it's a risk. If the project doesn't make a lot of money, you're not getting paid. A guaranteed downpayment is the safer and quicker option. What you don't get to do is go for the option of more payment up front and then change your mind later when the show is a huge success and demand the residuals you willingly forfeited. That's like selling stocks right before they skyrocket and b***hing and whining demanding a cut of the profits.
meanwhile, the cast of "friends" makes like 20 million a year. if you get lucky enough to have a hit show (like friends, the office, breaking bad) royalties could set you for life, and theres no way you can even get 10 million added to a base pay once. fight for like 50k once, or take a risk on royalties that might add up to 50k in 10 years, or might feed you millions every year for the rest of your life. its a no brainer which is the better play, especially when you are free to constantly perform in new work and roll the dice over and over again.
>heh, yes goy, just take this role for $50 an episode (+food+travel+lodging), with this hefty royalty package you'll never have to act again
I wish people on a television and film board knew anything about the history of television and film. Residuals (royalties are for books) were created to SAVE the studios money. They get to pay less up front, which means production is cheaper overall, and it gives the lead creatives (writers, directors, actors) an incentive to make a good show or movie, because the better end product, the more it will be consumed, the more money it will generate for both thte studios and the creatives. It is performance / meritocracy based pay and is good for everyone involved.
A show getting watched is the equivalent of a book being bought because the show is generating money (either by keeping subscribers on a service or by an ad being run alongside it), same way when a book is bought it is generating money. They both operate the same in that when the end product generates money, so too do the creators. ALSO on book services like Wattpad, which are supported by subscriptions and ads, the authors DO get paid every time it gets read.
You people are so fricking moronic I swear to god, spend like 20 minutes just learning about how this industry works so you dont come off like a completely ignorant Black person
>it will generate for both thte studios and the creatives.
And here I was thinking the studios are just being greedy. Turns out they actually want LESS money! Wow it all makes sense now
you'd have a point if these people weren't unbelievably wealthy and weren't paid in the millions.
"meritocracy" isn't real.
now you know why they wanted SYNDICATION so badly. breaking bad came at a weird point when streaming just kicked off and network tv was beginning to die.
someone should get royalties to stab actors in the dick
then someone should pay a huge amount of royalty to that snow plower of Jeremy Renner
I thought the article was about the guy who died in Fast and Furious and was wondering why they'd need to pay a dead man.
No. They get paid for the work they did. They act like the live in low income houses and are living on food stamps. I love how they keep acting like the average person is going to feel bad for them
25 million dollar net worth, boo hoo ;(
This month he was hoping to have a gold-plated shark tank bar installed right next to the pool, but thanks to people watching his work without being paid royalties, he must now wait a few months before he can afford it.
wow he looks old as shit
why does everyone find normal that when you write a book you keep geting paid every time it sells? but when you write a tv show you don't?
Every time it sells, not every time it's read.
Your analogy is flawed.
When producing a movie it's the producers (and other investors if any) that that the risk with the entire endeavor and allocate funds. Everyone else is just hired for the job and is paid as if it were a contract job (which it is). Only rarely do big stars negotiate a cut of the profits and are allowed to do so because they significantly alter the profit-potential of the project.
So basically producers invest and take a risk. Everyone else gets paid even if the movie/show is a flop.
The guy who sold the author the pen and paper he wrote the book on doesn't get paid for every book sold, so your point is irrelevant
Why should anyone get paid for the job they did years ago? Movies should be free after they're made. The producers already paid for it to be made, it already exists, why should we have to pay money if it's already done?
Actors should all be put on chain gangs and forced to break rocks until they croak.
To those who are anti-royalties. Lots of money is being made and its just going to Netflix or whatever streamer, they're stealing from him by downplaying royalties.
Also should Netflix be getting zillinos of money? think of all the latest hit shows and movies they make with your favourite actors and writers and diversity and sticking it to the status quo of white men ruining everything
Cinemaphile doesn't have an actual objective position except "Everyone should suffer except me."
>Also should Netflix be getting zillinos of money?
Nobody should be making zillions of money, nobody should have more than me.
Lmao, lots of money is not being made. The TV industry is going through the crunch music went through, and now the execs and "artists" are fighting over a much smaller pie.
Hopefully everyone loses.
what's up with the chuds saynvtpucking corporate dick?
No. People who put their own money on the line for a project should be the only ones getting income for the project upon it's completion. (Unless you negotiate for it). That is how it works in every other business in the world.
No it isnt, there are companies that are co-ops in which all employees share in revenue, any time employees are offered stock options they are sharing in revenue by proxy, authors and software / gamde developers put up time, not money, and get constant revenue from their products. You're just moronic. I dont understand why you take this view when even studios agree that residuals are a good thing. See
people here think hating something = personality
Companies only offer stock by consent, the Hollywood strike wants to force it
>promote capitalism
>mad when people want their capital
??? Just admit you're a corporatist cuck.
>I should still be paid for jobs I did ten years ago
Yeah, that's not how life works. If every company had to pay their workers forever there's be no companies.
I help build cars, should I get a check every time it's driven?
Yes. I used to be an electrician before I NEETed out, I should get monthly checks from each resident of each house I wired also.
yes, and McDonalds workers should get a check every time a burger is sold for the rest of their lives
Brainlet analogy, the people who make the movie are more akin to the people that created the recipe for the burgers in the first place. Frycooks would be the people working at the Blu-Ray factory.
>the people who make the movie are more akin to the people that created the recipe for the burgers in the first place
they invented television and film? they invented cameras?
huh?
McDonalds did not invent the hamburger, zoomer. I said the recipe.
>McDonalds did not invent the hamburger
They didnt?
They were paid a fee, a fee much larger than your average joes annual salary. They are being greedy, see my shitpost
I installed and wired dozens of machines in various factories in my life.
Should I get a cut of the production?
Why didn’t he just ask for royalties?
Fat head is fat faced and fat headed.
someone should ask him if he was paid out of the millions netflix paid for the rights to the show
?si=N_aBWIKSnM2IGxmr
How am I meant to care that someone living like this isn't being paid for old work?
Id love residuals for my decade of work supplying the world with oil.
The hilarious part is that streaming services are so desperate to avoid releasing individual streaming numbers that they prefer to even give actors money based on number of total subscribers. Anything to avoid revealing just how few people actually watch the garbage slop on their platforms.
there's plenty of risk in fame though
Actors in Hollywood should be forced to eat dog shit off peoples lawns
YO MISTA WUHITE
Easy solution: all tv shows and movies become public domain one year after they premiere.
i get what theyre going for but do builders get royalties everytime a house they worked on is sold? does a plumber get royalties everytime a toilet they installed is flushed? they got paid heaps for their trade (they didnt write it) so maybe that is fair
Yeah only studios and streaming companies should keep getting paid for stuff that was made years ago
>Electrician
>Customer asks me to install a plug in their house
>Charge them $500 (plus tip)
>Leave
>Find out he is using the plug to run his 3d printer for a side buisness
>Sue him because I deserve residuals seeing as he is making money off of something I supplied
>Power plant sues me for residuals because they found out I am making profit off of their product.
what if your boss was paid royalties for something you did?
Alotta Royalties for a hired hack
i do think they should get royalties but the thought of spending energy fighting for actors and writers is distasteful. their problem
i wish i got residuals from all of my old jobs that were much more difficult than reading lines and getting dressed.
point is more that nobody is getting residuals from your old jobs. shows and movies make money over time, your jobs were paid for then and there
3am shill thread lmao
>dumbfrick doesn't know the world exists outside his timezone
frick off
You literally do not matter esl
anything that takes money off the israelites running hollywood is ok by me
Why does Netflix still get paid for something they didn't even do is the real question
If that's what's in their contract, then yes, yes they should.
>architects should be paid everytime someone takes a step in a building they design
>that hairline
netflix execs are getting for doing no job at all
this is the point. the royalties are there, they're just not getting them. all these analogies about getting paid for previous work don't work in this context because several people are already getting paid for these shows
>Invent Coke
>WOOOW YOU THINK THAT YOU SHOULD BE PAYED FOR SOMETHING THAT YOU DID YEARS AGOE
It actually blows my mind how Cinemaphile neets drone on about getting a real job and are for Hollywood suites who are leaches are in the right and should be payed more as they actively israelite people out of money.
>Residuals
>From a Netflix show
How does this work? I thought they buy shows for their streaming plataform and after that they don't have to make any monthly pays, they can just show them for a set amount of time, they have to pay residuals on top of that? How do these frickers make ANY money? Their subscription is already dirty cheap
In theory they'd do residuals in a way that reflects how much the show is being viewed.
For example - Disney apparently does have streaming residuals for some shows, but they skirt around it by removing shit from the streaming service and only selling blu-rays lmao
>do residuals in a way that reflects how much the show is being viewed.
This is actually one of the main reason the strike is continuing. Streaming platforms, especially Netflix, so rarely release viewing figures for a reason; if creators could actually see that millions, or hundreds of millions, of people were watching their shows they'd have a stronger position to negotiate from, so the platforms keep it secret. One of the demands from the unions is to make those figures public so they know if their royalties are actually being paid the way they're supposed to be.
The platforms will do anything to avoid this because it would expose how much money they're keeping from creators. It would also expose their bullshit excuses for cancelling so many popular shows after a few seasons, they claim it's because not enough people were watching but we all know it's because they don't want to pay higher royalties.
>Streaming platforms, especially Netflix, so rarely release viewing figures for a reason
the reason is because those numbers are mostly embarrassing
you have to be moronic to believe they're cancelling successful shows to avoid paying money which they don't have to pay because they keep the numbers secret anyway
Turns out im moronic, Netflix has ads now, i should've known before, it didn't make any sense they could turn a profit with only subscriptions
Even then it blows my mind, the catalog is way too big, all of these streaming services also have frick huge catalogs, don't they have to pay taxes just to keep them on air?
>Their subscription is already dirty cheap
U wut m8
It is in comparison to what they have to offer, at least that's what i think, just about any streaming service have huge catalogs to watch at any time for the price of a movie ticket, most likely less
I know i sound like a shill but im just baffled this can make any money to justify itself
i support the actors and writers because frick israeli hollywood execs. im all for anything that actively hurts them
>frick israeli hollywood execs. im all for anything that actively hurts them
because they are israeli? wait till you find out about the actors..
How does the strike even work? It's not like people are going to stop watching shows, they're going to keep watching old stuff, so how is a strike affecting them in any way besides the bi monthly numbers jump from the newest slop release?
why do you think new shit is being made? for fun?
Im saying people will still use streaming services. Obviously they will flock to the newest thing but streaming services won't fail because of a strike.
not nearly the same amount of people, and that means less money
Thats crazy to me, I hardly watch anything new because it's all shit but I always turn something on after a day at work. Aren't normies getting tired of the state of Hollywood? I thought the woke bubble had burst and everything was crashing down.
The REAL awkward part is how is anyone supposed to support them? Most people I know have canceled services and not gone to see movies and they don’t seem to realize that the writers and actors NEED people to keep supporting the corpos right now to show they have something to offer in general and they need the support to stop once the reality show shit drops soon. Only new show I made it to the end of the season was animal control and I honestly got bored with it half way through
>Should actors get royalties when they take no risk?
none of my business
freedom of contract, they can make whatever deal they want with their employer
if this homosexual didnt put a royalty clause in his contract its his own fault, why should they gift him money?
Chuds really dont believe in anything. You gays even hate consensual binding contracts now? Kek, so much for principles
YO XBOX WHERES MY RESIDUALS
>YO XBOX, GET ME THE RESIDUALS FOR MY HAIRLINE
>contract says he gets residuals from airing on TV
>doesn't say anything about streaming services
Should've read the fine print xbox man
what were the terms of payment in the contract he signed?
Wait until these chuds learn about the elite making billions off of moving money around
>"I'm no longer being paid for a job I did years ago"
It's a valuable asset that Paul helped make, so a piece of that value should always go to him. If people are still paying for it, the people who made it should still be getting a cut.
Why not every one then, gaffers, key grip, catering, location scout
Just more of the Hollywood homos trying to get more money for blow and male prostitutes.
"Hey Paul. It turns out nobody was watching your show on streaming, so instead of royalties, you need to pay us for your share of the server farms and bandwidth maintenance costs."
Do Americans tip their actors?
He knows his career is dead and he'll never act in anything of significance again, that's why he's trying to get MUH ROYALTY GIBS
How about studios offer royalties to actors but if the actors accepts royalties, pay them way less then what you pay for a actor not taking royalties. If the show is a hit they come out on top. If not they shouldn't have taken royalties. How hard is that?
cueball headed frick didn't even put in the effort to lose weight and try to look the same age he was in the show for El Camino, he can suck a frick b***h
Settle down christian bale
If I pay a plumber to fix my toilet, do I have to pay him every time I take a piss?
I'm an actor and I think these people are greedy as hell. You get paid to do a job once and you get paid once.
Is someone making a profit every time you piss?
You're asking this in the age of "Gamer Girl Bath Water"?
Netflix isn't making money every time someone watches an episode of Breaking Bad. In fact, they're losing money so maybe the Jesse homosexual should be paying some of the bandwidth costs.
thats his fault for not negotiating royalties at the time
he could have easily done so in the later seasons when it was hot
I think the problem is that old royalties contracts didn't take streamers in account because they didn't exist yet. You royalties for ticket sales, vhs/dvd sales, syndication/tv showings, even fricking rentals.
That shit is hard to manage though, the rights for the show are a one time payment, the distributer doesn't get money from streamers every time someone watches the movie. If actors want royalties from streamers, I don't think they'll get that much more. What brought a lot of money will bring money (Friends, Seinfeld, HIMYM), but nobody is gonna make money off of The Pitts or The Slap or whatever fricking show lasted 6 episodes
Why don't actors do revenue sharing? The big stars making $20 million on a role don't need that much, they can redistribute it to poor struggling actors
His head wierds me out, it was kind of normal in the first season
Harry was right, just quit if you hate your job.