|
The WGA's "creative rights" proposals: Wrong response to a real problem
"We want the contractually mandated right to participate in all creative
discussions. We want and deserve to participate in all creative discussions: casting, rehearsals, read-throughs and locations, music and editing. We want to be involved in those decisions."
- John Wells, President, WGAw
Written By, October, 2000
The WGA's proposals won't create greater respect for writers
Many directors agree with their writer colleagues that screenwriters often don't receive all the recognition and the respect they deserve and that this problem should be addressed.
The WGA has announced that it intends to try to gain greater respect for writers by seeking changes in its 2001 Minimum Basic Agreement (MBA) with the AMPTP. Among these changes would be guarantees of screenwriter participation in almost every phase of the creative process and elimination of the use of possessory credits.
The DGA agrees that the current industry culture must be altered to increase the respect afforded to writers of feature films and long-form television. In fact, the DGA's President, Jack Shea, and its Secretary-Treasurer, Gilbert Cates, recently met with WGAw President John Wells and Vice President Dan Petrie, Jr., to express the DGA's willingness to work with the WGA in developing realistic solutions to the problems cited by the writers.
Unfortunately, the WGA's "creative rights" proposals are an example of a misplaced means to an end. These proposals are not about respect for the art of writing. Instead, the WGA is seeking to redefine the roles of both writers and directors. The WGA wants to increase the role of screenwriters and therefore - despite what they might claim - decrease the role of directors. The WGA believes this will lead to a de facto increase in the respect given to writers both on and off the set. In reality, however, these new definitions, rather than leading to greater respect for writers, will instead lead to conflict, delay and increased productions costs,
damaging both the creative content of films and the economic well-being of the filmmaking industry.
The WGA's proposals would force writer involvement throughout the filmmaking process
The WGA proposals seek contractual guarantees that would dramatically expand the role of writers in the production of feature films and movies for television at the expense of the rights of directors.
For example, the WGA leadership has proposed that the Guild's 2001 MBA be amended to:
-
Ensure the writer's participation in the creative aspects of production for screen and long-form television by requiring that a writer be employed for the duration of principal photography in order to make any necessary changes in the screenplay or teleplay."
-
"Improve the writer's participation in the creative aspects of production" by guaranteeing the writer access to the set, cast readings, all dailies, research screenings, meetings to discuss research results, cast/crew events, premieres, domestic and foreign press junkets, festivals and trade shows. [emphasis added]
The WGA's proposals will damage the entire film industry
If the WGA has its way, directors and writers will no longer have the ability to interact based on a collaborative working relationship. Instead, through the insertion of these new proposed "rights" for screenwriters, they will be participants in a contractually mandated, potentially adversarial process that forcibly inserts the writer into almost every major step of the filmmaking process.
If adopted, there will be at least three major negative creative and economic consequences for directors and the entire film industry:
-
Impairing creative
collaboration: Part of a director's responsibility is managing the collaboration which is part of the moviemaking process. It is the director's job to bring the talents of cast and crew to bear on the screenplay, with the goal of a film representing a unified vision. Mandating the writer's ability to view dailies, to be on the set, etc., will inject writers into the process when they were not chosen to be invited. Conflict and confusion will often be the result.
-
Lengthening of production
time: Moviemaking will take longer and cost more due to the mandatory injection of the writer into production activities now controlled by the director. Contractual mandates - even ones that contain language such as "absent an objection" - would mean that if a director, for whatever reason, decides he or she does not want a writer to view his or her dailies or be on his or her set, this decision could be taken to arbitration by the writer, thus leading to production delays.
Add the above possibilities together and you end up with:
-
Increased costs and compromised
creativity: Filmmaking costs will increase and creativity will be compromised because of disputes, or the fear of conflict, among studios, directors and writers over the activities of the writer. The bottom line is that one person runs a movie set, and that person, by definition, is the director. The WGA is attempting to invent contractual "rights" that would mandate the writer's involvement in elements of production where his or her presence may be counterproductive to the making of a film.
"I consider the possessory use of my name above the title of a film as of extraordinary value to the producing company as well as to myself. Every producing company has informed me that my name has 'box office value' and part of the benefit received by such producing company is the right to use, advertise and exploit my name."
- Alfred Hitchcock
The WGA is attempting to eliminate possessory credits
The WGA is also seeking to mandate the elimination of what is currently a non-mandated, non-contractual right of directors and others to negotiate for possessory credits. If the writers' proposal is accepted, it would prohibit the use of credits in any possessive form.
The DGA has always supported the position that possessory credits should be freely negotiable for anyone involved in the filmmaking process. Historically, these credits have been given in recognition of the commanding contribution made by a particular person - director, writer, producer, etc. - to a film. These credits have also helped "brand" films, which in turn draws audiences, thereby profiting the studios. Overturning such a system would unnecessarily hurt the industry and deprive the film artists that drive the creative process of moviemaking from the recognition they deserve.
The DGA must protect the rights of directors and the integrity of the filmmaking process
WGA President John Wells has spoken eloquently about the need for greater respect for screenwriters, and the DGA agrees. The screenplay is an essential element of every film, and the ability to contribute to a successful screenplay is a precious talent. In addition, we agree that this respect is too often not given, and that this problem needs to be addressed.
We also share with writers the desire to make the best films possible, and we firmly believe that the way to do this is to respect the individual contributions that are critical from different people at each different point in the filmmaking process. Creating new contractually mandated "rights" that would expand or redefine the role of writers will not lead to greater respect for writers: what it will do is make it harder for directors to do their job to the best of their ability.
The WGA's proposed changes to their MBA will create radical and destructive changes in the filmmaking process that will negatively impact the bottom line of the studios. The DGA's concerns about the WGA proposals are not just about protecting directors. The DGA firmly believes that writers should be afforded greater respect, but that such respect cannot possibly come from mandating new roles for writers; instead, it must come from creating an atmosphere of mutual respect within the collaborative filmmaking process.
It is for this exact reason that for more than a year, DGA elected leaders, creative rights committee members and hundreds of feature film directors have been discussing the WGA's proposals. We have also met with the AMPTP to discuss our concerns about the negative impact these proposals would have on film production if they were to be implemented. And finally, we have met with WGA leadership in an effort to see if a mutually agreed upon code of preferred practices which addressed their legitimate point about the lack of respect for screenwriters could be discussed.
The effort to keep DGA members up-to-date on these issues will continue in the weeks and months ahead. We want to ensure that all of our members are fully informed about the true implications of the WGA's proposals. We are greatly encouraged by the initial response we have received from those members with whom we have met. In 1967, when the WGA launched a similar campaign, an attempt to redefine the role of directors was repelled by the opposition of the DGA, including filmmaking giants such as Alfred Hitchcock, Frank Capra, King Vidor, David Lean, Fred Zinnemann and others. These directors understood then - as directors understand today - that united DGA opposition to changes that will harm the creative and economic stability of filmmaking is essential to preventing a disaster that threatens the entire industry.
Creative Writing?
"Screenwriters are not asking for MANDATES. Under our proposal no rights of the director are infringed upon.... No one in the WGA, even in private, is suggesting this… We have asked for language that simply encourages, but
DOES NOT MANDATE, greater participation for screenwriters."
-Written By, April 2000
"Improve the writers' participation throughout the entire production process for screen and long-form television by various means such as: . . .
REQUIRING a writer to be invited to cast readings . . . and research screenings;
PROVIDING a writer with access to dailies and access to the set; and additional measures to be discussed."
-WGA Pattern of Demands, October 2000
"We want the
CONTRACTUALLY MANDATED right to participate in all creative discussions. As writers we are morally and should be
CONTRACTUALLY ENTITLED to this
right we want and deserve to participate in all creative discussions: casting, rehearsals, read-throughs and locations, music and editing."
-Written By, October 2000
|
