INT: So Michael, can you tell us about 2006 and 2007 and what the Guild was doing during that period of time, relating to the, you know, what would be the upcoming media negotiations?

MA: I think what's interesting about that period was that the Writers were clearly angry about having not got what they want in 2004, and we were very much aware that there was a new dawn coming up. So we went to do an enormous amount of learning. We realized after the retreat we knew very little, and so that meant a lot of presentations to us, a lot of experts into us and also because we wanted, we felt that this was a journey into the future, we wanted to share it with the other guilds. We wanted to let them know what we were knowing, and that really didn't work out too well, I think for a simple reason, is that the Writers Guild was so angry that they wanted trouble. They I think, I forgot, the watershed moment was I think the word they were using. That these next negotiations would be the major event and that if you're really going to show your colors, and if you have go to out on strike you will. We saw 2006, 2007 as preparation for the future; a slow process of getting acquainted with everything that was happening in the industry. So that meant we were meeting a lot of people. We were getting a lot of advice brought in. We were making friendships with people who were experts in their fields, and at the same time trying, in a sense, to make this an industry event, not just the DGA going after what they wanted, but we felt we had sufficient information even to tell sometimes the heads of studios what the future was going to be.

INT: So during 2006, did you start meeting with studio heads?

MA: Yeah. I mean between the three of us, between you [Jay Roth], me and Gil [Gil Cates], you know, we went to I think all the studio heads. Sometimes individually. Sometimes together. [INT: But coming back to the... you know as early as 2006, why did you start meeting with the studio heads that early?] Well, because we thought we were entering new, untrodden paths basically and that this particular negotiation would be groundbreaking. Not that it would create eruptions or anything, but we all had to learn a new language. That's what I thought was going on. That's why we wanted to make sure that everybody was on the same page. We might have different opinions about it, but at least we're talking in the same language, whereas I don't think the Writers Guild and us were talking the same language, and we don't know what language SAG were taking. But it was very important for the negotiations that when we were talking to the studios, that we all had the same kind of fundamental agreements about terminology or whatever and the possible, you know, value of it all. How much that would determine how we would try and create a new pay structure for the new media, because it was a completely different thing from selling 15 million DVDs or whatever. It was a growing process. And I think we all wanted to know what we were talking about, and we were spending a lot of money and getting the very best people to do it. We weren't just taking soft answers or soft questions. Some of it was pretty frightening for us. [INT: And so you were out there basically selling that we had to do this together, to the studios?] That was the point; do it together. We didn't know what we were selling half the time. We were developing what we were selling. But we were saying, "Let's do this together. Let's, you know, do different things together and pool our resources," because they were clearly going to be very difficult negotiations. [INT: You continue those activities into 2007?] Oh, with the studios yes. I mean the studios we kept meeting up to the very end and during the negotiations. I mean, you and Gil would slide off and talk to Chernin or Iger [Bob Iger] privately or whatever. I mean that was very much an ongoing thing of which I wasn't necessarily, you know, a large part of that, but we did try and keep everything alive.

INT: Now by mid-2007, by the late spring of 2007, did we have a pretty good idea where we were going at that point?

MA: I think so. I think so. And you know we were confronted with the fact that the Writers Guild were going into negotiations early. They were "jumping ahead of us" was their term, but they were going into negotiations. And you know we knew what they were asking for was either incredibly expensive, or very unlikely or very attractive to the studios. So that was one thing going on. And the other thing was as we were shaping our language, our plans--I mean we did a huge amount of... I mean and we were so far ahead of the game, without boasting, because it had nothing to do with me. It was you and the staff, but we would show what our... we would have screenings of our shows, i.e. we would bring people in who would give other studios, other guilds what we were getting from various sources. They said you know, "We've had this opinion from a certain source, so we give it to you. We'll arrange it for you." We just wanted people to know what was going on.

INT: So, Michael, calling your attention to the summer of 2007, after the Writers had begun negotiations, did you think and the DGA think the Writers were going to be striking in the fall when their contract expired?

MA: No. We didn't think the Writers would strike in the fall. What we thought would happen is that they would wait 'til the following spring and join up with SAG, and between the two of them they would create the mother of all strikes. But what happened was there was a rift between the WGA and SAG. WGA decided they weren't going to wait six months to be with SAG; that they were going to go and strike then and there. So then we, our hope for a nice autumn negotiations went up the spout, because they were on strike, and we couldn't negotiate when they were on strike. So we were left holding the baby, as it were, waiting to see what would happen. And the Writers Guild were just eating up time negotiating and were not clear what they were negotiating for. And SAG, who had been cut away, as it were, were just waiting for the summer.

INT: The Writers struck in November, and we had, as you said, we had planned ourselves to negotiate in the fall and didn't because the Writers struck. What happened that made you reconsider continuing to wait?

MA: Well, you know, the strike, the WGA strike was causing a lot of pain and confusion throughout the city, throughout the industry and all this. Were we going to sit there and watch this go on when we didn't think there was any chance of a deal between the Writers Guild and the Producers with such hostility in the air? So we then had to make a decision. What are we going to do? Are we going to go in and try and negotiate while they were still on strike or what? And I think we came to the view, as their strike dragged on, and it didn't seem to be getting anywhere at all, that we would have to put it to the membership, that this is what we should do. And it was a very difficult, painful decision, because the Writers... there are a lot of Writer/Directors. Directors work with Writers. Were we going to be seen as selling them down the river by ignoring the fact they were on strike, and going in and making a deal? Personally it was very difficult for me. I got lots of letters in from Writer/Directors saying, "Don't go in. don't go in. We're going to win this strike. Wait for us. Wait for us." They came into the office, eight of them, and you know had a go at me about it. And we decided that we were going to try and go in, so we had our famous Western Council [Western Directors Council] meeting when everybody showed up, and unanimously we agreed that we would go in. And of course that created an upheaval. And we presented that to the councils and whatever, and we chose the date when we would go and start negotiating. The one single event really which really accelerated our decision to go in and negotiating was an animation meeting that they had at Disney studios. And then we realized the WGA was out of control, and they were never gonna settle it, and then we decided we have to go in. The town, the industry was upset with it all, and it had gone to another level, so we thought, "We've got to go in," and that's when we called the Western Council meeting where everybody showed up and voted unanimously to go in and negotiate, and then we sold that to the rest of the Guild, and we went in.

INT: Now did you go in right away [negotiations]? The meeting occurred on December 12th. Did you go in right away?

MA: No. We didn't. You know, as I remember, it was December the 12th. It's written in my heart. We had the resolution from the Western Council [Western Directors Council] unanimous, and we wanted to see what the impact of that would be. Whether that would get things to calm down or whatever, but it didn't. It didn't. So we felt we had to actually do what we threatened to do, which was to go in and, despite breaking families apart and all this kind of stuff, we had to split the industry and go in and negotiate while another sister union was on strike. [INT: But we waited another month after December 12th.] Yeah. We waited 'til I think January the 12th, January the 14th before negotiations started, so it was that period over Christmas when we had made our position clearer, and we think they had made their position clearer, that they were in this for blood and guts, and we were in it to go in and negotiate whatever the price, however unethical it might seem to be. And during that period we were, all of us, under a lot of pressure. [INT: But internally did we agree?] Internally, I think we were united about it. We wanted to give some cooling time, having made the decision to go in, to see whether that would in any way temper the behavior of the WGA. I mean I had a list, 400 signatures from Writer/Directors begging us not to go in. Saying, "Don't go in. Don't go in," but we just had to evaluate whether that would ever end. Whether this aimless strike would go on, and on and on, and one minute it was animation, one minute it wasn't animation, or whether we should try and bring a halt to it by showing our hand and negotiating. [INT: Now during the fall and early winter, did the DGA continue to meet with the studio heads?] I'm pretty sure we did. I mean I'm sure that you [Jay Roth] and Gil [Gil Cates] were still talking to the studio heads while the strike was continuing, but I can't believe the studio heads were very sanguine about what was going on. But I mean you could answer this better than me, but I think we were saying to the studios, "We are paying attention to what's going on and how this is impacting the industry. This seemingly aimless strike."

INT: So the goals of the DGA negotiations on new media, what were the basic goals? What was the template that...

MA: Well, I think it was two things. One was jurisdiction, and the second was some compensation that was reasonable, but it was the jurisdiction that was the key thing; that we had to have some control over this new medium. That they couldn't just go on and toss it all out and ignore us, because we could see this was the way the future was going to go, as well as being worth a lot of money to the industry. So those were our two, you know, two ambitions. We never regarded this as, you know, the big, final, definitive negotiation. We knew it was a process, but we had to start the process, and we had to start the discussions with them, which you'd already been preparing them for, the other side. The management. You [Jay Roth], and Gil [Gil Cates] and everybody. But we needed to establish those two things.

INT: With respect to the negotiations in 2007-2008, either ours or the Writers' that, you know, came after ours, did we anticipate all that was to come in the formulas we laid out?

MA: No. By no means we didn't. I mean we knew the ground rules. We knew the terminology, but no one knew what would happen. And it's interesting, the thing that, in the last negotiations we just finished, SVOD was the whole center of it, and yet two negotiations earlier it was never even mentioned. So nobody knew what the future was, but we had to be prepared for any eventuality. [INT: In all of our studies with all of our experts, did anybody see SVOD coming?] No. That's what was so bizarre about the whole thing. We just had a sense that it was gonna break out. We had no idea of the detail on how it was going to break out, but we knew it was important, and all the preparation we'd done sustained that belief, our gut belief that this was big. That it wasn't waste of time, you know, carrying on with DVDs. We had a feeling that things were going to change, but we couldn't put it down in paper. We couldn't put it down in, you know, chapter and verse, but we had to be ready. We had to establish ground rules. That's what it was about.

INT: The deal was made. The Writers followed suit, and you had one year left in your presidency. And all during this time you were making movies. And in fact what were you preparing?

MA: I was preparing the third Narnia film, THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER [THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER], this huge... god knows how much it cost, $150 million film. I was preparing this film while all this was going on and not knowing whether we would be on strike or whatever, but yeah. I mean we kept working. We all kept working. Again, living in a vacuum as we were, nonetheless. And it was good that, you know, for me, because I was doing one of these very contemporary films. You know, so I knew what was going on. I knew I had to train myself into visual effects, and stuff like that and whatever and you know superior animation. I knew these things were important. So at least by working, which I could do, and I was in Australia for months as well, but I think we got through it. You know, we got through it, and I did what I had to do when I had to do it, and you [Jay Roth] did your stuff all the way through. But, you know, keeping working and being a figurehead in the Guild I think is an important combination. Once you stop working, I think you lose touch with the industry. [INT: Is the rumor true that some people are talking about naming these negotiations The Voyage of the Dawn Treader?] It felt like that. "Where are we gonna land next? Which particular island are we gonna be in?"

INT: So you worked to make the film [THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER], and you stood down as president, and who was elected after you?

MA: Taylor. Taylor Hackford came after me. I mean, I loved doing it actually, and I could have gone on, but I think that's greedy. I mean I did three terms, which is unusual, although for a large part of the last term I was in Australia. But it was just a terrific experience doing it, working with you [Jay Roth], and the staff and all that you know. They were friendships, not just working relationships, so. And you know I think we did all right. I mean history has proved that that instinct we had after 2004 that something else big was going to happen came true and is still going on. [INT: So did you leave your involvement in the Guild when you ceased being president?] No. I didn't leave my... I mean but it was a deeply sad story why I came back so quickly. You know it was Gil [Gil Cates] who was loved by us all, and was our mentor and in many ways our spiritual guide, he was your confidante and all that, he died--suddenly, and you know badly and whatever, and so there we were you know without one of our pillars. And you know Taylor asked me whether I would take over as secretary-treasurer, so yes I did, and I'm still there. But Gil was a great loss to us all. And it was never the same without him, him at these council meetings or something. He always, it was so annoying. He always knew the right thing to say at the right time. You thought, "Why didn't I think of saying that at that time?" He was a very irritatingly wonderful man.

INT: So is all you've done just be president and the secretary-treasurer? Is there anything else that you, journey that you've taken...

MA: With the Guild? Yes I did. I don't know. It was interesting. It was the 75th anniversary, and we were wondering how to celebrate it. And I think, actually, I did come up with an idea, which was, you know, who were the great innovators of the history of the Guild in terms of the different work that was done, people that broke barriers. And so we did that. We chose... I think we did anything between 15 and 20 events about game-breakers. Is that the word? [INT: Game-changers.] Game-changers. Not game-breakers. Game-changers. You know we got all our heavyweights in -- Spielberg, everybody, Coppola -- to talk about their work process and their contribution to the art of cinema. So it was kind of about filmmaking. It wasn't, you know, another negotiations. It had soul and heart. It was about what we do, and that was fun to do. It was hard work to orchestrate it all, but with your excellent staff with the excellent Morgan [Morgan Rumpf] we pulled it off, and that was very rewarding.

INT: So is there anything else that they... [MA: Oh, god. Embarrassing. I seem never to be out of the building.] Well I seem to think you may have done a couple of negotiations.

MA: That's true, but in a more minor role. Yeah, I mean indeed. After I was, you know, as president, as secretary-treasurer, you know, I became, along, you know, with you [Jay Roth] and with Tommy Schlamme [Thomas Schlamme], part of the negotiating committee. So yes, it's never... I've been intimately involved with the last, must be five negotiations, in a different role. Sort of going backwards. Starting out as a so-called big cheese then coming down a bit, so. And it's very difficult stuff. [INT: Well it's sort of Gil's [Gil Cates] path. You know Gil was president.] Yes, Gil was president quite young. [INT: He was secretary-treasurer, and he was a negotiating chair.] But it seems an odd order to do it. Used to seem to sort of do it the other way round. Be negotiator, and then boom, boom, boom and then president, but it's good. Then you're a bit younger when you do the presidency, 'cause it's a difficult job, because you've got to in some ways be in the middle of it, but you've got to be able to step back from it. You can't get involved in all the minutia of it. You've got to know what's going on, but you've got to let people do their job, not just the staff and all that, but the various councils. You've got to let people have their air to breathe, and you just make sure from what you do that it's running smoothly, even if you don't like what's happening. You've just got to let people express themselves, because out of that comes progress. Out of that comes change. Out of that comes, you know, moving on. So it's a funny old job. I mean as I said, you've just got to know when to stay out of it and when to come into it.

INT: So how big is that negotiating committee that you chair?

MA: Well, the negotiating committee is about 70 people. 70 people from all over the country who come in for usually, it's actually three weeks and go through it. And I mean it's both torture and fascinating. It has a sort of pattern to it, and it has a sort of alarm about it. You think, "This isn't going to work. We're not going to get a deal done. It's over," you know. And then something happens, and people like you [Jay Roth] who spend your whole life doing this you know, and Russell [Russell Hollander], and Bryan [G. Bryan Unger] and all of you... I mean you have a feel for it. You know how far you can push it, how far you can push the opposition and when to give and take. That's what's so fascinating to me, you know, and how you manipulate each other, and how you have intel between each other: Producers, and the Guild and all this sort of stuff. It's a fascinating and complex thing. So it's best not for the president to be involved in the minutia of it, because it's like asking, you know, the head of something to come in and direct a day's work on a film set with Actors and things like that. You know, we each have our jobs, and some of my skills help, as a film Director, television Director, help me do some good stuff for the Guild, and vice-versa, you know, sometimes keep out of it.

INT: But as the negotiating chair, having been president and then becoming the negotiating chair, you get to see the other side of it.

MA: Yeah, yeah, and I think it's a mistake when presidents want to be too involved in it, because they miss the point of being able to look at it from 30,000 feet. If they get--and their instinct, the president's instinct is, "I'm not doing my job unless I'm really leading the negotiations," but that's not correct. Negotiations are a skilled and singular event, which has their own kind of routine; their own unpredictability or predictability. But you can't get bogged down in that. You've got to stand back from it and say, "What are you talking about?" Or, "This is great. Let's get out of here."