Posts by SteveH
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
So Parker was a last-minute retrofit? It makes sense if they had already gone to great expense during extended battle sequences involving the Elves.
I don't think Parker was a retrofit. The elves were from Lothlórien so it wouldn't have made sense to have Arwen leading them. I believe the elves were added to Helm's Deep because Jackson wasn't happy with having them sitting in their forests effectively saying "we know this is the great threat of the age, but we'd rather stay here while you deal with it, thanks". In books the elves were fighting their own battles so it's not such a problem.
Arwen at Helm's Deep was a different thing - I think the idea was to have a more major female character. IIRC, it dates back to the 2-film concept where there wouldn't have been time to deal with Éowyn as much as they did. I think it's mentioned in one of the DVD extras.
-
People wanted the feelgood but ultimately toothless and pointless resolution to ask for negotiations about suggested/non-binding conditions
If that's what NZAE want, then well, isn't that the Pink Book? Why haven't they negotiated that for 5 years? Why haven't they talked to Spada yet?
Union organisers wouldn't tend to take leave in the middle of a large dispute like this. Either he's not really involved, or... who knows.
... or it's a ploy to avoid reaching agreement (i.e. MEAA want The Hobbit to leave NZ), or he's getting out of the way in favour of someone less problematic for the other side (i.e. a tacit admission that Whipp has made a mess of the situation). I hope it's not the second possibility, but...
-
Andi Brotherston has admited a "horrendous error of judgement" and offered to resign. If only Henry was as professional.
Edit: Ah, Sofie saw it first. As I would have known if I had any interest in Peter Dunn's opinion.
-
People on the the FB page “Keep the Hobbit production in NZ” were offering to work for nothing, now is that volunteerism? Not in my view. My terminology however uncomfortable for you was accurate.
I don't think it was. This is not the FB page - no one is offering to work for nothing here. You basically accused everyone here who didn't agree with your position of being a scab (except for the producers for some reason). I'm personally offended by that and I've lost all respect for your argument as a result.
-
Don't worry, most of us got to practice back when the preview button wasn't also the post button.
Preview button still works normally for me.
-
It doesn't ring true - AE wants to meet Spada, Spada trying to phone AE to arrange meeting, CTU wants them to have meaningful dialogue etc.
I believe what is happening is that NZAE is refusing to meet with Spada unless a collective agreement is on the table, not just for a revision of the Pink Book. Frances Walsh said as much last week. I suspect their position hasn't changed since then.
-
Key was laughing along with him. Faux rage hours later is not credible. He'll happily laugh along with the racist but declaim him later. I expect more of my PM.
My impression of Key is that he happily goes along with most anything until the public reaction is clear.
-
Bouquet to Ben Gracewood for leaving his technical slot with Breakfast today after Henry's performance.
Yep. He's got a statement online.
Previously I’ve had to be circumspect about my responses to his statements, but I’m fucking sick of it.
I sense some frustration..
-
If "impacts upon others" stopped unions taking industrial action then industrial action would never happen. If it didn't adversely affect someone then it would just be ignored.
It's meant to mainly adversely affect the employer. In this case it'll have very little effect on the employer, in fact they may well be able to save money by making the movie elsewhere. Obviously industrial action has collateral damage. A strike by dockworkers adversely affects people waiting to import or export goods and that can have a flow on economic effect. But it's rarely as directly affecting as this case, IMHO.
-
Their statement probably isn't so much activating a boycott, as highlighting the fact that these movies don't meet those conditions so SAG members shouldn't sign for it.
In which case, why the singling out of The Hobbit? Where are the advisories for all the other foreign productions that have been made here since 2002?
So I'd fail to see how it could be made in Australia without signing union approved contracts any easier than NZ. If they sign union approved contacts in Australia Jackson's position back here in NZ is going to look bizarre.
I don't follow. PJ is saying that he can't legally negotiate a collective agreement here. If he can and does in Oz, then how does that make his position here look bizarre?