Since cinema is cinema, the fear of technology is very real. Although it creates incredible opportunities and realistic effects, which contribute to the fascination of the public that pays to be enchanted and escape reality, the message that machines cannot be trusted is consistent. From Metropolis to Mission Impossible 7, fear is the only constant in at least 96 years. And it is this fear, now real and direct, that has literally stopped Hollywood in July 2023.

Screenwriters went on strike on May 2, demanding changes in business models due to digital platforms as well as the regulation of the use of Artificial Intelligence in the creative part, encountering resistance from the Studios on both points. Actors supported the writers, often on social media, but now they are joining them – for the first time in more than 60 years – in a similar campaign. In their case, the fear of technology is even more real when dead actors are brought digitally to life (yes, remember Star Wars?) or are rejuvenated, proving that in a short time not even dubbing will require their presence (since AI can recreate dialogues, songs, books).

Obviously, to accuse Science of being an antagonist is to oversimplify more complex issues, because what drives fear (justified) is the fact that it reduces (or eliminates) wages, sharing royalties even more quickly than the creative process. Therefore, establishing rules is indeed urgent.

What happens now that literally, EVERYONE has stopped? The Studios, who were adamant (and continue to think they are right) will have to sit down and talk. The strategy of ignoring the writers got a twist they didn’t expect. Is it time to prove human irrelevance?

Part of the general shutdown means that nobody records, nobody gives interviews, nobody premieres, nobody does anything. Barbie and Oppenheimer will have to rely on word of mouth, which is why they were trampling Tom Cruise on the red carpets without giving him the space (or courtesy) to have ‘his’ exclusivity in promoting MI7. Series like House of the Dragon, recorded outside the United States, do not stop because they are not legally in the territory where the discussion is taking place, but remembering that we live in globalization and the issue is not exclusively American, it is better to follow. Yes, because it means that in a few months, we will have “nothing new” to watch. Like what happened at the end of 2020 and which caused billions of dollars in losses to the same studios who claim that it is too early to discuss revenue sharing. It’s always a matter of money.

We know that Netflix, which invested (for other reasons) in breaking the monopoly of the English language with content from other countries, creating, as a rule, the rule of films and series that ‘travel’, will be fine. Its monthly launch strategy is constant, it would take a worldwide shutdown of more than six months to feel the effect (random account, okay? They say they survive a whole year without feeling it), but the same does not apply to the other platforms. Therefore, consumers should only feel the consequences of the strike from the end of 2023, because until then there is something to launch, they just no longer how to publicize it with the presence of talent (I am thinking about the interviews I was about to do…).

While the actors were sympathetic to the writers, Directors contemplated joining them but effectively choosing as a class not to paralyze. It got even uglier for them now because they took their ratification apart. As I mentioned, collective bargaining must review the distribution of royalties (which streaming directly interfered with, considerably reducing the result) as well as job opportunities threatened by the frequent use of AI. The goal and that is why it is so relevant to follow the discussion, is not to prevent what is already in our daily lives (generalized technology), but I reinforce the word – to rebalance – the scale minimally so that workers do not lose meaning and still have some opportunity. Writing about the majority versus the elite on July 14th is chilling. A guillotine won’t cut it here. What is urgent is to bring an alternative that does not only benefit the boss.

All of this happens in nearly 100 years of a virtually unchanged business model. When streaming took hold, many executives stuck to the conclusion that established rules are the only ones that make Art commercially viable. The mergers and cancellations of non-performing series confirm this argument, after all, it was just a matter of time to adjust the measures, this time through algorithms, to determine the profitability of the business. Subscriptions do not support increasingly luxurious productions, they need commercials to pay a good part of the bill, but reviewing the division of what enters, which at the moment only compensates for the investment, was not supposed to be on the table yet. Would it be one day?

Remembering that the problem is not two years old, but almost 20, when the signs of digital distribution signaled that there were faster and cheaper alternatives to make money, taking revenue from cinema distribution, home videos, and even premium cable. What the studios know is that the villain of streaming has not made the money imagined and has already adjusted to the market, taking away the video and cinema slices, but leaving the bosses still in charge and with their bonuses. Unfortunately, what is asked is not even to distribute wealth, they want guarantees of decent distribution of values, to guarantee survival. What is on the agenda, somehow, is to reduce the toxicity of the market. But it’s going with flowers on a table where the cannons are.

It appears that the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) is not remotely interested in considering the issue. Before the actors joined, the notes released were that the executives wanted to let the writers “starve” to start the conversation. I think they forgot that every day the stars themselves are assuming other functions. Things got really bad now.

Technically, AI can take over many places now occupied exclusively by humans, and asking for reflection to establish rules is nothing but reasonable. The conclusion of this strike will undoubtedly impact other industries and labor negotiations. We are witnessing an unprecedented revolution, something fascinating and terrifying. Hollywood, always Hollywood, brings glamor and spotlight to the problem, but by far it is not the only or the main one to have to deal with the issue. So when I saw fans celebrating that House of the Dragon won’t be affected by the strike, it broke my heart. This is not good.

The crisis with AMPTP, which negotiates employment contracts, is more than real. Strike is always the last option, continuing with it for more than 70 days means that people are already starving and there is no close alternative on the horizon. I read in an article a quote from what David Letterman said in 2008, when there was a writers’ strike: “After months of hearing about how terrible it is that writers want to get paid so they can support themselves after making billions of dollars from all these studios and streaming companies, now let’s hear about how bad actors are for wanting fair wages.” So it is. There is so much talk about mental health, sisterhood, and a less toxic and slowed-down world. This is the time.

Search

Search