#sag energy

[trashcora]

PEDRO PASCAL 30th Annual Screen Actors Guild Awards (February 24, 2024)

[mralbertinho]

While we're all talking about both the WGA/SAG strikes and Barbenheimer, I hope everyone realises that the entire reason this exists is because Christopher Nolan stood up to Warner Bros against pushing their entire cinematic slate onto streaming in 2021, by taking his next film to another studio.

Then, as an act of petty revenge, they decided to deliberately move their single biggest movie of 2023 (and arguably WB's biggest non-Batman/Harry Potter movie in DECADES) directly onto his release date.

So no, the Barbie Marketing isn't "so good it helped another movie". The Barbie Marketing Machine was specifically designed to get back at someone who dared to stand up against WB executives.

It was a calculated move of malice by soulless corporate fuckeroonies.

[thetimelordbatgirl]

Bob Iger saying all this while also being on basically billionaires vacation really should say something, holy shit.

[moon8th]

Pluto entering Aquarius

imagine me screaming this whole post mama

I may be a bit excited about Pluto entering Aquarius happening on March 23rd.. however..

GOODBYE fake it til you make it energy 👋🏽 🖕🏽✌🏽

HELLO the birthing of more actual people living in their truth ☺️🥰🫶🏽💋🗣️

GOODBYE people just copying each other / influencer-culture ✌🏽👎🏽👎🏽

GOODFUCKINGBYE hustle culture 😭🖕🏽

MORE PRESENCE MORE LIFE MORE LOVE MORE CONNECTION

GO OUTSIDE 🧚🏽🧖🏽‍♀️🦋🦚🌱🪸🌍🫧✨🥥🤍♻️

THE STRUCTURES ARE SHATTERING 🗣️🔊🔊

LET THE REAL MASTERS OF THEIR CRAFT RIISSSSEEE

LET THE PEOPLE WITH REAL PRINCIPLES RIIISSEEAAAHHHHHHH

[saucysonnetts]

emilysonnett: Wanted to share these!

[capricores]

sagittarius gemini virgo and pisces placements when u tell them they cannot successfully study and become fluent in eight different languages at once

[thelaurenshippen]

okay, so, I tried to attend the virtual SAG meeting on saturday to ask some of my questions but it was literally full - I did not know that could happen virtually. but it's amazing, I love that the membership is SO galvanized.

that said, I have watched the in-person meetings for both LA and NY (both of which are, uh, 4 hours long thank god for 2x speed on youtube). the wonderful actors in attendance (including some real life pals!) asked all my questions and more. I took some notes on the SAG presentation (only the LA one - I didn't watch the NY presentation, just the Q&A) but I'm assuming it was larger the same) and the answers from the Q&A that I thought were particularly interesting.

I'm making a new post because my original post got so long, but I'm going to link this with a small summary in a reblog as well, because I think it's important to see how my thinking has shifted as I've gotten more information. (also, on that original post, I've seen some folks be like 'I'm not an actor or a sag member, but I think you should vote yes'...lovingly, please stop. share the post! share your thoughts! but please don't try to pressure a vote on a contract you have no material investment in).

anyway, let's get into it:

the presentation

nothing really revelatory here, but there were a few points that Duncan Crabtree-Ireland (the chief negotiator and a lawyer) brought up that I thought were really interesting:

if you wanted to make your own digital replica or have one made with a third party contract, you could then license that under the same consent rules as if the company did the scan. my brain immediately latched onto this because I think there is a lot of very interesting ramifications for someone making their own replica and then making an argument that the company needs to license that replica instead of scanning them. I don't think this is something that's really going to happen in a major way in this contract period but an actor having and controlling their own replica and making companies pay for it is genuinely very cool if I'm understanding it correctly.

he did mention that the dubbing issue with alteration was more about companies being able to hire an actor to dub in a foreign language and then alter the actor's mouth to match the dialogue, so presumably would not be a threat to dubbers. I don't know that the companies are required to hire a voice actor for this, but that was at least good to hear.

the whole thing about synthetic performers...Duncan really made some interesting points around this. in the Q&A, he basically echoed the point that I made in my original point that this doesn't actually have to do with actors at all, but he saw the inclusion of it as a good thing. synthetics have nothing to do with actor employment, but duncan argued that by putting it in here, we're forcing the studios to acknowledge that synthetics are horning in on our territory and it seems that the union will work to de-incentivize the use of synthetics by making it more expensive than hiring an actor (really hoping the MOA provides more clarity on this)

studios will meet with SAG twice a year to talk about AI stuff

he confirmed that studios have to hire background actors and if they use their digital replicas (which the background actors have to consent to) those actors have to be paid for their replicas work.

he made the argument that there are a lot of things, like consent to replicas, that are conditions of employment: salary, relocation, nudity, etc. and that's true, certainly, but this is still something we're going to have to keep close eyes on IMO.

there's a provision that actors have to be given notice for scenes that may be triggering to film! cool!

the Q&A

this is just a sampling of the many wonderful questions that were asked - if you're a member, I highly recommend you watch both of the livestreams and future meetings.

I didn't know this but there's a legal framework for minors to disavow contracts when they're 18, so this would allow minors to rescind their consent of their digital replicas. good!

someone pointed out that SAG could notify the membership about a company using synethics (which they have to notify SAG) about and use the membership/public to pressure the studios or boycott the use of synthetics. SAG confirmed that there's nothing to prevent SAG from telling us and letting us galvanize the public.

duncan reminded everyone that companies rely on copyright to make money and currently AI cannot legally by copyrighted, which will de-incentivize studios from leaning on it.

companies can only use digital replica in projects they've contracted, they cannot sell them to third party, which includes non-identifiable data. this was a great question and it's awesome to hear that the companies cannot do anything with any of the replica data, anonymized or not, without your consent.

there is so much likeness legislature out there already (you own your likeness, etc.), so these things just bolster those

a company choosing to hire someone else because you won't consent to scanning is not retaliation but being replaced during the course of your employment because of not consenting is and you could take action against that studio. and remember, they have to ask for your consent on specific things, so you would be giving your consent throughout presumably.

someone asked about loopholes with generative AI, and SAG emphasized that any resemblance to a real actor kicks it from synthetic into digital replicas and the actor would have to consent/be paid

background actors seem divided - in some ways they've gotten major gains and in others, they're very worried about being replaced because they don't want to be scanned.

they did fight for union consent to use of generative AI, and the studios are seemingly never going to give that

there was a question about studios scanning non-union actors and creating digital replicas and just using those instead; if I understood correctly (which I'm not sure I did), the studios would not be able to do that under this contract - all the digital replica terms would apply to any replica done, union or not.

my thoughts

I have all the same concerns as I expressed in my original post, but I do think that these meetings reassured me that SAG has the best intentions. I have been very vocal about my criticism of SAG (specifically how they approached podcasting, my main art form) so I don't have rose-colored glasses here. I have also seen them really improve on those areas of criticism in the past several years and I think we always have to keep in mind that we'll be back at the negotiations in two and a half years. I do think SAG is doing the best they can.

I also think it's important to always assume that the studios have the worst intentions. they're going to violate this contract if it's ratified and accept their fine/slap on the wrist/do not work orders and then violate the contract again. they're going to find loopholes to save money and behave badly. no contract in the world could prevent those things from happening. SAG is not great at enforcing these violations but no contract is going to fix that.

it has always been important for actors to rely on their agents, lawyers, and union for support and reporting violations and that's going to be more important than ever under this contract. it's also going to be so important for the famous and wealthy actors to sue the studios when there's particularly bad behavior on the AI stuff.

it's also going to be really important for you guys - the audience, the subscribers - to fully reject any and all use of synthetic performers. public pressure will be the way we keep acting alive as a profession and art form.

but here's where I'm at: I'm leaning toward yes. "but lauren, you had so many concerns! you think that this contract is an existential threat to acting!" yeah, I know. I'm still there, but I'm also leaning yes. I believe SAG when they say we're not going to get a better deal. I think even if we did go back on strike, we're losing public support and support from other unions - actors barely have leverage to begin with (which is why SAG contracts have historically not been great) and I don't foresee us gaining more over the next 6 months.

so I don't think we're going to get a better deal and I also agree that it's better to have some protections in place instead of nothing. ultimately, it comes down to the fact that my issues with the contract have a lot to do with that existential threat and the icky feeling that I get thinking about signing a contract that suggests at times that actors are meat puppets.

if this was a contract I was looking at as an individual, I would not sign it, plain and simple. but collective bargaining is a different thing. this contract unarguably gives actors more protection against AI than they currently have. we will get to renegotiate again in less than three years and this is a much better place to start from, especially considering how much AI will grow and change in the next few years. if we have to go on strike again, we will, and we'll be armed with a better contract and more knowledge, especially since we'll be able to see how studios behave within this contract.

I completely understand why people want to vote no. I would never presume to tell someone how I think they should vote - follow your conscience. I personally will not be voting until I've had time to review the MOA (memorandum of agreement) and I would encourage everyone to read the full contract before deciding how to vote.

tldr: I am leaning toward voting yes because my pragmatic brain is winning out - as someone who has experience negotiating with major studios as an individual, I know that SAG is telling the truth when they say this is likely as good as its able to get. this is the first battle in a war of AI and we can either live to fight another day or not. I think this contract will help us live, even if it isn't an out-and-out victory.

[finn-nelson-for-the-win]

Not sure if anyone is gonna care about this as much as I do, but I’m throwing it out into the MMFD Fandom ether here on Tumblr just in case.

So…Let’s discuss: My Mad Fat Diary character Zodiac Signs✨

I’ve done a bit of research (aka rewatching certain episodes lol) and some of their signs are confirmed:

Izzy is a Cancer (her birthday is near/on July 10th according to S1E1 when Rae meets the gang for the first time and Izzy is celebrating her 16th birthday at the pub)

Rae is a Sagittarius (she says this in S1E2)

Archie is an Aries (Rae says this in S1E2)

Chloe is a Scorpio/Sagittarius Cusp (her 17th birthday party in S2E5)

And I have a theories about what Finn and Chop might be but I can't recall if there’s ever been anything confirmed or any proof in the show...does anyone else have thoughts/theories or am I the only one that thinks about these types of things when I'm rewatching the show for the Nth time/reading or writing fanfic lol 🤪

[nicoscheer]

Courtesy of @divstheturtle

Get out of here 😭🥹🥹🫶🏽🫶🏽🫶🏽🫶🏽💕🥺🐢🐢🥰

[pcktknife]

athenas birthday was sooooo close to potentially being the same as mine woahh

[pwhl-mybeloved]

OTTAWA

Forwards

Adzija, Lexie (June 30 CANCER)

Clark, Emily (November 28 SAGITTARIUS)

Della Rovere, Kristin (November 30 SAGITTARIUS)

Garát-Gasparics, Fanni (November 20 SCORPIO)

Gilmore, Becca (February 15 AQUARIUS)

Grant-Mentis, Mikyla (July 15 CANCER)

Hughes, Gabrielle (October 4 LIBRA)

Jenner, Brianne (May 4 TAURUS)

Mrázová, Kateřina (October 19 LIBRA)

Scamurra, Hayley (December 14 SAGITTARIUS)

Shiga, Akane (March 3 PISCES)

Snodgrass, Natalie (December 17 SAGITTARIUS)

Watts, Daryl (May 15 TAURUS)

Defenders

Bell, Ashton (December 7 SAGITTARIUS)

Boulier, Amanda (March 30 ARIES)

Boyd, Zoe (August 9 LEO)

Harmon, Savannah (October 27 SCORPIO)

Howran, Victoria (June 11 GEMINI)

Roese, Jincy (May 15 TAURUS)

Tejralová, Aneta (January 4 CAPRICORN)

Goaltenders

Abstreiter, Sandra (July 23 LEO)

Maschmeyer, Emerance (October 5 LIBRA)

McQuigge, Rachel (October 8 LIBRA)

[sapphicherri]

Oh? I'm a sag. Can I ask what you like so much about us?

i like having my patience tested /j

[theblackfemininesociety]

Can we please talk about how much elegance Zendaya has?! She looked AMAZING at the SAG Awards.

[callumilott]

via instagram

[astro1derland]

In today’s transits, the Moon at 25° Virgo ♍️ forms a polar opposition to Neptune at 25° Pisces ♓️ and a square with Mars at 28° Sagittarius ♐️ and Mercury at 22° Sagittarius ♐️. Our needs to acquire emotional stability seem to be at odds with our mysticism and dreamy nature, our motivations, and our intellectual mind in an adventurous, fiery yet dreamy and unique way. Look for a new outlook and outlet today. Vent to someone new today. Find joy in the small things today. Listen to yourself today. Find your escape today. Lighten your heart today.

[whatudowhennooneseesyou]

Also rising in sagi. Idk if this explains anything ahahaha

Okay, I am so sorry this is more than a month late but my car has broke down, my dog got sick and mom was in hospital for a week with a septic gallbladder and I have finally built up the motivation to respond to my inbox.

So thank you @escapetheshark for being patient, you're gorgeous.

I don't remember if you asked to be roasted but you're a Sagittarius Moon so I'm going to roast you anyway because you're a big girl and you can handle it.

From those placements alone, I can tell you're very optimistic and high-spirited towards life and are definitely the 'hype' person in your friend group.

I'm going to come to you for cheering up because you have a great gift of providing motivation and enthusiasm to those who need it.

But masking your problems will not make them go away and it's okay to cry in front of people, don't give into your natural tendencies to just drop everything and move when things go sour.

Aww, you have the dreaded Gemini Venus *rolls eyes*

You're either emotionally unavailable or detached in relationships or too anxious and attached, you can't be both (just kidding...not really...lol, I am).

You are romantic and sensual after a few months of being bratty and enjoying being chased.

Did I mention HUGE brat behaviour?

Pretty petty princessey bratty material right here

I'm a bit perturbed by how i typed in the word 'brat' on tumblr gifs and so many seggsy 'little girl' gifs popped up.