Stuff.co.nz has posted a story on the threatened actors’ boycott of The Hobbit. Most of the story summarizes Peter Jackson’s recent statement on the situation. The last part, however, reveals that a group of actors met in Wellington and were unable to agree on a course of action:

The union has held meetings in Auckland and Wellington. About 60 Wellington actors could not reach an agreement last night while Auckland actors voted on Tuesday to seek a meeting and negotiations with The Hobbit producers.

NZ Actors Equity president Jennifer Ward-Lealand said last night that while a “significant number” voted in favour of the resolutions, “a number of performers represented alternative views and we have a duty to take their opinion into consideration”.

Most attendees last night were tight-lipped when approached by media afterwards, and the few that commented asked not to be named.

The union will now discuss its next step at a national performers committee meeting next week.

In response to the threatened actors’ boycott against The Hobbit, Peter Jackson and the producing studios have claimed that the MEAA does not have legal standing in New Zealand. Now Stuff.co.nz has a story confirming that claim.

TheOneRing.net has a long story detailing another response by Peter on the developing situation. One of the things revealed here is that Warner Bros. is considering six possible places to film The Hobbit if the problem with the local actors’ unions persists. PJ also reveals some of the actual weekly fees paid to actors on his past films, some of which are higher than union standards.

This looks like it might be the beginning of the end for the attempted boycott. Unless the MEAA is willing to sacrifice their own members potential earnings for a long time to come, as foreign productions leave New Zealand and Australia, they will need to back off. Of course, they may be willing to do that, cutting off their nose to spite their face. Still, it is clear that The Hobbit will be made, whether in New Zealand or not.

I would imagine that even if the filming with actors takes place abroad, landscape shots without actors could be made within New Zealand.

The Council of Trade Unions in New Zealand is accusing the government there of siding with Peter Jackson and the production studios in its position on the proposed actors’ boycott of The Hobbit. They urge the minister of the arts to facilitate talks between the opposed parties. See the story on the New Zealand Herald‘s website.

Veteran New Zealand journalist Gordon Campbell has contributed a very long and very knowledgeable assessment of the factors involved in the studios’ potential decision to move the Hobbit production to a different country in response to the threatened actors’ boycott. It’s over on Scoop.co.nz. It’s very even-handed as well, and Campbell knows the film industry, the history of the LOTR project, and the attractions for Hollywood studios of making films abroad.

You may be tired of reading about this topic, but this is far and away the best explanation of what’s been going on and what might happen. I won’t even quote from it, partly because it deserves to be read whole. But to give away the ending, Campbell thinks that the most likely outcome is that Warner Bros. will find a way to satisfy the actors’ demands and will keep the project in New Zealand. Let’s hope he’s right!

I’m also not offering analysis of this essay partly because I’m in the home stretch of getting ready to go to Vancouver tomorrow to attend the Vancouver International Film Festival. I’m sure more news will continue to surface on the whole boycott debate. I won’t be able to keep up the marathon posting pace that I’ve maintained for the past two days, in part with help from loyal readers Paulo Pereira (who pointed me to the Campbell essay) and S. Sanders.

I’ll try to keep up with the developing situation as best I can between films.

Patrick Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times has weighed in with some thoughts on the predication the Hobbit production is in as a result of the threatened actors’ boycott. He’s one of the few who doesn’t take sides.

[Thanks to S. Sanders for the link!]

Peter Jackson spoke to the Dominion Post, the Wellington newspaper. (It’s not clear whether he did this after or before the meeting of the New Zealand Actors Equity group in Auckland last night.) His remarks contain some interesting bits of news:

Sir Peter has said the union bid to have film actors treated as employees was “doomed to fail”, while movie studios have made the strongest threat yet that the production of The Hobbit could move offshore.

And in an odd twist, Jackson has revealed that as a union member he would have to blacklist himself from the two-part prequel to the Lord of the Rings.

Jackson has suggested that filming of The Hobbit may move to Eastern Europe – a prospect Wellington Mayor Kerry Prendergast said would be devastating, with thousands of future jobs at risk.

In a joint statement yesterday, New Line, Warner Bros Pictures and MGM Pictures said they avoided locations with the potential for workforce uncertainty or other forms of instability.

“As such, we are exploring all alternative options in order to protect our business interests.”

Jackson has said MEAA wants a union-negotiated collective agreement covering all performers. Yesterday he told The Dominion Post a collective contract was “absolutely not” being considered and would be illegal under New Zealand law because actors here are self-employed contractors, not employees as in Australia.

If film crews were hired as employees, with a contractual promise of ongoing employment, there would be no film industry, he said. “It’s an industry built on short-term work opportunities, with a finite time limit.”

Many contractors preferred being independent contractors – they were paid more, had more breaks, could claim back on expenses, and could also leave with short notice.

He would not be meeting unions because all contract negotiations were being handled by Warner Bros.

New Zealand Film and Video Technicians’ Guild president Alun Bollinger said film workers could be fired on a whim and only one week’s notice was needed to be given by either party.

In other countries, including Australia, film workers were usually employed as employees with full workers’ rights, though they were still only employed for the duration of each movie.

The idea that Warner Bros. would be handling any negotiations with actors is not surprising. Whether it’s good news or bad is a matter for speculation. They certainly have a lot of power, and the company has made several films in Australia–something that presumably would not happen again if this fight gets really nasty. On the other hand, Peter probably has little say in whether the studio decides to pull the production out of New Zealand.

A clip shows Jennifer Ward-Lealand, head of the union, reading the statement that the members had devised during the group’s meeting on Tuesday night in Auckland. It runs slightly over two minutes long. A transcription (which I can’t swear is absolutely accurate, given the noise of cameras and other factors):

As a result of tonight’s meeting, New Zealand Actors Equity members have overwhelmingly resolved that its delegation meet with the producers of The Hobbit to hold negotiations in good faith on the terms and conditions for performers working on the production. Until we reach a fair and equitable solution, we recommend that all performers wait before accepting any engagement.

We have no desire to put the production in jeopardy. Our members are simply seeking fair and equitable employment terms and conditions for New Zealand actors, the same terms that their colleagues elsewhere in the world enjoy. We believe a solution will be found by sitting down together with the producers and talking through the issues. We all have the same goal in mind: to get The Hobbit made, and we have nothing further to add at this time.

A reporter asks how confident the group is that the producers will meet with them.

Answer: We’re very hopeful. We’re confident.

The reporters asks whether the group is worried that the film production will be moved elsewhere.

Answer: We are very confident and hopeful that the production will not move out of New Zealand. That is not our desire. All we are asking is for fair, equitable terms and conditions, minimum terms and conditions that our colleagues overseas enjoy. We have no desire to put the production in jeopardy.

[Thanks again to S. Sanders for sending me the link!]

The New Zealand Herald has posted an editorial in favor of the actors’ boycott of The Hobbit and attacking Peter Jackson’s statement about it. After summarizing the situation, it concludes:

As with all such industrial disputes, the battle-lines have been quickly drawn.

Stars such as Sir Ian McKellen and Cate Blanchett, who are reportedly taking part in The Hobbit, are supporting a boycott, while the industry has thrown its support behind Sir Peter.

There is an element of predictability in all this. The Lord of the Rings trilogy earned $4.2 billion worldwide at the box office.

Many local performers probably feel they did not see their fair share of that. They are now seeking wages and conditions that are applicable elsewhere, except perhaps in Eastern Europe.

In a blatant piece of grandstanding, Sir Peter has tried to damn their demands by seizing on the presence of the Australian union. It was, he said, a “bully boy”. But it would not have become involved unless requested by local actors.

It can be argued that New Zealand, because of its geographical isolation, must provide a low-cost environment to attract big-budget film-makers.

This means actors and crew must settle for less than they would earn in Hollywood for the greater good of the country and to preserve work opportunities for themselves.

But if the industry relies on this, it will always have an uphill struggle. There will always be other countries ready to offer better deals and more generous subsidies.

The industry must, at some stage, come to rely on the talent and skills in its ranks to attract film-makers. If it cannot, it will, inevitably, lose out more and more to Eastern Europe or some other johnny-come-lately.

Has anyone seen any real evidence that Cate Blanchett and Ian McKellen are actively supporting the idea of a boycott? I’ve been scouring reports on the subject and haven’t found any. And the trilogy earned around $3 billion internationally, not $4.2. That’s gross, of course, with a lot of the money staying with the exhibitors and foreign distributors.

There’s obviously a deep divide, with a lot of performers bitterly attacking Peter. (Just read the comments section of the editorial.)

One of the arguments being made is that offering low wages to attract productions from abroad implies that the actors and filmmakers in New Zealand are not skillful enough to attract those productions if they’re paid adequately: “He implies that companies such as Warner Brothers, which is financing The Hobbit, are attracted here not by New Zealanders’ film-making skills or even the spectacular scenery but by the low cost of production.”

I think it’s quite possible that all three of these factors attract studios. But no one seems to remember that many of the skillful film workers in New Zealand got that way through the upskilling they received during the making of LOTR.

[Thanks to S. Sanders for the link!]

Last night about 200 New Zealand actors met to discuss the call for a boycott of The Hobbit by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance. The latter, an Australian actors’ union with which the New Zealand Actors Equity is allied, had gathered several major unions internationally to join in the boycott. The New Zealand Herald reports on the results:

After last night’s three-hour meeting, NZ Actors Equity president Jennifer Ward-Lealand read out a statement:

“As a result of tonight’s meeting, Actors Equity members have overwhelmingly resolved that its delegation meet the producers of The Hobbit to hold negotiations in good faith, taking in the terms and conditions for performers working on the production.”

Ms Ward-Lealand said the union had been trying to meet the producers for more than a month.

Karl Urban, who played Éomer in LOTR, is the only other person present at the meeting who was named in the article.

Presumably if the claims made by Peter Jackson and the Hollywood studios involved are correct, such negotiations would not be possible under New Zealand law.

[Update, Sep. 28: A brief account of the meeting on the Radio New Zealand site adds this:

She recommends that actors wait until the parties reach an agreement before accepting any work.

Ms Ward-Lealand does not think the move will push the film overseas, but the American studio financing The Hobbit says it is exploring other locations.

[Thanks to Paulo Pereira once again for sending me both links!]

The Australian, a national newspaper, has published a short article on the threatened boycott of The Hobbit by actors unions, led by the MEAA. After summarizing the situation, the author goes on to point out that there is considerable animosity toward the MEAA among people in the Australian film industry:

THE Hobbit dispute has wider ramifications. Several people in the Australian film industry have questioned the MEAA’s clumsy relations with international productions in this country and what appears to be an antipathy towards studio-produced film and television. A schism between crew, producers and the MEAA is growing, particularly when the high Australian dollar is making Australia less attractive to international productions. Love them or hate them, international films and TV series have subsidised much of the local film infrastructure and provided solid wages to underwrite the smaller local industry. One film technician told Reel Time yesterday, “The studios don’t need much of a reason not to come here and the MEAA is giving it to them.” The issue is particularly pertinent as Reel Time has learned that New Line is one of two studios looking to film a major production here.

It’s good to hear that the MEAA’s position has this kind of opposition. If The Hobbit is shot in Eastern Europe, studios will be less likely to film big-budget films in New Zealand. But since it’s an Australian union that is pushing this issue, the same stigma will attach itself to that country’s film industry. The Australian film industry is currently in worse shape than the Kiwi one is, and it doesn’t need any further bad press. The unnamed technician is quite right in saying that the Hollywood studios would be quite happy to take their business elsewhere.

Countries and states in many areas of the world are competing to see which ones can offer the sweetest deals in the shape of tax breaks, free labor, and so on. (Puerto Rico offers a 40% rebate!) Australia’s tax breaks and state-of-the-art studios aren’t as big an attraction as they used to be, when comparable studio facilities are being opened around the world.

It’s very interesting to hear that New Line is (was?) contemplating making a film in Australia. That schism between producers and filmmakers on the one hand and the MEAA on the other is likely to grow greater. An awful lot of people stand to get hurt by this boycott, and in the end, the actors in those Australia and New Zealand could find themselves with far less work.

(Unfortunately I don’t subscribe to Reel Time. If anyone does and would care to pass along the relevant quotes to me, I’ll make sure they get to the fans. In a stress-inducing situation like this, information like that is valuable.)