Matt Damon and Ben Affleck have reimagined the production model with a worker-first profit-sharing system and I don't know if enough people know this.
Their Artists Equity is one of the most impressive, inventive, and intriguing production companies at the moment.
Okay. So. Why did they start a new production studio, what does this even mean, and why am I hyping it up? Well, SURPRISE, it's a sneaky history thread because of Frank Capra, Ben Affleck, and Matt Damon.
How You Like Them Apples?: A Thread
So way back in May 1946, Frank Capra was livid (I swear it's relevant)
He came back from WWII and jackasses who didn't go to war (John Wayne et al.) had fucked Hollywood. It became thid conglomerate of major studios that suffocated independents, and Capra was having none of it.
The studio system at that time had studio heads making final calls on everything and Capra very famously demanded complete creative say over his productions (so much so that not having it ended his career in 1961 with a Christmas film (in my dissertation) Pocketful of Miracles).
So May 5, 1946 Frankie wrote a piece in The New York Times called "Breaking Hollywood's Pattern of Sameness" and It. Was. Savage.
He called out the studios for implementing a formulaic machine that produced uninspired films just for profit:
"Hollywood became increasingly self-satisfied, snug, complacent, and these characteristics became evident on the screen"
"Hollywood began wrapping itself in a bright, tight little cocoon"
"Hollywood was isolating itself with a wall of mirrors"
SIR
This article was Capra launching his independent production company Liberty Films that would later that year release his It's a Wonderful Life.
(Liberty was co-organised by Capra, William Wyler, George Stevens, and Samuel J. Briskin (not quite Ben and Matt, but close))
Now the fate of Liberty is devastating specifically because no one could have foreseen the myriad complex issues that hit Hollywood in the ensuing years, 1947-54ish: HUAC, SCOTUS, DOJ, FBI, TV, financial crises, studio system crumbling, SO MANY BABIES.
It was a MESS.
So, V, why are you talking about Capra's absolute failure to set up an independent company in 1946 like it's a good thing that relates in any way to Matt Damon and J. Lo's husband?
Because it IS and it DOES because they did it for the LOVE OF CINEMA, and also a little communism, but mostly the LOVE OF CINEMA.
There are so many examples in Hollywood's history of creatives from all roles setting up their own production studios for the love of the art.
I chose Capra because he's my boy.
We could also look at Reese Witherspoon's Hello Sunshine, a production company dedicated to women empowerment and raising women's narratives, perspectives, and voices at various levels in production and on screen.
The reason I'm so hype about Matt Damon's and Ben Affleck's company, Artists Equity (AE) is that they're improving upon the United Artists' (UA) production approach of the 1950s (stick with me) and updating it for the streaming era.
This article is about UA's approach but tl/dr:
- Paramount Accords break studio system
- Studios panic
- Banks cut funding
- UA pumps money into independent films
- Others get frugal & formulaic
- UA ushers in New Hollywood
- Independent heyday redpepper.org.uk/cinema-hollywo…
UA went from 4 films in 1949 to an average of 38 between 1951 & 1958.
And no, they weren't all bangers, but they were independents and gave voices (& crucially, jobs) to people who had none elsewhere: creatives, crews, external staff paid in a horrible time to work in Hollywood.
So what is AE doing that's so special?
According to their site:
"AE is an artist-led, independently capitalized studio... That partners with filmmakers to empower their creative vision and broaden access to creator and crew profit participation.
"Affleck and Damon are reimagining the relationship between talent, studio, and distributor via an innovative model that prioritizes creators and leverages a proprietary, data-driven approach to distribution."
This means several things:
- AE fronts money like UA
- They want equity among all points of contact on a film
- In addition to minimums, workers get a stake in the film profits (back-end participation)
- Creatives have control
- Quality over quantity
Most workers in Hollywood know the streaming era is bursting.
Like Capra's complaints in 1946, Hollywood has become complacent and formulaic and (even more) profit-driven.
AE is confronting that head on and I think they have what it takes to succeed.
Not only are Matt Damon and Ben Affleck intensely passionate about cinema, they're also incredibly smart men who for years have commented on the degradation of equity in Hollywood.
You might remember Damon's recent Hot Ones episode talking about streaming killing paychecks.
They know how Hollywood works, they have the star power and brilliance and financial backing to pull this off, and they have, most importantly of all, the workers' best interest at the helm of all of it.
At a time when the WGA is currently on strike for poor compensation, especially with regard to streamers, and with the DGA and SAG-AFTRA entering negotiations ahead of their contracts ending on June 30th, it's a very good time to be a studio built on solidarity and equity.
We'll see how they do with all of it, but I am a firm believer that if anyone could reimagine and realign Hollywood's relationships with its workers in an equitable way without compromising highest quality cinema, if even just within their own successful company, it's these two.
I just realised I should've named this thread Hollywood Runs on Dunkin.
Bin the whole thing.
(I think I'm done)
Oh wait:
Support #WGAstrong, support unions, support independents
Strikes work!
(And also check out an article on the history of Hollywood strikes, Reagan, and technology when it's out next week)
Not for nothing but this article is related. It echoes Capra's "Breaking Hollywood's Pattern of Sameness" in it's critiques of formulaic, complacency
I want to do two threads about purity culture in the film industry.
The first, this one, is an analysis of my favourite film to show how sex on screen can be a plot device.
I'm angry this needs to be said.
Sexual Healing in Pretty Woman (1990): A Thread
So, first thing, I'm not angry at the young people who are uncomfortable with sex on screen. Sexual aversion is a very real thing and it's not the person's fault for being uncomfortable with what they see.
I am angry at the purity movement and the grown ass adults pushing it.
This organised fight against sex and sexuality being witnessed at all is the cultural arm to the political purity movement.
If you are a young person and you have a serious aversion to thinking about, seeing, or talking about sex, I invite you to really question why that is.
Tell me a love story? Yours, a friend's, a family member's, whosever as long as it's true. Tell me the most beautiful, most powerful, longest lasting or most ephemeral real love you've ever witnessed.
Let's start Valentine's Day with some passion
Disclaimer: Love is for everyone. Your love story doesn't have to be romantic love. It can be with a friend, a family member, a pet, a stranger's passing comfort, a long lost acquaintance's return, yourself. Wherever the love is deep and true, darlings ❤️
One of my favourite love stories from my life that I think of all the time is the love a stranger showed me for a brief passing moment.
It was one of the first times I was back in the States after moving abroad. I flew into Newark and then went to Brooklyn to see my best friend.
Here's a thread (it's gonna be long) on the history of residuals and what we can do now to stop fucking over everyone who makes the content we enjoy 24/7.
Fuck Around with Unions and Find Out: A Thread
(This thread was inspired by this tweet and the absolutely abysmal residuals payment this writer received for their work, so let's get down to why)
So first, residuals are, in simple terms, payments to directors, writers, producers, actors, the people who made a film or TV show that is then being shown subsequent times from recording.
In even simpler terms, they're payments for re-runs.
Doing some research and just had a mind-blowing realisation.
Walt Disney really was an evil genius.
Your man was a founding member of the Society of Independent Motion Picture Producers (SIMPP (yes, SIMPP)) which sued Paramount in 1942, strengthening the need for the Accords.
Disney himself. Walt. The guy with the mouse that became a symbol of the 20th century. The one whose company is now one of if not the largest film corporation in the world. The one with the monopolies and franchises and theme parks and books and video games and toys and stores an
That guy. Who fought unions constantly. The one who then also founded the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals (MPAPAI) which hired Ayn fucking Rand to write about Commies in the Work Place and invited HUAC into Hollywood, ushering in the Blacklist.
Just some notes about me so you can unfollow if you want.
I am:
- First gen ac
- From Philly living in UK
- Bi and very pro LGBTQ+
- Left-wing
- Pro-disabled rights
- Sometimes wrong
- A human
- An advocate for learning history
- A leo
And when I say the last one, I want to add that history is not one single narrative; it's interpretations of the past through different lenses and perspectives. There's tons of nuance we won't be able to accommodate for on Twitter 100% of the time. So please be kind to historians
And follow more of them! History will and should make you uncomfortable and angry a lot of the time, and that's a good thing!