Re: What Did You Watch? 2025-04-09 (Wednesday)

On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 21:32:36 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

Thu, 10 Apr 2025 19:47:14 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

10 Apr 2025 08:18:16 -0700, Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org>:

>

Hollywood Demons (HBOMax) - "Dark Side of the Power Rangers" - Episode 3
of this documentary series.  This episode is the reason I even took
notice of this series, it focused on "The Power Rangers."  I was a
little older when the show came out, but still enjoyed watching it as a
teenager.  I've only ever heard horror stories from the cast about
making this show, and this documentary was no different.  I had
forgotten they shot the pilot with a different "Yellow Ranger."  They
interviewed her about the pilot.  She said they were in the middle of
some dessert in heat when one of the stuntmen in a rubber swimsuit had
heat stroke.  She said the guy was on the ground flopping around and she
insisted they stop filming and get the guy an ambulance.  But the
producers refused to stop filming and offered $100 for anyone to take
off the costume and put it on so they could keep filming, and someone
took the $100, took the costume off the man, and left the guy there
still shaking, but now in the his socks and underwear, and they kept
filming.

>

Sheesh, sounds like the producers should have been arrested for that.

>

You say that like there are producers who shouldn't be arrested.

>

They didn't even need to stop filming to get the guy proper medical
attention.

>

Seriously, it's not always a matter of criminal law if someone fails to
render assistance. Yes, there's liability and industrial hygiene
requirements, but that's civil law. Refusing to stop filming doesn't
prevent anyone else from rendering aid. If someone is physically
prevented from rendering aid, then it could be a crime.

>

In this case, unless someone ceasing to perform his job would create a
hazard on its own or make the emergency worse, like a grip in the
process of securing a piece of equipment, there are plenty of P.A.s and
actors not needed for the scene just standing around. Fuck all of those
people for refusing to assist.

>

That's the thing. Since there are quite a few people involved in any
production like this I find it unlikely that no one was willing to
help unless otherwise being ordered not to bother.

>
If you are in a position to render aid, what does being ordered not to
bother have to do with whether you render aid? If you could assit but
choose not to, that's on you, not some other asshole.

Sure, they should give aid. I'm just considering that given the story
it wouldn't surprise me if the producers ordered people who weren't
busy to not help the guy and they chose not to do so for fear of being
fired. Ass hole behavior, yes, on both the producers and the ones
refusing to help.

And that's not even close to the most shocking story they told in the
documentary.  There were so many shady things happened on that show.
Giving them contracts to sign, but telling them they had to sing almost

>

Sing for their supper. :)  

>

immediately with no time to let an agent review it first.  The terms of
the contracts had the actors working for almost nothing while signing
away their likeness.  Keep in mind, Power Rangers is a mutlibillion
dollar franchise.  They were putting the actors faces on products,
selling the products, and not giving the actors any of the money. 

>

Though the problem is how many other actors did they have lined up if
someone demanded to get paid for the use of their likeness. Which is
always a problem if there aren't legal protections in place.

>

How is that a problem? We have a word for performing labor and not being
compensated. Don't contractually engage in slavery. Let someone else do
it. Famously, Disney isn't allowed to use Giselle (Amy Adams) from
Enchanted (2007) in displays of Disney princesses as the actress refused
to sell rights to her likeness. It wasn't conditional on casting.

>

It's a problem if you are wanting to pay your bills so you need this job.

>
You seem to be ignoring the main point that performing work for no
compensation doesn't get the bills paid.

They were getting paid, just not for the use of their faces. They were
still getting paid to make the content.

I agree they shouldn't have signed the contract. That said many
people sign bad contracts the first time around because they just want
to have some rent money and either don't know what to look for or
aren't given the time to review the contract. Hell, even Taylor Swift
ran into some issues because of her first contract and she's proven to
be a savvy businesswoman.

 
The contract she signed may have been unfavorable to her -- she didn't
own the master recordings of her earliest songs -- but she wasn't
uncompensated. When she decided to re-release her earliest songs, she
made new master recordings in order to do so.
>
These actors were agreeing to give up something of value -- commercial
exploitation of their own likenesses -- for no compensation. They were
also performing stunts for which they had no training and I'll bet the
producers wouldn't have paid for rehab if they were injured.