Actors are the ones looking for a gig, often any gig, but when they have a choice, the highest paying gig. And believe me, every actor and writer in Hollywood wishes studios would invest more in mid-budget B movie not based on any cinematic universe: those are what paid many people’s bills.
As Union members, actors have a contract with studios that they negotiate every 3 years. Every three years since the last strike in 1960 they’ve reached a deal (and the result of that strike was the creation of revenue sharing for cable and film tv with actors and writers, which they are now hoping to apply to streaming).
No deal? Fine, studios have the right not to sign. But actors have the right to withhold their work. Eventually a deal will be reached.
Directors are not on strike, as they are the closest of the unions with studios and have never been on strike in the history of their union.
I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make, this year Hollywood is on track to exceed its pre-covid performance at the Box Office worldwide and domestically. Netflix/etc are growing more than ever.
It seems like all signs point to this sector being on the up and up.
Actors here are just collectively using that power to withhold their work in order to negotiate a better deal, as is their right. They’re not asking for sympathy, they’re demanding studios meet them at the negotiating table. If they’re wrong about how important they are, then studios will continue to disregard their demands until SAG eventually folds— my guess, though, is that actors know they’re more important en masse to studios than studios are to them, or else studios would’ve refused to exclusively work with SAG along ago.
After all, most actors are very used to having second jobs to make ends meet. They can work other jobs or more hours or whatever else they want to do during the strike. Studios are the ones with corporate 9-5 employees who won’t have anything productive to do or show their shareholders the longer the strike goes on.