HELLBOY Star Ron Perlman Issues Warning To Studio Exec: "There's A Lot Of Ways To Lose Your House"

HELLBOY Star Ron Perlman Issues Warning To Studio Exec: "There's A Lot Of Ways To Lose Your House" HELLBOY Star Ron Perlman Issues Warning To Studio Exec: "There's A Lot Of Ways To Lose Your House"

Hellboy star Ron Perlman is not messing around in his response to an unnamed studio exec whose recent comments about the SAG-AFTRA strike have caused major uproar...

By MarkCassidy - Jul 15, 2023 08:07 AM EST
Filed Under: Hellboy

With the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes now underway, tensions are high in Hollywood, and the situation was greatly exacerbated by recent comments from an unnamed studio executive.

While speaking about the strikes to Deadline, the individual was quoted as saying: "The endgame is to allow things to drag on until union members start losing their apartments and losing their homes."

Understandably, these comments did not go over very well, especially after details of the negotiation between representatives of the Screen Actors Guild and the AMPTP were shared online.

Now, Hellboy star Ron Perlman - who has never been shy when it comes to voicing his opinion - has shared a video to social media in response to this mysterious exec, and he is not messing around.

"We know who said that and where he f*cking lives. You wish that families starve while you’re making 27-f*cking million a year for creating nothing? Be careful, motherf*cker, there's lots of ways you can lose your home."

Perlman's comments have raised a lot of eyebrows, with some empathizing with how angry he is, and others feeling he may have taken things a little too far. It is very interesting that he mentions a 27 million-a-year salary - because that's exactly what Disney chief Bob Iger is said to be earning.

What do you make of Perlman's video? Do you stand with the strikers, or do you, like Mr. Iger, feel their demands are unrealistic? Be sure to share your thoughts in the usual place.

HELLBOY: THE CROOKED MAN Acquired By Studio Behind Ben Affleck's Critically Panned HYPNOTIC

HELLBOY: THE CROOKED MAN Acquired By Studio Behind Ben Affleck's Critically Panned HYPNOTIC

HELLBOY Star Ron Perlman Addresses Controversial Instagram Post: We Should Be Loving Each Other
Recommended For You:

HELLBOY Star Ron Perlman Addresses Controversial Instagram Post: "We Should Be Loving Each Other"

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2 3 4 5 6
dragon316 - 7/15/2023, 8:05 AM
Dam right
bobevanz - 7/15/2023, 8:33 AM
@dragon316 -
Don't mess with the nanny. If you're on the other side like @Origame, I wonder what makes you tick
Origame - 7/15/2023, 10:28 AM
@bobevanz - really dude? Still waiting for your counter to my point. Maybe if you guys can make an argument there'd be something to say.
AllsGood - 7/15/2023, 12:01 PM
@bobevanz - GO NANNY :)
Usernametaken - 7/15/2023, 12:58 PM
@bobevanz -
jst5 - 7/15/2023, 5:52 PM
@dragon316 - A rich fake tough guy ...making threats towards other rich people...this is COMICAL!
TempleRod - 7/15/2023, 8:10 AM
100% This guy is spitting straight TRUTH
TheVandalore - 7/15/2023, 12:19 PM
@TempleRod - he went Clay Morrow on em.
Alucard28 - 7/15/2023, 8:12 AM
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:12 AM
Ok, so threats? Keep in mind the studios have attempted actual negotiations and gave reasonable compromises. Even in terms of AI they're willing to come up to an agreement but leaving the door open for further negotiation as technology advances.

It's the unions unwilling to compromise.
AllsGood - 7/15/2023, 8:19 AM
@Origame - So now your defending Disney Corporation and CEO and wealth?
TempleRod - 7/15/2023, 8:23 AM
@Origame - oh, it's certainly going to be a nasty next bunch of decades for ones like you.

honestly a nasty next bunch of decades for all of us, but especially ones like you.
But you'll still get that Pat Pat on the head.
You're a 'Good Boy' after all. LOL
Th3Batman - 7/15/2023, 8:27 AM
@Origame - One of their "compromises" was to pay people around $200 to scan their likeness, then to never work with them again. The US government, and governments around the world in general, cannot allow AI to take everyone's job away. Governments enforce regulations on businesses all the time, and employing actual people needs to be one of them. These companies cannot be allowed to put millions of people out on the street.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:31 AM
@AllsGood - ...in this case yeah? Just because they're greedy corporations doesn't mean they're objectively always in the wrong.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:32 AM
@TempleRod - can any of you actually come up with a counter to what I'm saying beyond just "defending the rich bad"?
bobevanz - 7/15/2023, 8:34 AM
@Origame - and you're saying the big wigs tried, no the [frick] they didn't.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:35 AM
@Th3Batman - yeah, and they can choose not to sell their likeness. Just saying no would be enough to force studios to renegotiate.

Need I remind you the studios already agreed to 4% of the 5% pay increase they asked for. And you're telling me it's the studios unwilling to negotiate.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:36 AM
@bobevanz - ...yes they did. They offered them 4% when the writers asked for 5%. How is that not a fair compromise?
AllsGood - 7/15/2023, 8:37 AM
@Origame - Now a Disney and Marvel Studios Supporter.

Ojeet78 - 7/15/2023, 8:41 AM
@Origame - Telling actors to sign away their likeness rights and paying them for one day's work while using a CG double for perpetuity is evil. You can try and spin this any way you like but it makes the corporations look bad and the talks have been stalled cause they didn't want it to affect their summer movie profits. Back when the WGA strike started , Fran Drescher was fence sitting but now she's leapt into battle. Try and think what went horrifically wrong for there to be a double strike. This strike is to keep the soul in creativity intact and not let the suits turn into a rote , mechanical, heartless endeavour.
Th3Batman - 7/15/2023, 8:41 AM
@Origame - "yeah, and they can choose not to sell their likeness"

Is there really a choice when that's the only option on the table ? Either work with us once for $200 or don't work with us at all. This should be outright illegal. You want to run a large scale business ? You need to hire actual people.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:44 AM
@AllsGood - ...no? It's having my own opinion on the matter. It isn't an all or nothing matter. I can agree with some points while ultimately being against them.

It's logic like this that's making politics impossible. You have people like you defending incessantly points they haven't actually thought of for themselves because "democrats believe it". You lemming.
TempleRod - 7/15/2023, 8:45 AM
@Origame - Honestly, you don't seem to be actually 'saying' much.
So it's hard to imagine coming up with a 'counter' for it.

My post was meant more as a mockery of how agreeable you always seem for 'bending over'. You must really love that part.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:45 AM
@Ojeet78 - never said it was. But actors...have rights. They can just say no.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:46 AM
@Th3Batman - yes, I'm sure the studios would hire a bunch of no names instead of keeping the likes of established names πŸ™„
Origame - 7/15/2023, 8:50 AM
@TempleRod -

I made points about actual threats against their wellbeing and how the studios are actually negotiating.

Also, dude, I'm known for taking the unpopular opinion here. How's that "bending over". Even now, the fact I'm against most people here is the exact opposite of "bending over".
Th3Batman - 7/15/2023, 8:51 AM
@Origame - One of the ways people become established in the industry is by being an extra. Eliminating this job will keep A LOT of people out of the industry. This should not be legal. Why you're chilling for a CEO who wouldn't piss on you to put you out if you were on fire is beyond me.
Ojeet78 - 7/15/2023, 9:02 AM
@Origame - Its not much of a choice for working actors and people who have been forced to live paycheck to paycheck. But I get it, you need to commit to your bit. Threats are never okay but saying that studios are open to compromise is completely off the mark, given that Bob Iger is on record calling these demands unreasonable while at a billionaire retreat. Your opinions aren't unpopular, just straight up wrong but at the end of the day you're entitled to it.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 9:19 AM
@Th3Batman - yeah, but they care about the likeness of big named actors. What part of this aren't you getting?
Origame - 7/15/2023, 9:21 AM
@Ojeet78 - "threats are never ok" then how about talking to the people here actually praising Perlman for the threat?

And there's plenty of evidence of the studios compromising over this. The only area is something big named actors only need to do is say no to.
nhoj3 - 7/15/2023, 9:28 AM
@Th3Batman - Let's be honest... the CEO would only piss on him to put out a a fire if it somehow profited the CEO. Otherwise, he'd just let him burn and make his profit selling the burnt remains as fertilizer.
TheHumanSpider2 - 7/15/2023, 9:30 AM
@Origame - Literally defending the multi-billion dollar corporation.

Th3Batman - 7/15/2023, 9:36 AM
@TheHumanSpider2 - There are so many people like this, too many in fact. These individuals only wake up when the boot is on their neck, by that time it's often too late.
TempleRod - 7/15/2023, 9:39 AM
@Origame - No, I am totally aware that you enjoy the role of 'antagonizer' or "Hot Taker".
I see that.

But you're also the Party Pet. You support establishment to such an exaggerated degree, You bend over, You run here,
You run there.
Try to look cute.
You make blatant food poses.

It all leaves me with a distaste in my mouth. I argue with many people here.
But none leaves me feeling so annoyed or maybe exasperated as when I talk to you.

[frick] me, I guess.
FrenchSauce - 7/15/2023, 10:15 AM
@Origame - You know you've got nothing because you totally sidestepped what they just said. Thousands of people sustain a career in acting through background roles until they manage to be discovered or just break into bigger roles. You're defending something that would force many of those people to drop out of the profession entirely, which would diminish the prospective talent pool significantly. In doing this the studios aren't even being greedy, they're being shortsighted and incredibly stupid by looking at short-term gains over long-term.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 10:27 AM
@TheHumanSpider2 - yes, because billion dollar corporations are always wrong by default πŸ™„

It's funny how, when talking about the quality of the movies these multi billion dollar movies, you guys will consistently defend it. Yet now it's unthinkable to defend them.

Whatever makes you right in the moment.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 10:32 AM
@TempleRod - 1) ...no. I just have my own opinions that often go against others.

You're often on the other ends of debates here, so you're in no position to criticize people on this matter.

2) yes, I do that so often. Like how I regularly call their projects garbage πŸ™„

3) maybe if you'd actually argue my points instead of saying I'm wrong because I'm siding with a corporation here? Idk, just trying to have a reasonable discussion.

And yes, bad faith arguments instead of countering my points gets a f@#$ you from me.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 10:38 AM
@FrenchSauce - ...exactly. I never said they were right for this point, but saying no is an easy solution.

It's a new precedence with this technology. And of course the studios are gonna think of what they can do to take advantage of it. But they can't just take these things from you without permission. You can say no. And if enough people say no, namely big names like the ones in the union, then they'll have to think of another solution.

Certainly doesn't require a strike (which is a more extreme method to what I'm describing), or giving threats.
FrenchSauce - 7/15/2023, 10:45 AM
@Origame - It does require a strike or they wouldn't be striking. They would have reached an agreement. You're not very good at this playing Devil's Advocate thing, are you? I think you're one of those people who confuses contrarianism with intelligence. The point is to create a firm line now so they don't try to take the piss further down the line, ambiguity or haziness allows for loopholes to be exploited and in doing so, tens of thousands of people's livelihoods would be at risk.

Incidentally; "if enough people say no", you do realize they can keep asking until they find enough people to say yes? Or try to throw the net out wider and wider until they do? If standards aren't firmly in place, corporations will run roughshod over them. And often they'll do that even if they are.

Stop wasting time speaking on things you know nothing about.
Origame - 7/15/2023, 11:12 AM
@FrenchSauce - 1) sigh. The fact they are exercising their legal right to strike doesn't mean that's the only reasonable measure. Just like you can have a frivolous lawsuit so too can you have a frivolous strike. People can be idiots. Shocking, I know.

2) by that same logic, you don't know any offer they made to them. But for the writers strike, the writers asked for a 5% pay increase and the studios agreed to 4%. How's that not reasonable? Oh, but they didn't agree. Must mean it's totally the best choice to strike πŸ™„

3) I have been playing devil's advocate. You aren't, by immediately siding with them because they're the ones on strike.

4) and if they did try to take it further, you read the contract and make a decision like an adult. Why is this hard?

5) not if they're big names like Ryan Reynolds and scarlet Johansson, who are participating in the strike anyway. They aren't gonna risk losing those names.

6) "stop wasting time speaking on things you know nothing about" says the guy who tried to say striking was the only option because that's what they did πŸ™„
1 2 3 4 5 6

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder