"Why the WGA snubbed 'Inglourious Basterds' and 'A Single Man'"

Patrick Goldstein weighs in on a seeming controversy:

Since "Inglourious' " Quentin Tarantino isn't a member of the WGA and his film wasn't made under the guild's minimum basic agreement, his film isn't eligible. Likewise with "A Single Man," which was written by Tom Ford, who is not a WGA member. (Nor is Joe Penhall, who adapted "The Road.")

That is correct - none of those three films are eligible for WGA awards. Goldstein's opinion:

The WGA, which prides itself on its inclusiveness in so many areas, should open its doors to non-members at awards season. It would be the kind of magnanimous gesture that might serve as a reminder that the WGA rewards great writing, not just great writing that happened to pass muster because it came from a film that was made under a guild-sponsored collective bargaining agreement.

In a perfect world, maybe. But the WGA does not exist in anything near a perfect world. First, while it may seem a "magnanimous gesture" by Goldstein, from most WGA members' perspective, I suspect, it would be a slap in the face for Guild members to vote for a non-signatory movie. Second, if a non-signatory film could win a WGA award, that would give producers even less impetus to make guild-sanctioned movies.

The Guild has had a longstanding policy to give awards to screenplays written by WGA members. So this 'issue' is not about the quality of a script, either guild or non-guild. It's about the fact that the WGA has to fight at every single front just to hold the line against a wave of losses in contractual negotiations and studio / network policies toward writers.

Perhaps if the AMPTP started offering some "magnanimous gestures" to the WGA, such as a reasonable fee structure for the gobs of money the studios and networks are making on Web content written by WGA members, then perhaps the Guild might be in a more magnanimous mood in the future.