Luhrman loses Crowe

Another pothole and a tough journey for director Baz Luhrman , who’s lost the services of leading man Russell Crowe in a forthcoming Australian period epic that reportedly still has Nicole Kidman on-board in the female lead role. I was intrigued when I first read about Luhrman’s stated intention to shoot the film’s big scenes in the organic, old-fashioned Lawrence of Arabia way, with a minimal use of CGI. Variety‘s Michael Fleming is reporting that Heath Ledger has “passed” as Crowe’s replacement, despite a recent N.Y. Post report saying he’s in.

54 thoughts on “Luhrman loses Crowe

  1. Stephanie on said:

    It’s just as well. I’m turned off by Russell Crowe, the person. He comes across as an arrogant ass. I don’t care how great his acting is, I just don’t want to see anything he’s in. I feel for Luhrman, though. First his Alexander picture and now this. I would have loved to have seen what he would have done with the Alexander story.

  2. This is the second film that Russell Crowe has hyped to the point of filmgoers’ ears bleeding, only for the movies to start having problems with the suggested blame lying solely at his feet. Someone should tell Crowe that filmmaking is a case of collaboration, he can’t keep second-guessing writers, directors simply because he is a great actor. Funny, the movies he vocally supports before they go into production seem to collapse while those he just signs on to do without much fanfare enter into production swimmingly, maybe he should stop “trying” to save the Australian fim industry and just act.
    I hope Baz is still able to get this going but this is the second movie that Kidman has stuck with him to do and doesn’t look to be happening, if no one can say anything about Kidman, she sure is loyal.

  3. For many of us who live in Australia, we see a completely different side of Russell Crowe. From his dry humour in interviews to his wonderful generousity with large charities and smaller, more personal projects like building a swimming pool for the school of a tiny town, he certainly is not the person that the media frequently portray him as. He was thoroughly committed to this project and really promoted it all over the place, so what changed? Perhaps it’s the “agenda” of the Murdoch owned Fox and New York papers who “suggested” to Baz that they find a cheaper and more compliant actor instead of one who is rigourous in his choice of quality material. I have friends in the film industry over here and the people who will be hurt by this are the support staff — the crew and techs of all kinds. Our movie making biz is struggling and these types of cancellations have a definite trickle down effect. Making the perhaps tempestuous but infinitely talented Mr. Crowe the villain in this matter is unwarranted and unhelpful. The reason he “hyped” the movie (and the previous one that failed to come to fruition) is that he truly wants to see our industry bounce back over here. And he puts his money where his mouth is by actually LIVING here instead of in New York or Los Angeles. We certainly can’t say the same thing about Nicole Kidman or Cate Blanchette or Hugh Jackman or 98% of the other well known Australian actors, can we?

  4. I am very sorry to hear that Russell Crowe, probably the greatest actor ever, won´t be in this film. Everything, the actors, director, the king of story, the setting, appealed to me. We don´t , and won´t probably know the real reasons, and I find it very unfair when some people begin to blame Russell Crowe for something like this.

  5. In my opinion, Russell Crowe has an excellent track record at picking his projects, so I respect and trust his choices. If he had ‘differences’ with Fox about the script, I’m certain he had very good reasons. I wish other actors were more concerned about the final product and less concerned about simply pocketing the paycheck.
    I’m not at all sure this film will ever be made. The budget has escalated to the $135-150m range and I do not see Fox ever providing that kind of money for an Aus-centric film. Baz is terrific but he’s not a mainstream director who rakes in megabucks for his films.
    With this film Fox and Baz have had disagreements about location filming, which has greatly increased the budget. Fox wants the majority of the film shot at the studio, not in the outback where they will have to build an entire town. Fox also recently pulled the plug on ‘Used Guys’, which was to star Jim Carrey and Ben Stiller, due to financial concerns. Many recent articles point to the studios wanting to tighten their belts and change some aspects of film financing in regards to paychecks of highly paid actors/directors; if not necessarily lowering the salaries, at least making them take fewer back end points and/or waiting until the studio has made it’s money back on the picture before getting paid those points.

  6. Wow, Jeffrey – did you get linked to by a Crowe fansite?
    Um…”probably the greatest actor ever”? I’m guessing these are not the comments of HE’s normal readership. Thanks for the…er, useful contribution to the dialogue, folks.

  7. I am a disappointed fan of both Russell Crowe and Nicole Kidman. It would have been awesome to finally get to see these two talented people together on the big screen in the Baz epic. However, I won’t sink to the level of some to begin bashing Russell Crowe, yet again, for his choice to remove himself from this film. Let’s get real people, are we so arrogant to assume that we know the whole story? I for one am delighted everytime he graces the big screen with his presance/talent. Hollywood constantly puts out garbage at every turn with no-talented, truly arrogant actors/actresses. Russell has proven himself and proven how talented he is on more than one occasion and the intensity of his performances are always a breath of fresh air and will get my vote everytime. Even if the films he is in are not up to standard, he always gives 110%, and for that this fan is grateful for his willingness to go the distance to truly entertain the audience.

  8. For those who love to blame Russell Crowe for just being alive I say this: Have they honestly compared Russell’s entire body of work with ANY actor out there today. If they did they would realize that he does not tolerate fools or inadequate scripts. He is not a paycheck actor who does 4-6 films a year…how about another Ocean’s 11, Batman, Superman, X-man or cartoon? I suppose the 16-21 yr olds need their fix until they mature enough to appreciate the feeling of awe at having seen a magnificant movie like Cinderella Man. Which, by the way, was ignored by the Academy – who wonders why fewer and fewer people believe that their voting system rewards the ‘best’. Count me in with the fellow that said he would pay to see Russell Crowe drink a beer. cheers

  9. Australia is the country that cracks the most cruel jokes on Crowe. Most people do NOT respect him over there. He’s just a big joke to them. I think Luhrman realised that after Russell’s 34th demand to change the script to make his role look better to the audience.
    However, that lazy Cate Blanchett tries to fight racism in Australia in the meanwhile with the “wave of respect”. Where was Russell back then? Having fun at Cronulla beach? Or torturing the australian continent with his “music” again?
    Good man Crowe? In some deluded fangurl minds maybe, not in reality though.

  10. Somehow it feels to me that the movie got cheated by letting Russell go, for whatever reason. The studios should know that by now. I’m sure Baz and Nicole do, but I can’t speak for either of them and hope that in the future they all can collaborate on something, or even that Russell can be re-cast in this role. Maybe it’ll come back to him. But would Russell even consider it, now that it’s gone down this way? I know that he’s said he’d love to work with both of them. He does have high standards, but he doesn’t hold anyone up to anything he wouldn’t himself try harder to attain. That’s just the way he works; anything to make the best product possible. He’s an artist, folks! Get used to it! And yes, he’s driven. Wouldn’t you want to do the best job you can do? I myself wouldn’t want to work in something that I didn’t believe in whole-heartedly. Baz turns out wonderful films and I love what he’s done in the past. I’m sure that he’ll do a lovely film. I wish that he, Nicole and Russell CAN all do this film, with the studio just letting them do their jobs and butting out. In the end, they’ll be amazed at what comes out.

  11. If there is one thing Russell Crowe has besides his enormous talent is GREAT TASTE in choosing his films! Obviously, changes have come about because the “money men” think only in $’s and not in artistic achievement. It is certainly the “Studio’s” loss, as well as Baz’s and ours, the public who really value quality work over mindless “summer fluff”.

  12. Fox’s agenda is to make a good film. According to Variety, they are proceeding without Crowe.
    Crowe’s agenda is to “honor himself” at the cost the film, as evidenced by the collapse of Eucalyptus and his being booted out of the Luhrmann film.
    For an Oscar winning actor/millionaire, Crowe’s philanthropic activity is minimal. Many Aussie actors maintain homes in both the US and Australia, and find time to participate in many worthy causes on both continents. Hugh Jackman has raised over $1mil for AIDS research in the US, along with his many charitable activities in OZ. Cate Blanchette sponsors a children’s helpline in Australia, has made sizeable donations to environmental charities in the US, and has participated in a fundraising stage production in London.
    Crowe dropped a paltry $100 grand for that pool, leaving another $300,000 unfinanced, and the pool still unfinished. He also purchased a traffic sign for his hometown. Wow. Compare that with Ms Kidman’s support of a Sydney children’s hospital, a children’s theater, her work with breast cancer and UNIFEM, and you find Crowe sorely lacking in the charitable donations department.
    Russell Crowe doesn’t tolerate fools?? He is the biggest fool of all.

  13. Regardless of what you may think of Russell Crowe personally, he is a great actor who puts his all and a little extra into every movie he makes and I really doubt he wants to rewrite his part bigger…geez! I don’t know what happened but am just sorry it has gone this way. It would have been a wonderful Australian movie if the script had stayed the same as the original. But hey, it all comes down to money and studios just don’t want to spend that much.It’s all about cutting back……….look what happened to The Alamo.
    It’s hardly fair to put all the blame on Russell Crowe as we don’t really know the real facts.

  14. I dont get it.. How does Russell Crowe come off as an arrogant ass?? He’s funny on talk shows, and in his interviews in print and on radio he seems very personable. I know he gets a bad rap, but unless its coming FROM a movie set Ive always been confused by the reputation. Doesnt seem to jibe. Even after the phone-thing he seemed humbled and very contrite. Great actor. I dont even think his music deserves to get as slammed as it does.

  15. Why are some ASSUMING that the fact that Mr. Crowe is no longer onboard the Australian epic is a sure sign that this is a result of his arrogance? Why do people defame the man when the facts aren’t known as yet. I would sooner believe the explanation given by Crowe or by Baz Luhrman than anything that might come out of the studios. In my estimation the studio pimps are the arrogant ones with no taste, morals or integrity. It’s time more actors were more selective in taking on roles. We might have less garbage on film. But of course with most others, unlike with Crowe, it’s the bottom line that matters. Why else would they feel the need to turn out four or five losers a year? Remember QUALITY – NOT QUANTITY”? Let’s tatoo that on 90% of hollywood’s heads! Give the man a break!

  16. Why are some ASSUMING that the fact that Mr. Crowe is no longer onboard the Australian epic is a sure sign that this is a result of his arrogance? Why do people defame the man when the facts aren’t known as yet. I would sooner believe the explanation given by Crowe or by Baz Luhrman than anything that might come out of the studios. In my estimation the studio pimps are the arrogant ones with no taste, morals or integrity. It’s time more actors were more selective in taking on roles. We might have less garbage on film. But of course with most others, unlike with Crowe, it’s the bottom line that matters. Why else would they feel the need to turn out four or five losers a year? Remember ” QUALITY – NOT QUANTITY”? Let’s tatoo that on 90% of hollywood’s heads! Give Russell Crowe a break! He’s well overdue one by the media!

  17. Why are some ASSUMING that the fact that Mr. Crowe is no longer onboard the Australian epic is a sure sign that this is a result of his arrogance? Why do people defame the man when the facts aren’t known as yet. I would sooner believe the explanation given by Crowe or by Baz Luhrman than anything that might come out of the studios. In my estimation the studio pimps are the arrogant ones with no taste, morals or integrity. It’s time more actors were more selective in taking on roles. We might have less garbage on film. But of course with most others, unlike with Crowe, it’s the bottom line that matters. Why else would they feel the need to turn out four or five losers a year? Remember ” QUALITY – NOT QUANTITY”? Let’s tatoo that on 90% of hollywood’s heads! Give Russell Crowe a break! He’s well overdue one by the media!

  18. I am disapointed that RUSSELL CROWE isn’t making the Baz movie it sounded like it would be great but I am sure RUSSELL CROWE had a good reason.Murdock being involved would be reason enough to be leary of it. RUSSELL crowe is the greatest actor around.

  19. I would just like to say that, judging from some of the above distasteful postings, Russell Crowe remains somebody who a lot of people need to focus their hostility upon. Therefore, they automatically blame him for this current situation as well as other prediciments that have arisen in the past. That’s unfortunate, not for Mr. Crowe, but for them.
    If this film proceeds without this great actor, it will be it’s loss, not Russell Crowe’s. He’s a great human being and a great actor who will, no doubt, go on to other things.

  20. For PrincessPat’s info, Crowe’s charitable works were the subject of a mention in the Australian Parliament’s Hansard report at http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/HansArt.nsf/0/16701b8cb413de27ca256d5e004025ae?OpenDocument
    It includes the following:
    “Of late, Russell has been supportive of the Ulong Ex-Services Club, which tragically lost its clubhouse by fire a few weeks ago. I thank the Government for allowing the club to transfer its licence to the local town hall and village green in order for it to continue trading. The club is the only focal point for residents of the town. Russell has paid for the establishment of a community scheme called Heart Start in the isolated towns of Glenreagh and Coranba. Under that scheme local people can be telephoned when someone has a heart problem or other serious medical emergency. Local community members are trained to lend assistance until such time as trained medical help arrives by way of ambulance or doctor.”
    He has also donated equipment to the local Police Boys’ Club.
    It’s always helpful to remember that not all charitable efforts are announced publicly.

  21. “Wow, Jeffrey ? did you get linked to by a Crowe fansite?”
    The answer is a resounding ‘YES’ to that question. Most of those names there actually are from Crowe forum chats and they excuse rewrite or justify anything and everything he does when it can be perceived negatively. Many of them decide among themselves to come here and do battle.
    Russell Crowe has become too big for his britches it seems, and if he is the cause for trouble on this project and on the failed Eucalyptus project then I’m glad if the studio put him in his rightly place instead of letting him throw his weight around as if he thought he were king of the hill.

  22. Mmmmm – most of the newspaper reports which seem to be setting Crowe up for whatever happened, seem to have originated with the Murdoch owned press; by pure coincidence, Fox studios, which is producing Luhrmann’s film, is also owned by Murdoch (Variety, as ever, is far more even handed). But I’m sure those two facts are completely unrelated…
    Of course, he could be totally to blame, but I can’t help wondering why they are so keen to make sure that everyone thinks that. Makes me wonder what they’re hiding behind the smokescreen…
    Just to establish things off the bat, I’d better admit that I am a huge fan of Russell Crowe, the actor, as that seems to be as heinous a sin as being Russell Crowe himself in some quarters and some people may simply want to dimiss any opinions contained in this message now…
    I have to admit to being immensely curious as to what happened, but I guess we’ll never know the facts (unless, that is, we’re happy to allow Murdoch’s empire to decide truths for us). I think the film could have been wonderful – Luhrmann has a distinctive vision; Crowe is a superb actor. But the budget is hair raisingly high and Luhrmann is a niche director with, so far, a limited market. So the film is a huge risk, whoever’s in it – and it’s not entirely sad that someone else will now be shouldering that risk…

  23. Maybe Crowe has spent too much time playing with his band TOFART, and actually believes he has more talent outside of acting.
    I heard he couldn’t even fill a venue in New York City, his band is so bad.
    Don’t quit the day job, Crowe. That is if you have one left after all your blunderings. I thought he was lucky to be in a Bas Luhrman filn, and now he’s out because he can’t get his way?
    Very arrogant.

  24. If this is all because of bad Murdoch press out to get Russell then Crowe’s camp or the Baz camp could come out and set it straight because the stories don’t look good either way. It’s easy enough to do. Yet they haven’t and the stories sit and gather strength. But isn’t it a big stretch to assume all of this is just bad Murdoc press?

  25. I don’t know why neither the Luhrmann or Crowe camp have commented. It could be because the story is in essence true. It could be because Fox is still financing Luhrmann’s film and he just wants to move on with it.
    The fallout from this is not pleasant, no matter which way you look at it…and I think the spectre of a cancelled project must be hanging in the air: current studio vocal support notwithstanding.
    It’s simply an observation that the articles going out of their way to paint Crowe as causing difficulties – which he may well have done! – all originate with the Murdoch press. Whereas any other press, which is not simply copy and pasting the original NY Post article, is far more even handed and sees it as industry fallout.
    It may well come down the studios wanting to rein in the powers of top stars, as has recently been widely reported.

  26. I’m glad Russell isn’t going to waste his time on this project. Russ is a Renaissance man. He can write a script, chose the cast (with himself as the lead, of course), direct and produce. Plus, he can write such tender, heart-felt songs that his masterpiece would not be complete without him writing the musical score and original accompanying songs. I envision a movie about the tumultuous love affair between a man and his pet kangaroo entitled Brokeback Outback and the Ordinary Fear of Marsupials (aka. BOOFOM). I hope he reads this message.

  27. The reason for the withdrawal of Russell from Baz’s movie is not something anyone outside the situation knows about. There’s a reason for that. It’s none of our business. So speculation on the subject is a waste of time and inappropriate.
    I find it interesting that the people who bash Russell Crowe so vehemently are most often people who have never met the man. Those who know him personally from his private life or professionally express that they think very highly of him. He is professional and expects more of himself than anyone else. He’s a perfectionist when it comes to his craft, whether it’s acting or his music. He’s constantly striving to improve his talents and give the audience a performance worthy of them spending their hard-earned money. If he were as egotistical as others here have said, he would think he’s already perfect.
    As for his charitable works, those listed in the post above are not all he’s done. MANY more contributions are made anonymously. (ok, if it’s anonymously how do I know? Because two of his close friends told me in person.)
    His singing- I’ve talked to many people who went to his concerts out of curiosity to see the “Gladiator”. Not one time did I hear them say that they didn’t like the music or his performance. They did say they were surprised the it was not just good, but wonderful. Russell is the first to admit he’s not the world’s greatest singer but the music is important to him. Expressing deeply personal experiences and feelings through songs, in front of hundreds of people takes a lot of courage, not ego. Courage.
    If it’s not to your liking, so???? If you don’t like a particular type of music, does that mean it’s no good? How about Opera? How about Cantonese? How about rap? Do you like ALL types of music? Why do you feel the need to insult certain styles of music and those who love to it?
    Russell Crowe is just a man trying to do the best job he can in the career he’s chosen. The bigger “star” he’s considered, the bigger target some people seem to think is on his back.
    I happen to think he’s an extremely talented, hardworking man with a great deal of courage and a very caring heart. A lot of men could stand to follow his example.

  28. Why all the comments about the stories coming from publications owned by Murdoch? He owns a lot of stuff. He’s a billionaire.
    If there is such a negative attitude re: Crowe, and some sort of a smear campaign, why would they keep trying him to do movies for Fox projects? Is this some vast conspiracy against Russell Crowe? No.
    I followed this link from a Crowe fansite, after commenting that people who feel the need to defend/slag him at more than one venue obviously have way too much time on their hands. Why am I posting here? Because I’m bored and I want to get on the nerves of everyone.

  29. Proof above that people are flocking here from negative fan sites to bash Crowe fans. Things don’t get much weirder than that.
    I hate to tell you all this, but pointing out that people posting positively here are fans of Russell Crowe is not going to come as any great revelation to anyone. On the scale of insightful and useful comments, it’s a bit like pointing out that a black and white, four legged animal with udders is a Fresian cow.

  30. I didn’t get the link from a negative fan site. I’m not bashing Russell at all. His defenders are a never-ending source of amusement to me.

  31. I appreciate that the rules relating to libel are different in the US but I have been truly astonished by the content of many of the posts on this site. Freedom of speech is not and never has been a license to commit character assassination.
    Whether you are a Russell Crowe fan or not the man is entitled to a fair crack of the whip, and if he did not make excessive or indeed any demands regarding script charges no-one, whomever they may be, has the right to accuse him of doing so. If he had it is worth pointing out that Russell Crowe is always the first to admit when he has made his feelings known regarding a film. The fact that he has said nothing on this occasion should speak for itself.
    There does seem to be an ongoing and widespread assumption amongst the general public, largely fostered by the tone of media and particularly tabloid coverage, that once someone has become famous they lose all humanity. Why do the ‘Crowe bashers’ on this site seem to believe that Russell Crowe has no feelings which can be hurt? The famous, and especially those involved with the Arts, have not suddenly become robots whose emotions are switched on and off as and when needed, and some of the people who have posted on this site should ask themselves how they would feel if some of these comments had been written about them for the whole world to see.
    I had thought that we had left the public stocks behind us centuries ago, and for good reason.

  32. His defenders are a never-ending source of amusement to me.
    As are those who are obsessed with his fans – obsession by proxy – to the rest of us.

  33. Hark! –
    it’s the sound of the world’s tiniest violin playing Hearts & Flowers for Russell Crowe’s sad plight. o woe is him!

  34. Geez folks. If you hate his bloody guts that much DON’T watch his movies and for Pete’s sake plug your ears when he sings and then get some therepy for your problem. He’s going to be around for a very long time. One movie in the bag, making one right now and another this summer.
    Now PLEASE go and hide somewhere, because he ian’t leaving.
    Sorry JW this is getting down right silly.

  35. Carol – I wouldn’t worry.
    If anyone beyond those who frequent boards dedicated to Crowe (one way or another) still has the stamina to be reading this, they must be either laughing their backsides off, or studying for a psychology degree.
    Being a fan automatically implies some level of bias and belief that the person you are a fan of has some worthwhile qualities (even if they are only professional ones). So I can’t imagine fans ‘defending’ Crowe, after this latest (rather minor in the scale of things) to-do is going to surprise anyone.
    The fact that ‘anti-fans’ need to follow them here is facsinating.
    I mean, what’s the mission? To protect the world from the delusions of fans of Russell Crowe. Phew – thank goodness you’re there!

  36. A little history lesson, copied from articles in the Australian press re: Eucalyptus.
    An actor who played one of the 14 roles read that day said Crowe was “charged up” and “charming” when the read-through began at 4pm, announcing to the gathering, “It’s just a read-through … we are going to have fun; this is Australia, not Hollywood.” He then motioned toward a table stocked with wine, beer and other drinks.
    Moorhouse did eventually speak, saying she was very excited everyone was there, adding, “I love you all.”
    Although both sides have cited the script as the biggest area of contention, there was no hint at the start, despite the actors having to replace 26 pages of the 112-page “sixth draft” script with revised blue pages.
    “Jocelyn had done rewrites when Nicole Kidman had come on board. I thought she had done it very skilfully,” said the actor. “And at the reading I must say I could see Nicole making it work beautifully.”
    These comments support Hugo Weaving’s contention – aired on Monday – that the script was strong.
    “Crowe’s reading started equally well but gradually through the reading … his voice started to get quieter and quieter,” said the actor.
    “It appeared that Russell was either doing an incredibly intimate reading for the actor right next to him, or had lost confidence.
    “He would occasionally change the odd word and skip a bit here or there.”
    Things deteriorated quickly at the following rehearsals, involving just the principals, and further script changes were suggested.
    Crowe [was] regularly introducing his own script changes. Complicating the situation was Crowe’s position as executive producer, which gives him a level of control over the screenplay, which Moorhouse co-wrote.
    Stories of a head-on collision between Moorhouse, who has a reputation of being easy to get along with, and Crowe, who doesn’t, have been circulating for the past week.
    “Creative disagreements” and “personality differences” are the polite terms being used. But it seems there was an irreconcilable breakdown between Crowe and Moorhouse, and, according to the most extreme stories emanating from the set, between Crowe and almost everybody else.
    To bring this back to the script side of things: it appears that the disagreement between Moorhouse and Crowe concerned the dialogue. Crowe wanted changes, Moorhouse did not.
    It says something that within four days of the first full read-through, Moorhouse felt sufficiently bullied, abused and distanced from a project that she had laboured over for years to tender her resignation.
    There were meetings between Crowe and Moorhouse and other parties. Reports of heated exchanges between Crowe and Moorhouse filtered out. Crowe allegedly made pointed references to the love scene from Proof, reigniting the tensions of 14 years earlier. (during the making of Proof. Moorhouse reprimanded Crowe for his behaviour during a love scene, after the actress involved complained that the then unknown Crowe was forceful to the point she was frightened.)
    A strongly worded email was sent to Moorhouse, but copied to people at Fox. An insider insists it included the line, “I’m a Ferrari, you’re just a VW”.”
    “He (Crowe) was constantly wanting Jocelyn to rewrite things and change things and Jocelyn consistently tried to meet every-thing that he wanted,” a Eucalyptus actor tells The Age. “I know that she did a number of rewrites.”
    By this account, Crowe eventually fronted up with his own version of the script and announced “this is the new script”.
    “Kidman looked pale, paler than she always looks, because she loves Jocelyn’s script,” the actor says. “That’s what she wants to do and I gathered that she said to Jocelyn that ‘you have got to stop him’.”
    The studio supported Crowe, Kidman left in an agitated state saying she would not return (though it appears she did return) and Moorhouse attempted to tender her resignation. It was not accepted.
    Hugo Weaving says regarding the officially cited reasons for halting production:
    “That was a very dishonest position to take”,Weaving said. “I regard this script as an absolute gem. They should have come clean and said Russell needed some changes made to certain parts of the script.”
    Actor Jack Thompson told The Telegraph he agreed with Weaving about the quality of the script and said the rehearsals with Kidman and Moorhouse in recent weeks had gone well, with no requests for script changes to his knowledge.

  37. Which newspaper was that report in? It’s full of insiders and stories, but has very few direct quotes from named people.
    On the other hand – it’s true that Weaving did seem pretty pissed off with Crowe.
    You know, the report could have a lot of truth in it; it could have a lot of bullshit and gossip; it could be half and half. I’m sure RC would have to shoulder some of the blame in any reckoning on Eucalyptus – but I’m equally sure that it takes more than one cook to spoil the broth.
    The link between that situation and this one is certainly fortuitous – and may well be similar if one knew any, never mind all of the facts – for those who wish to suggest that RC was in the wrong.
    And yet, he himself talked about a long period of procrastination and seeking clarification before signing on for Master And Commander. Ron Howard said he did the same thing before signing on for A Beautiful Mind.
    It’s the way he has worked for a long time and it doesn’t seem to have caused such problems before – even with Fox, who produced M&C.
    Anyway – here’s hoping that Luhrmann gets his film made and it’s a stunner; and that Crowe signs on for a new project soon – because he’s got a good few years of not making enough films to make up for IMO!

  38. I just happened upon this and the only reason I bothered to continue reading it is seeing how many negative responses there are, not about Russell Crowe or the original topic, but directly to those who have posted postive remarks about him. I find it interesting that people have actually taken the time to come back here over and over to insult other people they don’t even know, about something that has no impact on their lives at all. Perhaps it’s all they have to give themselves a reason to feel superior. ???

  39. Well, it appears that Russell was told by Fox and/or Baz that his services were no longer desired on the film. The Post story, stating that they removed him from the film, and not, as some Crowe fans were implying, that he had departed the film of his own choosing, was spot on. The Post article was also right about Heath Ledger being offered the role. They didn’t say that Heath had turned it down and accepted another role, but other than that, the ‘gossip rag’ Post Page 6 had the story right.
    Interestingly enough, Heath has been cast in “Dirt Music”, another role that Crowe fans have been salivating over for at least a year.

  40. I’m so disappointed to hear that Crowe was dumped from this project. He did receive the second draft of the script on May 12th, and according to him, he sent his “OK” to the execs of FOX and Baz on May 17th. But then the Fox reps said it was too late for him and he was out of the picture. As far as I’m concerned, the script renewal was done by the request of Baz, not Russell. If I’m not mistaken, he has travelled to England a month ago to do the script re-writing with some guy there.
    Why the studio moved on so quickly and did not want to give him a chance to read the revised script? Yeah, I know about that “deal” with the FOX studio execs that he had to give prior approval of the script without making any demands of changing it (according to Russell’s statement to a media in Oz). It was only five days from the time he received it! The pre-production will begin in October, so why does it have to be in such a rush? This is all too suspicious.

  41. With a nic like Vindicated it sounds like you’re looking for some type of revenge, and more than likely you’ve never met the man and know nothing about him other than what you read in the Post or Enquirer. How very sad!
    Mr. Crowe is one of the most talented actors in the world, I don’t think we need worry about his future in filmmaking.

  42. No doubt ardent Russell Crowe fans tending to be female, overweight, and about 50 years old thereabouts, will see this as another poor widdle Russell episode wronged again by everyone else. Pooh-pooh on stupid Fox and that Luhrmann guy. What do THEY know anyway?
    It’s prolly simple–Russell liked the first script but maybe had certain concerns when talk came up of changing it. Baz and team changed the script knowing it wasn’t what Russell wanted and had perhaps been vocal about, so they put out the order for him to sign the waiver and let him see what he called the second draft. He refused or dragged his feet and thought he could give imput on the script anyway. Maybe Fox figured on trouble from that point knowing what happened with Eucalyptus and that his imput would be of the demanding nature, and gave him the boot. I don’t see that the Russell ardents are asking why exactly is it that Fox and Luhrmann were so terse and immediate about not wanting him for the film.

  43. No doubt ardent Russell Crowe fans tending to be female, overweight, and about 50 years old thereabouts, will see this as another poor widdle Russell episode wronged again by everyone else. Pooh-pooh on stupid Fox and that Luhrmann guy. What do THEY know anyway?

    It’s prolly simple–Russell liked the first script but maybe had certain concerns when talk came up of changing it. Baz and team changed the script knowing it wasn’t what Russell wanted and had perhaps been vocal about, so they put out the order for him to sign the waiver and let him see what he called the second draft. He refused or dragged his feet and thought he could give imput on the script anyway. Maybe Fox figured on trouble from that point knowing what happened with Eucalyptus and that his imput would be of the demanding nature, and gave him the boot. I don’t see that the Russell ardents are asking why exactly is it that Fox and Luhrmann were so terse and immediate about not wanting him for the film.

  44. Alas, I’m 30 odd and not overweight in the slightest: I am am female though, so you did get something right….
    Does this make the rest of your post – in relation to the fans; the rest seems as perfectly reasonable a possiblility as any other – bollocks as well?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>