Joaquin Phoenix QUITS Todd Haynes’ Gay Romance Movie, Just FIVE DAYS BEFORE FILMING

Couldn't get it up?

What the hell happened? Why can't they just recast? This sucks. I was looking forward to this movie.

Why do ALL gay themed movies with explicit sex scenes get canned? This fucking sucks! It's like we're doomed to be stuck with neutered Heartstopper-esque gay themed shows and movies forever. Ugh. This never would have happened if it was a lesbian movie.

Hell maybe they should cast an actual Gay in the lead. And there are plenty of out, B list actors who they could then make stars.

Didn't Joaquin also ditch Brokeback before shooting that too? What a fuck face. A movie like this is made for no money, I'm sure all their funding relied on him.

I'm available!

R3, I agree with your point, but also I don't think we're missing out on much by not getting explicit gay sex scenes involving Joaquin Phoenix in 2024.

And we do have Queer coming up with Daniel Craig, who is still in good shape and doesn't look terrifying.

The cost of: To be or not to be

Can't blame him.

Glad he listened to reason. If Julie hadn't told me to call him, it would have been disastrous.

This weirdo is going to get sued.

Hinged on Phoenix’s casting, the movie, produced by Killer Films and backed by sales agent MK2 Film, had already sold to international distributors ahead of production. Sources tell Variety the project is in peril, indicating that Phoenix’s role cannot be recast. The crew is now out of work, and stakeholders in the film still need to be paid. Losses could exceed seven figures.

He's nuttier than a fruitcake, what did they expect?

It just seems ridiculous that he can't be recast. Even if funding for the pic depended on his participation, surely the investors would be fine with another actor of equal caliber stepping in to play this role, especially given how much is riding on the project.

Isn’t no movie better than a Billy Porter movie?

I have no interest in seeing explicit sex scenes with Joaquin Phoenix, gay or straight

He turned down Brokeback because of the sex scenes.

Matt Bomer or Jonathan Bailey!

He must have been abused in that cult.

Joaquin is a method actor. Maybe nobody was willing to have explicit gay sex with him.

Killer Films is Todd's friend & collaborator Christine Vachon along with Pamela Koffler. They produced Past Lives, Carol, Dark Waters and May December. We got a glimpse and confirmation of Joaquin's mental illness during his Joker Oscar speech. What a shame that he is going to fuck over so many people but especially the crew.

It hasn't been canned. Joe Alwyn has taken over the role.

R19, great point!

Homophobia!

Today, Deadline reported that there were no plans to recast the role. Investors wanted Oscar winner Phoenix not Taylor Swifts's ex.

We'll see -- maybe you have inside information!

No worries. My Fendi is packed. Uber 3 min from LAX.

[quote] Haynes has mentioned that, while brainstorming the project, Phoenix kept pushing him and going “no, let’s go further with the sex.” Haynes confirmed this would be an NC-17 rated film. It’s obvious that, with this project, and based on their own comments, Haynes and Phoenix were trying to make a very provocative film here.

He gets last-minute cold-feet quite a bit:

[quote]This wouldn’t be the first time Phoenix has decided to exit a project at the very last minute — he did the same thing on “Joker” and “C’mon C’mon” before the filmmakers convinced him to come back— but Perez says the Haynes fiasco is “different.” Phoenix is dead serious about not coming back. Crews might be out of work soon if Phoenix doesn’t recommit.

R2 they can recast but they need someone who will be good for the role, have chemistry with the costar and be a name who can generate attention to the project. It’s an NC-17 film and those never do well.

R1 it’s a film not a porn. They can’t show hard dick in movies. It automatically becomes porn.

They can’t just “recast” because the investors only invested because it was him. They now lose all those investors with him dropping out

R3 = James Ivory

I don’t know who could replace him. Pedro Pascal, Oscar Isaac and Adam Driver couldn’t attract that much funding.

The only person who could attract financers is Leo and he is most likely not in shape and is still scarred by Total Eclipse.

File under "Joaquin being Joaquin"

[quote] Speculation among the crew is that Phoenix's exit had to do with the graphic nature of the film's sex scenes. But that theory is confusing to some sources, who reiterate that it was Phoenix who brought the project- and it's NC-17 concept- to Haynes in the first place.

[quote]"Basically it was just this wonderful, organic way to create the script," Haynes said. "And Joaquin was pushing it further into more dangerous territory, sexually."

Did the script call for full, unsimulated penetration?

He's hot. All is forgiven.

So the storyline is not worth anything without explicit sex? That doesn't seem like something you'd want to base a mainstream project on anyway.

R33 again, not a porno.

R35 it isn’t mainstream. It’s an indie. It isn’t studio backed. Hence them needing the investors.

The film is canned.

R31 Pedro is hella popular right now due to that show. It’s one of the reasons he isn’t “out out” yet. He is on his way to becoming A list.

They should have lined up another name.

Whoever agreed to the last minute out clause has a hand in putting all these people out of work.

R38 again, that is up to the investors. Pedro isn’t close to the same league as Phoenix. Please

R40 I never said that. I said he is a popular star in today entertainment world. Hugely popular and highly rated streaming series are the new blockbuster pictures.

So Joaquin brought the project to Todd, co-wrote the script, then bailed at the last minute? Something doesn't add up.

Okay…

FAG!

A REAL MAN like ME would have powered through.

I wonder how much he gets paid anyway?

does anyone remember the Family Guy bit where River Phoenix's death was lamented, and we were left with a tragic reminder of what might have been?

Cut to a pic of a bloated Joaquin.

Nicki's ass needs a lot more than an occasional dump/dick squat to be seen again.

It's a leaking bean bag pillow.

I really can't stand this freak. He'd have absolutely no career if it wasn't for his more talented and better looking brother, River. RIP.

According to Deadline, the production had been "in limbo" for the last 2 weeks after Phoenix stormed off the set. (No reason given.) Co-star Danny Rodriguez flew to Comic-Con to promote the new Captain America movie, not knowing whether production would resume. The producers had been trying to put it back together, to no avail.

If it was that public of a blow-up, I expect we'll be hearing a lot more about this shortly.

Some kind of last minute horrible conflict between Haynes and Phoenix.

My guess is that Phoenix was all in for strong sex scenes while the film was in the development/concept stage, but when they got on to the set and it was about to become reality, he freaked out. Which means hr didn't REALLY want to do those scenes; he just liked the idea of being provocative without actually having to follow through.

He learned the meaning of surprise anal!

What’s the movie actually about?

Had not heard anything about this project till now.

Joaquin probably has giant penis's chasing him in his dreams.

Isn't it Danny Ramirez, not Rodriguez, R47? He's the new Falcon in the next Captain America film. (Maybe get Sebastian Stan to replace Phoenix - he likes quirky roles).

You be the judge…would you do it for money?

R53 yes

Joaquin Phoenix is repulsive.

I’ve disliked him since Gladiator. But that was because he did such a good job being an unworthy asshole.

Did like him in The Joker movie.

I think he can be a phenomenal actor but this is really shitty and I hope every crew member sues him

Pretty good headline.

Article: Promise you this: No gay actor would ever pull out.

He's too old and honestly lost his looks years ago.

Is the movie about eldergays?

Tell Todd to give Hugh or Ryan a call.

[quote] He'd have absolutely no career if it wasn't for his more talented and better looking brother, River. RIP.

R46 While technically correct in the sense that Joaquin was cast on a sitcom his brother had been cast in first, your statement is demonstrably false in the sense that those parents were throwing all the kids headlong into the child actor pool, and it was inevitable that both Phoenix brothers would ended up in many acting roles throughout their mutual childhoods. And at this point Joaquin has given too many amazing performances in too many amazing films to step back and question his talent now. It's far too late. He's A-list, sugar. He just is.

Good riddance. There's plenty of gay porn in the world already. Sex in movies was pushing the envelope in 1970 (with Last Tango in Paris) - if Todd Haynes still thinks that's "edgy" in 2024, when you can find gay sex at practically every Pride parade (all right, I'm exaggerating), I'd say he's creatively bankrupt.

Current look.

He dropped in today to bring the the cosmetic dentist who does his teeth for the Joker a gift related to the move, and the doc put this photo on his IG.

I'm sure Jake Gyllenhaal would love to take on the role.

Yeah, nobody needed or wanted this movie. Todd does better with brittle, mixed-up frau protagonists.

Pussy move. He chickened out due to gay panic, despite edging the director for months.

There’s rumors that Ryan Reynolds has HIV from Hugh Jackman. Just thought you might want to know.

Wouldn’t this project have insurance covering losses from this sort of thing?

He’s going to get sued like Kim Basinger in “Helena’s Box”.

I meant “Boxing Helena”!

R70 tell us more!! We need good gossip around here.

R64 He’s had very few hit movies as an A-Lister. He’s only had like 4 or 5 movies make their money back in his 30 year career of leading roles.

There's a rumor that he quit not because he couldn't handle the gay scenes, but because the investors were impeding his vision by seeking a more market friendly R rating.

R64 Joaquin Phoenix is most certainly not A list.

R77 He kind of is based on “Joker”. How many actors win an Oscar for a billion dollar movie today? I’d say that’s A-List.

Replace him with Andrew Garfield.

Does this mean Joker 2 will be all about me?

(As if it wouldn't have been anyway!)

Well you definitely can't say he didn't have the balls for it, because....MY GOD!

From r54 AZNUDE link. He needs to see a doctor.

He looks like shit-good

He's gonna get his giant balls sued off.

R81 Those were prosthetic balls. This is from an article about the movie:

"Joaquin Phoenix kept the engorged prosthetic testicles seen on Beau in the bath and in that outlandish sex scene. Does he have them in a spot of honor? In a special trinkets box?"

Whatever they are, they are gross.

[quote] the investors were impeding his vision by seeking a more market friendly R rating.

And they wouldn't back down at word of his leaving?

Has the asshole said why he quit?

Producer Christine Vachon confirmed Phoenix's exit on Facebook.

"A version of this did happen," she began on Friday, Aug. 9. "It has been a nightmare."

"And PLEASE -- if you are tempted to finger wag or admonish us that "that's what you get for casting a straight actor" --DON'T," she continued. "This was HIS project that he brought to US-- and Killer's record on working with LGBTQ actors/crew/directors speaks for itself. (and for those of you who HAVE-- know that you are making a terrible situation even worse)."

Self centered twat.

Vachon's quote at R88 has total "I'm telling you now so that I don't have to tell you then" energy.

r90 Mkay

Vachon is a nasty old dyke and a hard bitten alkie.

Haynes announcing the explicit sex scenes to the world was a very stupid thing to do. It probably annoyed the fuck out of Phoenix. Did he have a signed contract?

They should get Mike Doyle. I'd like to see him in explicit sex scenes and I bet he would have no problems with them. But little name recognition value. He was honest to a fault and didn't have the career he should have. He was never in the closet. Well maybe he's happy with the career he has and having been open about it from the beginning. But he's in a major Hollywood film being directed by Clint Eastwood and he's the gay guy?

R77 Joaquin Phoenix is a bit of an antisocial misfit, but make no mistake - he's A-list. It's not just about having your own production company and raking in hundreds of millions of dollars on the back end like a Brad Pitt or an RDJ. It's about name-recognition and esteem, too. Joaquin's A-list status was cemented in 2005 when he got nommed for Best Actor for his star turn as Johnny Cash opposite Reece Witherspoon in "Walk the Line." But that wasn't his first nom.

Google "Is Joaquin Phoenix A-list?" and you will see countless articles and listicles referring to him as such. He's a BAFTA and Academy Award winner. He's been getting nominated for Oscar since his supporting role in 2001's blockbuster Gladiator.

Culturally, you cannot get a way from Joachin. He has been ubiquitous for decades. Directors clamor to work with him, and as such his resume includes films by Ridley Scott, Oliver Stone, Woody Allen, M. Night Shyamalan (multiple), Paul Thomas Anderson (multiple), Gus Van Sant (multiple), Ron Howard, Joel Schumacher, Spike Jonze, James Gray (multiple) and on and on.

*away

He's so hideous

Would I? Would I?

Hairlip! Hairlip!

*Harelip

Vachon might be a nasty old dyke and an alkie but she's got every reason to be furious. Producing movies in Hollywood is not for the faint of heart. I just re-read a few articles about Scott Rudin and it's amazing the free pass he got from the industry for so many years.

Just wondering how graphic the film will be. Nudity is one thing, but a dick in his mouth ON FILM is something else. I’m not surprised he’d be having second thoughts.

Again, if it's a good story, why does it need an NC-17 rating? Sounds like a stunt. Now a stunt gone bad.

There are ways to film sex scenes to make them erotic, passionate, charged, rough, etc. Just push the limit of an R-rating. This project might do well with an intimacy coordinator or even a talented porn director like Noel Alejandro.

You’d probably need an actor like Karl Glusman to do a gay movie that’s sexually explicit.

What I would give for Karl Glusman to do an explicit gay movie - a sequel to Love, but about the character going gay

I'm free!

Danny Ramirez is totally hot - what a shame this won't get made. Though good to know he was up for it.

Are Kirk Cameron, Scott Baio, or Kevin Sorbo available?

My schedule is free!

To recoup even a little bit of the money, Haynes should at the very least sell the screenplay to Raging Stallion Studios, which can then let their award-winning director, Tony Dimarco, cast and bring this project to the screen, properly.

Todd Haynes will be replaced with Bryan Singer

I don’t know which of these two, Joaquin or Todd, is more disheveled and unattractive. Ugh! Clean yourselves up. Christ.

Darren Criss and Eddie Redmayne are champing at the bit.

....

I would love to know what really happened here. It's not like there had been rumors of Joachin acting like a total primadonna and sabotaging productions prior to this. What the fuck could have happened that hadn't already been glaringly wrong prior to the five days' before filming? What could have made it untenable to continue? The fucking pushback from investors, the ones who deliberately chose to invest in a sex-drenched gay romance? They gave pushback to the exact thing they chose to invest in? Help, me lord.

[quote]He's too old and honestly lost his looks years ago.

When did he have them in the first place? He's looked like the inbred hillbilly version of Wes Bentley as long as I can remember.

Are actors allowed to leave a film five days before filming? Isn’t there a contract?

I'm team Haynes/Vachon all the way -- they've both given us a lot of wonderful, boundary-pushing stuff. And the digs about their personal appearances are DL at its worst.

[quote]And the digs about their personal appearances are DL at its worst.

They are great artists.

But they do look like shit.

It's a choice, and they made it.

All the gay actors out there, & they give the lead to a hetero nut job...

Shame on you, Miss Haynes.

R118 It was the hetero nut job's idea to do this to begin with.

[quote] Haynes told Variety in September 2023 that the film started with “fragments of ideas” from Phoenix, which the director formulated into “an actual narrative” before bringing Raymond on board.

They didn't "give" the lead to anyone. Joaquin brought this project to THEM. It was his idea.

This could be Armie Hammer's big comeback!

Is Mark Wahlberg available?

Is it a role that could be reworked for Kristy McNichol? She’s fairly butch.

Why not just get Jonathan Bailey on the phone?

Paul Mescal also seems game for anything, and he's a hotter star than Joaquin Phoenix.

R20 I remember that inane Oscar speech — some fun fact about calves being taken from their mothers — no milk for you .

I speculate he pulled out because of his conscious or unconscious homophobia .

It was all well and good to write this script , volunteer to star in it, pull it all together — then “ what the fuck ??? They’re going to film me in sexually explicit scenes with a guy ??? No, just no. I don’t give a fuck “

[quote] I speculate he pulled out because of his conscious or unconscious homophobia .

Translation: I pull comments out of my ass

" It's not like there had been rumors of Joachin acting like a total primadonna and sabotaging productions prior to this"

Actually quite the opposite - I read yesterday (but of course I can't find the link now) that said he's walked off several projects at the last minute in one of these fits before, but they have always been able to convince him to come back. But it's not working this time.

Jonathan Bailey or Matt Bomer probably wouldn't work because they don't have the box office heft that Phoenix (allegedly) has. If investors tied their money to Phoenix it's probably because it came with an expected or calculated ROI that Bailey and Bomer cannot deliver. So investors probably expected a bigger name for the recast.

I wish Brad Pitt would step in …

Seriously, no one wanted to see Joaquin in explicit gay sex scenes anyway. Count this as a blessing.

[Quote] He's nuttier than a fruitcake,

AND?

R127

It’s much easier for you to express disagreement with a vicious attack on me, rather than state logical reasons for your point of view .

Why are you so triggered by the concept of internal homophobia? Gee, I just can’t imagine why. Get help.

I'd be happy to take the part!

R133, I'm not R127, but I can understand his frustration at your comment. It has been stated on here several times that Phoenix came to Haynes with the project. He's the one who originated it. He's the one who got it happening and helped put it together. So to state the idea that there is any homophobia on his part, external or internal, is rather unlikely and ridiculous.

If I was gonna speculate, it's that he took a good look at his 49 year old body in the mirror and realized he wasn't willing to do nude scenes with anybody. It's a regular body, a real body, but he's an actor and in between ego and insecurity, he must have realized he wasn't up to it.

Pre exsiting medical conditon. His harelip prohibits him from sucking cock.

For better or worse the asshole will always have a place in the studio/mainstream world but otherwise stick a fork in him he's done in the independent film world.

It’s not homophobia — Joaquin found the project and brought it to Haynes to begin with, and he’s a cowriter. But he has mental health issues and has always been unpredictable and impulsive. They should have never started any multimillion dollar project that is contingent on him, and him alone being cast. He’s always a risk.

It is perfectly possible to be gay-friendly in theory but not able to carry things through in practice. If he can get himself mentally into a place where he can play the Joker, but not a gay man, then that seems an issue.

Keep fucking that chicken, R140

Agree with R136. Middle aged men who go nude (Harvey Keitel, Michael Douglas) have been ridiculed for showing too much body. My question is how could he abandon a film he created and still survive in Hollywood. What a jerk.

Matt Damon kept calling and whispering "Fag".

Bingo ^

R133 R140 correctly said that one can be “ all in” in theory — creating project , casting, the screenplay, the setting , the everything …

But when it comes to the nitty gritty…. Parading his not so great body on the screen fucking another guy —— it CHANGES THE DYNAMICS.

Simply put, he’s NOT ok with it!!!!!!! You don’t want to accept there is internalized homophobia in all of us !!!!!?

Why would he do this and not follow through ???? Because he can . He has all the fame and money possible so if he tosses a project , screws the entire film production …..

Well it’s just a big fuck you to the industry !!!! And he has always loved that.

Tiny meat humongous potatoes

[quote] Simply put, he’s NOT ok with it!!!!!!!

How the fuck do you know? Did he tell you? You're so desperate to have your theory be true that you're ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Shut up already.

r145!!!!!!!?????????

Joaquin was obviously talked out of the role by....

r146 that is scary junk ! no wonder he didn't want to do the sex

Curious, but when they were casting the other lead male actor was there no auditioning or screen-testing for the physical, sexual chemistry between the two men? If the film was going to hinge on "going further with the sex" then wouldn't they want some kind of preview to see if the pair could actually bring it and that they were making the right decision for the vision they had? And no, I'm not pointing a finger at Ramirez, just thinking that if the problem became the sex scenes, then I would think any discomfort Phoenix had over it, should have been determined during this process.

We'd have our answer if only Gary hadn't been dead for twenty-five years.

[quote] It’s much easier for you to express disagreement with a vicious attack on me

My goodness! Where should we send the ambulance?!

Who knew there was a crazy Joaquin Phoenix troll on the site!

You guys fucking crack me up ….. no perspective , no tolerance to consider someone else’s point of view …. You’re right ! Right ! And I’m wrong !!!

Why the fuck are you so triggered ???? Because you know deep down inside of that pea size brain that wakes you up at 3 in the morning …… maybe all of us have known or should have known the devastating effects of internalized homophobia …… like being staying in the closet

You all are way too transparent …. So keep slinging all your shit at the one person who dares to disagree or present another point of view ?????

You’re getting close to magatland mania Just stay in your own fucking lane and put me on ignore ….

It was considered, rebutted and dismissed, R155.

And your need to pin it on homophobia is kind of repellant.

Why hasn’t Joaquin issued a statement? Too uppity?

I'm sure he has a mental health issue to get through these days, possibly in a secluded, uh, wellness institution. And his publicist has probably been ordered by legal to shut the fuck up until things have been sorted out.

r155 ????? !!!!!!!

R158 He wasn't in seclusion when he dropped in to see his dentist buddy last Friday bearing gifts. Ref: R66

[quote]It is perfectly possible to be gay-friendly in theory but not able to carry things through in practice. If he can get himself mentally into a place where he can play the Joker, but not a gay man, then that seems an issue.

"Get himself mentally into a place where he can play the Joker?" Like that would be difficult for Phoenix? I'm pretty sure that's as easy as finding some greasepaint makeup and green hair dye.

What a Twat!

Would this have been superior to his role as "Joker"?

r163 How would we know?

I'm confused. Why are we assuming the "gay factor" had anything to do with him leaving the production?

A far more believable theory is that he and Haynes argued/fought/didn't get along and Phoenix decided it wasn't worth the effort.

He saw Ramirez naked and knew he could compete with THAT!

He was creepily good in Joker but I'm disappointed he's doing another one.

R165 Agreed. This was his idea.

And they’ve said he’s done this before so it’s not like this is unique.

He’s just crazy.

[quote] I'm confused. Why are we assuming the "gay factor" had anything to do with him leaving the production?

Because some asshole troll on here is pushing an agenda.

Yeah, it's just one weirdo

Maybe people should be talking about this line in the original report:

[quote] Haynes assembled a crew in Mexico for the untitled film backed by sales agent MK2 Films. Sales in territories worldwide began ahead of the European Film Market in February. The project fell apart in early July.

Two words: Pete Buttigieg.

He seems to be seeking the limelight around now.

This is why straight actors should not play gay parts.

The latest is apparently Joaquin wanted to make the sex scenes too realistic and Todd didn't want to push it as far so they clashed.

He should have quit before filming that NAPOLEAN debacle. Just awful.

If r174 is right, that's super weird - like Joaquin was making the movie as an excuse to have actual gay sex. I wonder where his wife Rooney Mara stands on that. Honestly I could see it being her idea haha

R174 sure the word was not "realistic". Perhaps you mean more GRAPHIC or revealing? Realistic sex can be dull and also required little nudity on screen.

Realistic-He wanted cum shots.

[quote]R165 A far more believable theory is that he and Haynes argued/fought/didn't get along and Phoenix decided it wasn't worth the effort.

Joaquin may have been #MeToo-ed

The damnable little whore at the center of the firestorm…. who [italic]couldn’t hold his man ! !

cum shots would be more GRAPHIC but you do you.

[quote] The latest is apparently Joaquin wanted to make the sex scenes too realistic and Todd didn't want to push it as far so they clashed.

I wondered if that explanation was actually out there on the internets somewhere, and I found a kind of blind reference to it on Twitter. It was actually posted a few minutes ago.

But warning, unsourced.

^^ And remember that this completely contradicts what the crew people thought the problem was: the gay sex was going too far. This new item indicates the problem was the gay sex didn't go far enough.

^^This is a little hard to believe. Joaquin is a Hollywood veteran who knows all of the nuances of making movies. Insisting that the movie sex is more realistic, graphic or pornographic is like flipping the kill switch on the project. I think he changed his mind and didn't want to discuss Todd's project during the Joker press tour. He's all in for the Joker sequel. He has always presented as difficult and cagey. Less of a fan of Rooney now.

Mara Rooney had a fan?

I stormed out when Todd said no to my bukkake scene!

I smell a big fat lawsuit.

Yeah, all those investors are not going to be all “oh, he changed his mind? No worries!”

He left all of the crew hanging with no job and no pay, since the investors will now pull out. Asshole. He's the one who brought the project to Haynes in the 1st place, and co-wrote the script. NOW he has issues with the plot or theme?

I hope he gets sued up the wazoo. If a female/actress pulled this kind of stunt under the same circumstances, they'd be out of the business. Can you imagine the fallout if Kate Winslet, Halle Berry or Anne Hathaway pulled this?

Does Danny get a say (in that new theory)? Maybe he doesn't want to have real sex with the old fart.

r189 I completely agree with you. What an utter twat and how completely unprofessional. So immature to throw a tantrum because you disagree with something and walk out on all those people and the production, leaving everyone high and dry.

I really hope this type of behavior gets him blacklisted, because it's complete and utter bullshit.

If he has an X-rated project he wants to do, next time take it to Noel Alejandro.

Is Christine Vachon a lesbian?

Pretty sure Christina Vachon is THE lesbian -- the lesbian from which all other lesbians were created r193

I think Halle Berry did just pull that, for Ryan Murphy's "All's Fair" Kim Kardashian project. Only thing is, they had no problem replacing her.

[quote]Haynes confirmed this would be an NC-17 rated film.

Is it more than what they did on Queer As Folk?

r176 Are you 12 years old?

Can films get insurance for their pre production periods, in case things like this happen?

r198 I googled that myself because I was also curious

There was a blind item about this that said Joaquin didn't care if he was sued - he has f you money now.

Well, hope Hollywood turns its back on him so he can go enjoy his fuck you money and we can enjoy not seeing his "I'm an artist", entitled attitude.

The man is a neurotic basket case. Always has been. Here he is talking about his experience filming Gladiator. Apparently, he was so sick that he couldn't even speak his lines and needed several more takes than the rest of the cast. The director had to essentially coax a performance out of him. I love Joaquin as an actor, and I think he’s a really good one, but it seems like too much work to get him to that point. He's the male version of Faye Dunaway.

[quote] Here he is talking about his experience filming Gladiator....The director had to essentially coax a performance out of him.

That director was Ridley Scott. And it happened again when they filmed "Napoleon." From Variety, here's Ridley Scott talking about Joaquin:

[quote] “He’ll come in, and you’re fucking two weeks’ out, and he’ll say, ‘I don’t know what to do,’” Scott said about Phoenix. “I’ll say, ‘What?!’ ‘I don’t know what to do.’ Oh God. I said, ‘Come in, sit down.’ We sat for 10 days, all day, talking scene by scene. In a sense, we rehearsed. Absolutely detail by detail.”

This man sounds insufferable, and like it's torturous to work with him.

Why have they enabled him? I don't think he's THAT great of an actor. He was very good in Walk the Line though.

Someone told him that he was fugly.

It was reported he got $20 million upfront for this upcoming "Joker" movie, said to be an accepted condition due to the financial state of Warner Bros.

"said to be an accepted condition due to the financial state of Warner Bros"

and in English that means?

Honestly, I'm okay with not seeing Joaquin naked again. I'm one of the few who sat through Beau Is Afraid and there's no mystery. Haynees should hire an actual gay actor who isn't afraid of getting erotic.

R200, they probably can’t sue him personally. Movie companies contract with a corporation the represents the actor, not the actor himself. (Fans of film lawsuits may remember the Kim Basinger ”Boxing Helena” case).

On the acting front, who else besides Danny Ramirez was going to appear? He's the only one listed for the film at IMDb. Was this basically going to be a two-man film with some locals from Guadalajara appearing? I could see Haynes guaranteeing Ramirez a role in some other future project.

R207 at the time J2 was greenlit Warner had just been merged with David Zaslav’s Discovery and nobody was quite sure what his plans were for the studio with people believing that he was intending to strip and sell the studio (which is happening but more slowly than some anticipated). Creators were reluctant to make films at Warner in the event the studio was sold in two years (greenlit to theatrical release takes two years on average) so Warner had to meet a very high fixed compensation threshold in order to get anything made.

Notoriously, Channing Tatum and Ryan Reynolds got $20 million upfront for this piece of shit. Their normal compensation would have been 10 to 13 million with backend.

Now the producers are talking lawsuits:

[quote] Todd Haynes' Producers Discussing Potential Lawsuit Against Joaquin Phoenix

[quote] Puck’s Matt Belloni is being told that the film’s producers are meeting today to discuss options, including suing Phoenix. Apparently, there’s a very good breach of contract case here, at least to recoup the money already invested in the project, to say nothing of the cast and crew’s lost wages.

[quote] There’s also been dialogue with WME and lawyer David Weber, and a possibility has arisen for Phoenix to pay a portion of the lost financing. If Phoenix doesn’t pay all of these people back then he risks having seriously bad optics shadowing him throughout the fall as he promotes “Joker: Folie a Deux.”

[quote] As far as European money goes, Belloni states that French production company MK2, plus a group of equity investors, “together have sunk a few million dollars into this movie, and they’d very much like that back now.” To not get sued, Phoenix would have to likely pay all of these people, and the tab is absolutely in the millions. It’s a disastrous situation for the actor, and all because, if rumors are true, he did not want to perform explicit gay sex scenes in the movie.

[quote] Apparently, the always unpredictable Phoenix does this a lot. He’s had cold feet before, bowing out of “Joker” and Mike Mills’ “C’mon C’mon”, before finally being convinced to come back to those respective productions. No such luck occurred on Haynes’ film.

R211

Whoof…Ms. Channing’s hairline is retreating like rebels at Appomattox.

R77 He certainly is.

Lawyers are going to the only ones making money from this shit show.

The supporting cast, set-builders and others will get bupkis.

Phoenix may have fuck-you money, but post-Joker, bitch will have to self-finance any future projects.

Miss Joaquin = [bold]CANCELLED!

Phoenix will probably forced to settle in the low seven figures

[quote] Phoenix will probably forced to settle in the low seven figures

Which is way more money than the film would have ever grossed, so it sounds like everyone should shut up and take the win.

[italic]LOCK ‘IM UP!

Yes, fuck him up.

His insane tantrum that tanked a major film HE BROUGHT onboard, for whatever reason, and leaving the project left so many people in the lurch.

You are NOT Napoleon! You are a peon more than you realize.

Joaquin Phoenix’s Last-Minute Exit Sparks “Huge Amount of Outrage” Among Hollywood Producers:

Thanks for posting that article again, r221. 🙄

I found a good article about the situation:

I heard producers are outraged!

Halle Berrys project wasn’t within days of going into production.

They should recast his part with Colin Farrell. Also isn’t Todd Haynes one of the better directors to work with?

Napoleon was a bomb and other than Joker his film resume has been smaller films for the last 15 or so years. Is he no longer insurable now for the types of movies he does?

Maybe he thought it was a Todd Solondz movie?

R211 thank you for the explanation.

As the link at R212 says, this is just what he does. Some actors have had serious careers despite being incredibly unreliable. Threatening him with “seriously bad optics” at this point just seems funny, because by now everyone knows he’s crazy.

R19 Makes you wonder.

Recall the blind item on that subject appearing in Radar Online for his acting in "Walk the Line" back in ca. 2005.

[quote] Acclaimed Actor Blows His Lines: Which young actor gives a true Method performance in a recent film? The star, who has a reputation for devoting himself to roles with scary intensity, got into character with the help of regular cocaine infusions, according to a source on the set. In several cases, he was actually high on-camera for scenes in which he was supposed to be strung out. The directors, far from getting concerned over the actor's habits, encouraged them—whether to keep him happy or to enhance the "authenticity" of his performance, the source couldn't say.

Did they replace him or just cancel the film?

R230 Reports said there are no plans to replace him and that the project is dead.

On that subject, if Haynes wants to do the film sometime out in the future, he might have to reformulate scenes to give it an 'R' rating.

How many A-List actors want to do NC-17, especially gay sex NC-17?

Joaquin has pulled this stunt before.

Did Todd Haynes actually think this was going to happen?

I still wanna know why is showing graphic sex so absolutely necessary to this story?

Because it’s in the title r234 - Call me by your Anus. Actors must present.

This whole situation could have easily been avoided.

As soon as Phoenix approached Haynes with the notion of taking the mansex further, Haynes should have simply contacted one of the audition studios like GayCastings, Raw Castings, Gay Wire, or Next Door Male, etc. and had them test Joaquin out to see what he is and isn't capable of doing in front of a camera with a guy he's never been intimate with before.

Can they sue him for the entire cost of the movie and the huge box office receipts it would have made? I know that straight men like nothing more than seeing a guy give another guy a rim job.

[quote] Sex in movies was pushing the envelope in 1970 (with Last Tango in Paris)

How the fuck old are you, grandpa R65? You still think what they showed then was "pushing the envelope"?

You are the definition of a pearl clutcher! And by the way, that movie came out in 1973.

The not-so-blind-item reads:

[quote] This A list actor is an Oscar winner/nominee, he doesn't care if he gets sued for bailing on a movie. He has f you money now.

His net worth is estimated to be between $80 - 110 million. The cost of the film has been reported to be "low seven figures." He can probably throw $3 or 4 million at them, easy. If there are moves for legal action, I would guess his agent and business manager would advise him to settle to avoid more negative PR and legal fees, since he'd more than likely lose in court anyway. - jmho

Joaquin is a method actor. Surely he got some real life experience to prepare.

Speaking about preparation, were producers (or the insurance company) going to require the actors get tested for STD's before shooting began?