Actor sues for payment in 'Brokeback'

[Tiggeroshii]

LOS ANGELES - Randy Quaid, who plays a tough sheep rancher in "Brokeback Mountain," claims he was fleeced for his work in the movie.

Quaid filed a lawsuit Thursday in Los Angeles County Superior Court alleging the producers got him to work cheap by falsely claiming the movie was "a low-budget, art house film, with no prospect of making any money."

"Yet from day one, defendants fully intended that the film would not be made on a low budget, would be given a worldwide release, and would be supported as the studio picture it always was secretly intended to be," the lawsuit says.

Quaid agreed to waive his usual seven-figure fee and share of gross profits in favor of a much smaller payment, the suit claims, although it doesn't say how much he was paid.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060324/ap_en_mo/brokeback_lawsuit

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shain from kane]

2. I hope he doesn't give in an inch. n/t

[Caoimhe]

3. It's called a contract

Can't believe he could have read the script, look at the chosen actors, the screenwriter and the director and thought it would be a dive. Randy wasn't even that great in the movie. His part was very minor.

[mattclearing]

5. His part was minor but I thought he did a great job.

That said, whatever his usual fee is, it would have been too much for his bit role.

[Seabiscuit]

6. That's not the point.

Randy's saying he was deceived, and entered into the contract he did as a result of that deception. Deceit voids any such contract.

[LostinVA]

7. And, SAG rules are very strict regarding budgets, etc.

He probably has a very legit suit.

[Montauk6]

18. Should he also be suing his agent? That is, if he has/had one.

[MADem]

4. He shoulda worked for room, board, spending money and a percentage

of the gross. Oh, well!!!

[PBass]

8. He was great in the movie.

He didn't seem to be an actor... can't get any better than that.

[rocktivity]

10. DING DING DING! MADem, you're our grand prize winner!

He shoulda worked for room, board, spending money and a percentage of the gross...

Waive your performance fees if you must, but NEVER give up your percentage--it's like dropping your seventh veil. Why? Because YOU NEVER KNOW what a movie will do. Who would have dreamed that Fargo, Moonstruck, Eraserhead or even Farenheit 9/11 would be anything other than low-budget "cult" films with "no prospect of making any money"?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Lautremont]

9. Well, they weren't deceiving him, really.

It was a fairly low-budget and comparatively arty film which one might be excused for assuming wouldn't make much money.

[stopbush]

11. I'm on Quaid's side here.

The producers deceived him. There are a million unemployed actors they could have hired. They hired Quaid because they knew
his past work was right for the role. The knew that his participation in past box office hits like Independence Day would
enhance their film's profile with the public.

The SAG guidelines are clear. Quiad waived his usual fee and rights because he was lied to by the producers. Since the terms he
agreed to in the contract were based on lies, the contract is null and void.

They'll have to pay up.

[Swede]

12. It's called fraud.

When one party lies to another party,hoping for financial gain,fraud has been commited.

[MsUnderstood]

17. how can you be on his side with half the facts

You don't know what was said between Quaid's agent and the film negotiators-all you know is what Quaid said later on about the meeting.

Unless quaid was the first actor signed on, the director, other actors, writers should have given Quaid a sense of what the film could be.

Meanwhile, if it is a low budget artsy film then be smart and negotiate a piece of the fee.

Quaid shoulda had a smarter lawyer.

[Nailzberg]

13. I still cannot understand why he dropped points?

His lawsuit says his usual deal includes back-end, why would he drop that? Especially when you are working for under your rate.

Did Mr. Quaid or a representative on his behalf, sign a SAG low-budget contract? That's the only case I can see.

When I hear low budget, I don't equate that to mean the production is under a SAG low budget agreement. I think of shitty craft service. I know I'm not getting put up at the Plaza.

I find the portion of the lawsuit describing the elaborate "movie-laundering" scheme to be quite laughable. I don't think many people are engaging in schemes to have Randy Quaid appear in their movies. His star is pretty faded these days.

[shain from kane]

14. I didn't think he played the part of the actor that dropped his pants. n/t

[rocktivity]

16. Perhaps Randy should be suing his agent--if he used one.

Was he THAT desparate for a quick payday? Or was he THAT worried about being associated with a gay-themed film?

:shrug:
rocknation

[Pale Blue Dot]

15. Randy Quaid gets seven figures?

Why? He has never "carried" a hit film, and hasn't bit in one since "Independence Day" almost 10 years ago.

I'm really not sure about the merits of the case, but 7 figures seems way out of line.

[Montauk6]

19. Finnfan! Certainly you haven't forgotten that blockbuster "Pluto Nash"

:sarcasm: