maveholic31
Civilian
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
This is in the new Vanity Fair magazine with a article titled "Heath Ledger tried to sabotage his performance in "The Dark Knight"
... I smell HUGE bulls*it, and very low class of VFair to make claims after the guy is long gone. Anyways, here's the lowdown.
http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=14071
A Vanity Fair article decided to take a closer look at Heath Ledger, including the reason for his decision to play The Joker in last year's "The Dark Knight."
According to Ledger's agent Steven Alexander and cinematographer/friend Nicola Pecorini, the actor had a pay-or-play deal on "Knight," which means that he would be compensated no matter how terrible he ends up being. This gave Ledger the freedom to do what he wanted with The Joker.
But the real decision to take the role was because of the film's unusually long shoot, which would give Ledger an excuse to turn down other offers. And since he was guaranteed to collect a paycheck, Ledger was hoping that his performance would be so "far-out" that he would end up being fired and become the beneficiary of a lengthy, paid vacation.
His agent added that while Ledger wanted to get paid, he didn't want to be part of the massive blockbuster that "The Dark Knight" turned out to be. "[Ledger] was always hesitant to be in a summer blockbuster, with the dolls and action figures and everything else that comes with one of those movies," Alexander explained. "He was afraid it would define him and limit his choices."
Source: Vanity Fair
... I smell HUGE bulls*it, and very low class of VFair to make claims after the guy is long gone. Anyways, here's the lowdown.
http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=14071
A Vanity Fair article decided to take a closer look at Heath Ledger, including the reason for his decision to play The Joker in last year's "The Dark Knight."
According to Ledger's agent Steven Alexander and cinematographer/friend Nicola Pecorini, the actor had a pay-or-play deal on "Knight," which means that he would be compensated no matter how terrible he ends up being. This gave Ledger the freedom to do what he wanted with The Joker.
But the real decision to take the role was because of the film's unusually long shoot, which would give Ledger an excuse to turn down other offers. And since he was guaranteed to collect a paycheck, Ledger was hoping that his performance would be so "far-out" that he would end up being fired and become the beneficiary of a lengthy, paid vacation.
His agent added that while Ledger wanted to get paid, he didn't want to be part of the massive blockbuster that "The Dark Knight" turned out to be. "[Ledger] was always hesitant to be in a summer blockbuster, with the dolls and action figures and everything else that comes with one of those movies," Alexander explained. "He was afraid it would define him and limit his choices."
Source: Vanity Fair