Damn I didn't get my seven figures fee

  • Thread starter Thread starter arildno
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Randy Quaid's claims regarding his fee for his role in "Brokeback Mountain" and his subsequent lawsuit against the producers. Participants explore the implications of his decision to waive his usual fee and the motivations behind his actions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that Randy Quaid claims he was misled by the producers regarding the movie's financial prospects, leading him to waive his usual seven-figure fee.
  • Another participant questions the rationale behind Quaid's participation in the film if he believed it would not be profitable.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that Quaid's legal action may indicate a curmudgeonly nature, drawing parallels to his character in the film.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the motivations behind Quaid's lawsuit, with one humorously suggesting it could be a "scam" to gain more money.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on Quaid's motivations and the logic of his actions, indicating that there is no consensus on the matter.

Contextual Notes

Participants do not delve into the legal specifics of the lawsuit or the details of Quaid's contract, leaving those aspects unresolved.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in celebrity legal disputes, film industry practices, or discussions about actor motivations may find this thread relevant.

arildno
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
10,165
Reaction score
138
It isn't actually me who didn't get my usual seven figures fee, but the actor Randy Quaid, who played the sour Joe Aguirre in "Brokeback Mountain".
According to him, the producers of Brokeback lied to him, and said there was no prospect that the movie would make any money, and for that reason, he chose to waive his usual fee.

Now, he's suing the company, it seems:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/03/24/people.randyquaid.ap/index.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Why should I be concerned? Is he going to give me some? My birthday is coming up, soon.
 
. . .plays a tough sheep rancher . . .claims he was fleeced for his work in the movie.

:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:

Good scam.

Waive your seven-figure fee, then sue for eight.
 
This begs the question...if he believed the movie wouldn't make any money, why did he agree to participate in the project?
 
Moonbear said:
This begs the question...if he believed the movie wouldn't make any money, why did he agree to participate in the project?
Agreed, it is sort of strange.
For example:
If he were enthused about the project, and wanted to be in on that even if it meant he would be paid less than usual, then it seems unlikely he would have dragged this into court.

My bet is he's just as much a curmudgeon as Joe Aguirre ever was, and that that's basically his "reason" for doing this.
 

Similar threads

Meet a Mentor: Mark44 - Get to Know Your Wonderful Mentors
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 241)
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K