MovieChat Forums > Kevin Spacey Discussion > Ridley Scott RECASTS Spacey with Plummer...

Ridley Scott RECASTS Spacey with Plummer and will RESHOOT All The Money in The World!!


Wow didn't even consider they'd do this
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/christopher-plummer-replace-kevin-spacey-all-money-world-1056450?utm_source=twitter

And its still on for December!.

reply


OMG...I don't think that's ever been DONE before (??)

He was probably thinking, "Well, my DIVINE performance in the upcoming movie will remind EVERYONE what I'm all ABOUT!" And now, he's like, "?!?!?!"

#ohsh!t

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5064647/Kevin-Spacey-replaced-Plummer-Getty-movie.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hollywood turns on Kevin Spacey: Disgraced actor is sensationally axed from Ridley Scott’s new $40 million blockbuster just SIX WEEKS before release as director orders an immediate reshoot with new star as J. Paul Getty


* The actor, 58, has been written out of the film in a bold move by director Ridley Scott in the wake of multiple sexual assault allegations
* The cast and crew have all agreed to re-shoot Spacey's scenes, and are said to be 'determined' to stick to the December 22 release date
* Sources close to the production claim the re-shoots are commencing immediately, with Plummer, 87, taking on the role of late oil tycoon J. Paul Getty
* It's said director Scott 'made the decision unilaterally and only notified Sony of his decision on late Wednesday afternoon'
* The move comes after the movie was pulled from the prestigious closing night slot of the AFI Festival this month, and had its awards campaign push halted

Kevin Spacey has been replaced by Christopher Plummer in All The Money In The World, just six weeks before the big budget movie's release date. The actor, 58, has been written out of the film in a bold move by director Ridley Scott in the wake of multiple sexual assault allegations. The cast and crew have all agreed to re-shoot Spacey's scenes, and are said to be 'determined' to stick to the December 22 release date, Deadline reports.

Sources close to the production claim the re-shoots are commencing immediately, with Plummer, 87, taking on the role of late oil tycoon J. Paul Getty. The Hollywood Reporter claims director Scott 'made the decision unilaterally and only notified Sony of his decision on late Wednesday afternoon'.

The publication also said Plummer was originally the first choice for the role, but studio executives wanted a bigger name, which is why Spacey came on board.

The move comes after the movie was pulled from the prestigious closing night slot of the AFI Festival this month, and had its awards campaign push halted. The re-shoot will be by no means an easy task, with Spacey transformed with the aid of prosthetics to portray the ultra-wealthy oil tycoon. The actor shot eight days and many of the movie's scenes feature just him.

It is not yet clear how Scott will bring about the swap at such short notice. One of the key problems facing the production crew will be visual effects, seeing as many of Spacey’s scenes were shot in different locations.

Set predominantly in Rome, Italy, in 1973, the movie details the story of Getty refusing to pay the $17 million ransom when his grandson was kidnapped at the age of 16, despite being the richest man in the world at the time.

Michelle Williams plays the part of Gail Harris, the mother of John Paul Getty III, while Mark Wahlberg plays ex-CIA agent Fletcher Chase. He argued that if he were to pay the ransom then his remaining 14 grandchildren could also be kidnapped for the same reason.

In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Academy Award winner Spacey gushed over the performance, saying: 'It was one of the most remarkable experiences that I’ve had as an actor.'
Spacey said he dove deep into research of Getty's life and realized the man wasn't exactly who the public perceived him to be.

The change in strategy comes amid new sexual assault allegations throughout Spacey's 11 years as artistic director of the Old Vic theater in London.

Spacey's behavior has come under the spotlight since Star Trek actor Anthony Rapp, 46, alleged Spacey made inappropriate sexual advances toward him in 1986, when he was 14.
Spacey responded by saying he doesn't remember the encounter but if he acted the way Rapp alleges, 'I owe him the sincerest apology for what would have been deeply inappropriate drunken behavior.' He also spoke publicly for the first time about being gay, which draw backlash from some observers as an attempt at deflection.

Since Rapp made his allegations, Spacey has been hit by at least 10 other claims.

reply

he is literally being erased from hollywood

reply

This is the most delicious scandal in ages, I can't believe how he is truly over.

reply

Delicious?

reply


Well, it is always delicious to see cranky crabcakes fall. Spacey's been unpopular in the industry for decades.

But now the chickens have come HOME to ROOST!
.

reply

Unpopular? he was beloved by the industry and the public.

reply

He is notoriously difficult to work with...a bully.

reply

how did he kept working then

reply

Because actors aren't hired because coworkers like them...any more than good lawyers or doctors are hired because they're nice people. The time it would matter would be if two performers are up against each other with equal status and equal salary demands...then they might care if one is nicer than the other. But film is FULL of people who are kind of detested. Jennifer Lopez was a nightmare but worked consistantly for a while, for instance. It doesn't mean anyone liked her. It's more about "Can we make money off this performer in this role, or not." Or if they're not a name actor, "Can we get the best value for our dollar." (I almost said "bang for our buck," but that sounds wrong!)

reply

this is not about being likeable, these people, and most in the workplace actually, are indulging in criminal activity,.

reply

This film look like shit anyways. Ridley Scott is a terrible director and this decision demonstrates that.

reply

I didn't consider that either..
I do hope they stop there and don't attempt to remove his name from all his films or remove his work from the public eye.

Weinstein, that appears to have been a much worse candidate fit for public shaming, is having his credits removed from all his tv and films. They are truly going to erase him.
I'm not sure that erasing history is the route to go with these sort of people. I have little doubt that HW was a nasty piece of work but isn't removing his former prestige and ability to ever work again...and hopefully obtain that neglected concern of so many; Due Process ..Is that not enough?.
Is erasing history changing it for the better or is it removing our ability to learn from our mistakes? And isn't it a slippery slope? There are a multitude of artists, past and present, that may not be particularly admirable individuals in various ways..Should we seek to erase them all?

reply


<< Is erasing history changing it for the better or is it removing our ability to learn from our mistakes? >>

Weinstein's not being erased from history...his name is being removed from commercial properties his image now devalues. And they are properties he does not own, personally. They belong to a company.

Everyone is still going to talk about him and know who he is.

In Spacey's case, that film cost 80+ million dollars to make, and that money's all at stake now. When it's our 80 million dollars we've invested, then we can decide the risks we're willing to take.
.

reply

That's what Hollywood was waiting for! A chance to remake classics like "The Usual Suspects", "LA Confidential", "Seven", "Midnight in the Garden...". Oh wait, wasn't this one his coming out?

reply

hmm I wonder if Scott is keen on getting an award for this film and figures Spacey will muck it up. I am curious if they will throw the scene as extras on the Blu Ray. It would be interesting to see the different performances.

reply


The movie was going to sink/stink badly with Spacey's name attached. This is a bold, unprecedented move to save it.

It also sends the message out there "You can be replaced....LITERALLY!"

reply

I heard on the news that Plummer will be shot on blue screen and digitally inserted into existing scenes.

reply

That would suck... They'll probably spend a ton on VFX to make it look decent... Doubt it would work well, even with Ridley Scott in charge...

reply

Probably cheeper to reshoot and recover your additional costs rather than have the movie get destroyed at the box office, or worse unreleased...

It's a business move. Lose entire budget or regroup the crew and reshoot... No brainer...

reply

Wow. I didn't think they'd go that far, I don't know how Spacey's career can survive this. It looks really really bad for him.

reply

Ridley Scott is a massive asshole. My girlfriends cousin did make up on Robin Hood and said he was right up his own arse type. Didn’t have time for the little people and spoke down to pretty much everyone. So him being stubborn enough to recast isn’t surprising, especially when you consider that he wanted Plummer in the first place but the studio forced spacey on him according to rumour.

reply