Gary Oldman pulls out of EP3

[ReaperFett]

Oldman Quits 'Star Wars' Sequel


Wild actor Gary Oldman has pulled out of the next Star Wars movie because he refuses to work overseas illegally. The Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban star had agreed to be the voice of evil Jedi knight killer General Grievous in Star Wars: Revenge Of The Sith, but quit the production because it was made outside the Screen Actor's Guild rules. Oldman's spokesman explains, "Gary was excited and looking forward to working on the film. The snag is that the movie is being made without members of the Screen Actor's Guild. It means Gary would have been working illegally overseas. Out of respect and solidarity with the other members, he could not and would not consider violating the rules of his union."
Meh, respect both ways for sticking to their guns.

[darth_mcbain]

Interesting - I never knew he was officially in to begin with, I always thought that was a rumor. I'm not too disappointed, I think it is almost certain that GG's voice will have some digital alteration to it, there probably wouldn't have been much of Oldman's voice recognizable underneath it anyway.

[JMK]

I'm not terribly disappointed either, but how was this made outside of the rules of the screen actor's guild? And why is he the first actor to pull out of it? Shouldn't there have been someone before him to pull the chute?

[Figrin D'an]

To be honest, whoever did the voicing for Grievous in the Clone Wars cartoons did a pretty good job, IMO. As long as his voice is done well, it doesn't matter who does it.

[JMK]

I loved the voice from the cartoon, I wouldn't be pissed at all if they just went ahead and used that one.

[darth_mcbain]

Yeah, the cartoon voice was done well - I think they could make it fit in the movie.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well they said on the official site it was going to be somebody else a bigger name. Oldman was their first choice. I first read that on the Mugglenet website (no clue how they were the first to break the story). I am not sure about the screen actors guild thing. I know Lucas isn't a member of the MPAA but I didn't think it made it a non-union movie but who knows. My guess is they will go after another big name maybe somebody like Jermey Irons.

[Dasquian Belargic]

:o Jeremy Irons would be awesome. He has such a sinister voice.

[General Tohmahawk]

why was this voice acting illegal? That seems screwed up to me.

[Jedi Master Carr]

No clue honestly. I wonder if there is a misunderstanding there. I would think it is just Oldman doesn't have time between working on Batman Begins and Goblet of Fire.

[Syren Wyssholt]

Originally posted by General Tohmahawk
why was this voice acting illegal? That seems screwed up to me.


The Actor's Guild is like an actor's union. Since Lucas withdrew from the guild many, many years ago and isn't really part of hollywood, any actor in the guild who works for Lucas is breaking "union" rules. There must be some form of stipulations in the contracts and such (I'm not sure if those who have done the films in the past were members of the guild or not). stating what the actor can and cannot do as well as what Lucas can and cannot do with the actor.

For those who didn't see it a few nights ago, there was a special on one of the satellite stations (A & E or something like that) that told much about Lucas, SW, the Guild, etc. I believe it will be included on one of the DVD's available with the new release of the trilogy on the 21st.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Still odd, can't believe Portman and Jackson aren't members of the union? I can believe the rest. Of course Jackson might not give a crap about the union.

[Syren Wyssholt]

Seems odd, I agree. Though, when you consider the fact that the Screen Actor's Guild could also prevent actors from taking roles that they might otherwise want to do (thus hindering income, gaining status, getting known, etc) it's not that odd. I'm not sure how the whole thing works exactly, but I think SAG might also be a determining factor in how much an actor is paid per film. Since Lucas doesn't hire actors that are part of the guild (or so I'm assuming from what I heard on that special the other night), he isn't required to pay them what might be demanded. Plus, he doesn't have to pay dues to the SAG, the actors don't have to pay dues to the SAG, and those can be expensive.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Star Wars: Empire of Dreams is airing on A&E and it is included on the DVD OT set coming out on Tuesday. We watched it last week - it's a GREAT documentary of the making of Star Wars.

[Syren Wyssholt]

That was the show, thanks Lil :) For the life of me I couldn't recall the title. I agree it was a great documentary. I'm looking forward to watching it again when we get the DVD.

[imported_QuiGonJ]

The reason it's "illegal" is because George led the way for runaway productions in movie-making, exploiting non-union labor hungry for a buck. I love Star Wars, but I still think George deserves a kick in the rump for that. He's not talking the actors, but the crews.

There are reasons for unions in film-making, not only for safety (union members get training and certifications; they don't usually have like the 13 deaths of the non-union set builders on Titanic), but also because Reaganomics was wrong. Rich people, once handed more money, tend to keep it and work the system for more, while paying less and less to everyone else on the sole principle they can get away with it. And yes, all-union productions such as say, the Spiderman and Harry Potter films, still make boatloads of money for their producers.

Anyway, the point of that diatribe is, Gary Oldman was saying he wanted no part of "the New World Order", and made a point to try to protect the livelihoods of the people whose names aren't on the marquee.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Funny thing is he pulled out over the credits thing originally. What is funny is nobody is putting credits in front of films anymore. I don't see them kicking Spielberg out of the union :p Honestly they should let Lucas back in now if that was his main beef.

[Marcus Telcontar]

There are reasons for unions in film-making, not only for safety (union members get training and certifications; they don't usually have like the 13 deaths of the non-union set builders on Titanic)

No. The unions are scared of runaway productions because places like Australia - which I might add has some tough as hell OH&S laws that protect workers rights and safety - offer a better quality, less BS prone and above all, cheaper deal.

Better and cheaper? DEAL!


exploiting non-union labor hungry for a buck

Ever consider that non-union labour actually might deliver better than a union workforce?



Rich people, once handed more money, tend to keep it and work the system for more, while paying less and less to everyone else on the sole principle they can get away with it.

(Snip)

And yes, all-union productions such as say, the Spiderman and Harry Potter films, still make boatloads of money for their producers

Nice troll straight out of Karl Marx. However, in biting on it, that's the priniple of a properly working business - reduce costs and make profit. That is exactly the job a CEO of a company is supposed to do. Call it greed or return on investment or makign a buck to live. All the same.

Except, instead of say HP outsourcing a call desk to India where the quality of service is lousy, there would be a good debate that moving a production to another country may in fact deliver a superior film and even make the investors more money, not only with decreased costs, but with chances of increased returns in revenue due to better quality - and to make money is the reason Hollywood exists. There is no other reason.

Which is also transversly a reason hy the Aust film industry is up the crap creek in a barbed wire canoe. Lack of quality film people want to see. That's nto the fault of the crews, mind. The crews themselves are by the main excellent. The directors and producers are lousy.

[darth_mcbain]

Well, from AICN, they are saying that John Rhys-Davies might be in for Grievous. I think he'd be good - although I still think that no matter who they get, their voice will be digitally altered - so maybe it doesn't even matter that much.

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=18421

[Syren Wyssholt]

Originally posted by QuiGonJ
The reason it's "illegal" is because George led the way for runaway productions in movie-making, exploiting non-union labor hungry for a buck. I love Star Wars, but I still think George deserves a kick in the rump for that. He's not talking the actors, but the crews.

I'm sure if Lucas were exploiting the actors whom are not in SAG, it would have become public long ago. Lucas pulled out of Hollywood and SAG because he wanted to maintain creative control over his films. Hollywood didn't allow him to when he first started out. After seeing Empire of Dreams, I can't blame Lucas for yanking out of Hollywood! Good for him for not wanting to see his films bastardized into something they were never meant to be by the greedy heads of Hollywood.


There are reasons for unions in film-making, not only for safety (union members get training and certifications; they don't usually have like the 13 deaths of the non-union set builders on Titanic), but also because Reaganomics was wrong. Rich people, once handed more money, tend to keep it and work the system for more, while paying less and less to everyone else on the sole principle they can get away with it. And yes, all-union productions such as say, the Spiderman and Harry Potter films, still make boatloads of money for their producers.

I'm curious - how many deaths have their been on the sets of the SW films? For that matter, how many serious injuries have their been? Anywhere to find that out at?

I'm also wondering how in the heck Reaganomics has anything whatsoever to do with Lucas using non-union actors in his films? Have you seen the amount of money the actors have made by doing these films??? Lucas didn't seem to scrimp there to save a buck. Not like he has to - most likely that man has more money than God.


Anyway, the point of that diatribe is, Gary Oldman was saying he wanted no part of "the New World Order", and made a point to try to protect the livelihoods of the people whose names aren't on the marquee.

This made me laugh. It seemed to me that Oldman pulled out simply because he didn't want to break any of SAG's rules. He'd get fined heavily if he did and probably kicked out of SAG on top of that. He was covering his own butt, not the livelihoods of others. Nothing wrong with that all.

Unions do not insure the safety of its members. Employers, employees as well as OSHA (not sure if its known as something different outside of the USA) are the ones whom are responsible for job safety. What's so dangerous about doing a voice over for a character? Oh wait. Yup, losing one's voice due to the air being too dry - gets 'em all the time. ;)

I'm sure that SAG isn't anything like the unions of which I'm use to ( I have to assume this because I don't know all that much about SAG) - those being the mason's union and the laborer's union. However, the only good thing about the union is the fact that Union workers are paid very well. In fact, if you're a minority or a lazy bum - the union is a terrific tool to exploit in your benefit. Union's shut down jobs - small ones up to billion dollar ones - if there aren't enough black people on a wall laying brick; or if there aren't enough mexicans mixing concrete, etc.

The union doesn't say that you have to be skilled in the area in which you are employed. It just says you have to be at the job sight if you want to be paid :) Unions argue for more money to line their pockets while trying to make it look as if they are trying to get more money for your pockets. Every x number of years the contracts expire and its back to square one with arguing and negotiating. During the negotiations, union workers strike. This has always perplexed me because I see no point in striking at all. I suppose its alright for those who can afford to not get a paycheck for 2 weeks or 2 years, but I have kids to feed and clothe, bills to pay and I really don't think either are going say "Oh, sorry to hear about the strike, mom. We won't eat until its over." Or "Oh we totally understand, we won't turn off your electricity until the strike ends and you get a paycheck again."

And no - the union does not support those that are supporting them. Honestly, the unions aren't worth it. The union didn't get us anything more than what employers across the country already give to their employees aside from a higher pay scale. Which bumped us to a higher tax bracket and Hey look at that! Uncle Sam took a huge chunk of that!

It's not like Hollywood doesn't make a huge killing off of Lucas and his films even though he isn't a part of hollywood. Fox (I think its Fox) makes millions from the distribution rights alone for each film Lucas pumps out. I don't think Hollywood is upset that Lucas isn't "one of them".


Funny thing is he pulled out over the credits thing originally. What is funny is nobody is putting credits in front of films anymore. I don't see them kicking Spielberg out of the union Honestly they should let Lucas back in now if that was his main beef.

Lucas doesn't want to be in with them. Can't blame him, really. Though, I find it funny that Oldman pulled out of the filming yet Spielberg works with Lucas all the time.

Ah well ..

Human story behind Star Wars: Empire of Dreams (http://www.starwars.com/episode-iv/feature/20040917/indexp3.html) for those who might be interested to learn a little more about the documentary.

[imported_QuiGonJ]

Reaganomics simply = greed.

As for training, in Hollywood all on-set workers must have a mandatory Safety Pass (http://www.csatf.org/safety.shtml) to work. I know cause we just went through a round of training. I'm clerical, so I don't have to have it, but our crews sure do.

Marcus, I have spent the past 12 years as a union member working in Hollywood, and no, your non-union crews are not better, just cheaper and more easily exploited. [And btw, I was including British unions as union labor crews in my original statement, which is why I deliberately brought the Potter films into it. It's not non-US production I was completely objecting to, just non-union crews].

So, you can just deal... /shrug

[Jedi Master Carr]

I don't think SAG would have kicked Oldman out. Jackson and Portman are both SAG members and have done three Star Wars films I think they would have kicked them out by now. I think its like Qui-Gon said Oldman was standing for his beliefs which I guess is his choice. About Davies playing Grevious, he would be a cool choice. He does have a very good voice.