-
Tananarive Due and Steven Barnes Bring New ... -
A Woman's Body Is Not A Plaything - from ... -
How You Can Light for HD... Until You Can ... -
Review: 'Peeples' is a Charming Farce with ... -
Was The Man Behind 'The Lone Ranger's' Mask ...
-
S&A 'Scandal' Recap - An Unexpected Blast ... -
Review - 'Venus And Serena' Is An Entertaining ... -
Review: 'Peeples' Is Essentially A Predictable ... -
How to Read (Black) Classic Films -
Kerry Washington and Craig Robinson Talk ...
-
David Alan Grier and the 'Peeples' Cast Talk ... -
5 Netflix Streaming Titles You May Not Know ... -
Interview: Chicago Native Aims To Match NYC, ... -
Tribeca 2013 Review: Revisting Charles Lane's ... -
Craig Robinson Talks To S & A's Sergio About ...
Exclusive: Trailer for Acclaimed South African ...
Netflix Offerings: 5 Streaming Titles You ...
Netflix Picks: 'Black Butterfly' Deals w/ ...
Review: 'Iron Man 3' Is The Most Entertaining ...
The Mainstream Media's Coverage Of Crowdfunding ...
About That Popular 'Black Films Don't Sell ...The Offer Chris Tucker Rejected From Harvey Weinstein & Quentin Tarantino (Not 'Django')
He really was on the show to push The Intouchables, but they talk about a lot more; specifically, and maybe most interestingly, Harvey reveals (something he said he'd never spoken of before) that at one time in the past, when Chris Tucker was a hot commodity (hotter than he is now anyway), he (Harvey) approached Chris with an offer to produce a stand-up comedy movie special that would have been produced by Harvey Weinstein and, even more curiously, directed by Quentin Tarantino.
Obviously, that never happened; Why? Well, Chris got a bit greedy! The original proposal Harvey made was that they'd split the profits 50/50 (Chris would get 50% all to himself, while Harvey and Tarantino would split the other 50 - or 25% each). But Chris apparently didn't like that offer, and came back to Harvey saying he wanted 90% of the profits, which meant Harvey and Tarantino would split just 10% (or 5% each).
Of course Harvey balked at that split, and the project never happened.
Harvey laughs it off in the interview; he can afford to, because he's certainly doing just fine years later; Chris Tucker however, not-so much (not as well as he once was). He may be wishing he'd taken that 50/50 split deal today, because I doubt that he'd get that kind of offer again - certainly not on that level, with Harvey and Tarantino involved.
But I can only imagine what that may have been like, especially with Tarantino directing.
Harvey did mention that Chris co-stars in a project he's producing - a drama from David O. Russell titled The Silver Linings Playbook, adding that Chris does a good job in it.
Harvey also talks about the fun in working with Tarantino over the years, including, of course, Django Unchained, stating "if people think Inglorious Basterds kicked ass... Wait." He also praises Leonardo DiCaprio's villain, saying he's "evil personified... brilliant, brilliant performance." And finally added "don't worry, we kill plenty of people in this movie... sex up the wazoo... we didn't forget where we came from," (with some laughter) as they talked about the dialogue in the film, seeming to comfort the hosts (and the listeners) who may have suddenly become concerned that the film would be dialogue-heavy, with little "action," since the emphasis during the conversation was on how wonderful the dialogue was, and how well it was delivered.
Harvey also dishes on getting The Intouchables early, while it was still in the script stage (this is the original French version), falling in love with it then, and deciding to get involved in its distribution. Of course, there's the remake in development, and he does say, as has already been reported, that for the role played by Omar Sy, they're looking at people like Chris Rock, Chris Tucker, and Jamie Foxx. He seemed to particularly like Chris Tucker, so maybe that's a sign we should run with... for now.
And lastly, Harvey also talked a bit about his company's split from Disney to form The Weinstein Company, revealing that he'd taken a number of high profile projects to Michael Eisner (who was head of Disney at the time, when Harvey and his brother ran Miramax), including The Lord Of The Rings; but Eisner rejected the project (obviously Peter Jackson got to make the trilogy of films elsewhere - New Line - and they made a ton of money, won awards, so there).
However, don't cry for Harvey because, as he states in the interview, he'd actually invested some $10 million into developing the LOTR trilogy, with the scripts already written, when he took the package to Disney/Eisner. They'd even shot test footage as well; and because of that initial investment, despite the fact that Jackson made the films with New Line, the Weinsteins still collected a percentage on the backend (he gross) and, as he says, they did "extremely well."
I can imagine; those LOTR films collectively grossed some $3 billion at the box office, so whatever the Weinsteins' percentage was (and it was plump enough), they would've collected a tidy sum. Even if their cut was 1% of the gross (although I'm betting it was higher than that) they would still have made 3 times their initial $10 million investment.
But it's an interview worth listening to, for an *insiders* POV on things. Harvey rarely is out front and center marketing his films this way, so this was a bit of a treat. He talks about a lot more than what I've highlighted here.
And I'd say that it's hard to listen to this and not feel his passion for movies. It's evident that he not only knows movies, but he really lives, breathes and loves movies.
The full 35-minute interview follows below.
27 Comments
jay | July 29, 2012 12:17 AM
Chris tucker sounds like Floyd mayweather(dont want to fight Pachiao) because he wants 60% of the money....Man black people have to do better than that...movie trivia "Chris tucker latest movie was on the year???? ok, see
Bondgirl | June 27, 2012 9:16 PM
Harvey is laughing his ass off because he knows Chris is SOL for money. He owes $12 Mil to the IRS, both homes are being sold, and he's not the star he was. Kevin Hart: Laugh at my Pain made $7.7 Mil, so Chris could've made a nice profit. More importantly, it would've kept him relevant and brought him lead roles. Instead, he chose to do bullshit like The Fifth Element. I'm always amazed when I hear of black actors turning down work, especially that which promotes their brand.
ronette | June 27, 2012 8:18 PM
"Will Smith is the go-to guy" ... for black roles? So stupid.
noel | June 27, 2012 9:43 AM
That's life, you win some you lose some. At the same time, who knows, accepting the 50-50 offer could have been a mistake by tucker regardless of who is involved. Life's got its way of playing prangs on us
Shebababy | June 26, 2012 7:56 PM
"don't worry, we kill plenty of people in this movie... sex up the wazoo... we didn't forget where we came from,"
Doesn't he mean rape?
Donella | June 26, 2012 7:15 PM
I wonder if I shall take Harvey Weinstein's word for what happened in a private business negotiation. Sounds to me like Weinstein's doing his usual bully routine, throwing artists inferior opportunities, then working them over in the media to save face when the artist shows too much backbone. People like this are probably why Chris Tucker turned his back on Hollywood.
Tamara | June 26, 2012 4:19 PM
I like hearing/seeing these perspectives from insiders. And yes indeedy, 10 million invested, triple/quadruple that. LOTR was a ridiculous success. Blockbuster and well acted/well directed just an all around good film (and franchise). I'd love to shadow him...or other producers like him.
NO BRAINER | June 26, 2012 3:47 PM
90%... he was basically giving them the finger for whatever reason...lol
misha | June 26, 2012 11:46 AM
*Gasp!* I can't believe that negro would want majority profit for a stand-up special. How dare he?!
Charles Judson | June 26, 2012 10:22 AM
If I'm remembering correctly, the reason Chris's comedy club here shut down, even though it had become one of the most successful places in the city is because he pulled out the alcohol. This was about the time he decided to clean up his routines and not cuss so much. Club was gone in less than a year after that. I'm not sure Chris has always been the best manager of his own career.
artbizzy | June 26, 2012 10:01 AM
It's possible that Chris Tucker for some reason just wasn't enthusiastic about the idea because 90%is a pretty high amount to ask for when you are considering who the director and the producer would have been. Maybe he thinks like this: "If not feeling this project but I might be open to doing it if the money is more than right, just so it could be win-win. So I'm going to ask for an exorbitant amount. If I do the project than I get all that money, if I don't, doesn't matter, because I wasn'treally into the project in the first place. I'm still young, I'm eating, I'm paying my mortgage, I'm enjoying my life, whatever." I wonder if it's less about greed for Chris Tucker than it is about carefully choosing his projects. Look what happened with Dave Chappelle. Nothing wrong with an artist wanting creative control. In particular a black artist/comedian/actor. I think Chris Tucker is smart. But to others it might not seem that way becasue we tend to equate success with dollar signs.
Adam Scott Thompson | June 26, 2012 9:48 AM
Pride goeth...
Poindexter | June 26, 2012 9:33 AM
I don't think Chris Tuckers split sounds so bad when you consider that the project was a comedy special. How much value does a director or producer add to a stand-up special?