THR: Producers haven’t sued Joaquin Phoenix after he exited the Todd Haynes film

A few weeks ago, Joaquin Phoenix suddenly pulled out of a Todd Haynes-directed film which was already deep into pre-production. Joaquin pulled out just a few days before he was due on set to begin principal filming. It is an especially crazy thing to do, even more so considering the fact that Joaquin brought the story and concept to Haynes and they developed it together. The story is something like “a closeted gay detective story” and it’s a period piece and the love story was supposed to be very explicit. Joaquin’s sudden withdrawal has left Haynes in an awful spot, not to mention the production companies which already invested millions. The Hollywood Reporter has already done some reporting about the studio/executive outrage over Phoenix screwing over Haynes and the film. Now THR asks: “Can Joaquin Phoenix Be Replaced, or Is Todd Haynes’ Gay Love Story Doomed?”

Joaquin Phoenix has pulled this sort of stunt before. In 2019, he tried to back out of The Joker at the last minute. He did it again in 2021, with Mike Mills’ C’mon C’mon, and again in 2023, with Ridley Scott’s Napoleon. But in those cases, Phoenix ultimately settled down and the movies ended up getting made. Which raises an obvious question: Is there any way the explicit Todd Haynes gay love story that Phoenix supposedly got cold feet over and abruptly exited Aug. 9 — just five days before shooting was scheduled to begin in Guadalajara, Mexico, where sets were already being built and crews were waiting for the Oscar-winning actor to arrive — might somehow also end up getting made?

Rambling Reporter has been hearing all sorts of rumors about eleventh-hour attempts to salvage the untitled project, including reports that Haynes had been contemplating recasting Phoenix’s part. Pedro Pascal’s name has been bandied about, though sources tell THR he’d be an unlikely choice given that Pascal’s schedule is packed until the end of the year with Fantastic Four and The Mandalorian shoots and also because Haynes had already cast Top Gun: Maverick‘s Danny Ramirez as Phoenix’s love interest in the film, which centers on a corrupt L.A. cop in the 1930s who has a torrid affair with a nonwhite male character. “Having two Latinos in the roles doesn’t make a lot of sense,” one talent rep tells THR.

Meanwhile, Rambling hears that Haynes’ producers have been considering hitting Phoenix with a lawsuit to cover lost costs, said to amount to several million dollars. Might that entice Phoenix back to the set? Anything is possible, but it’s unlikely, given that money doesn’t appear to be a problem for the actor these days; he got paid $25 million for the Joker sequel, Joker: Folie à Deux, which bows at the Venice Film Festival in September.

[From THR]

As I said weeks ago, the reason why there’s not more full-throated, on-the-record backlash against Joaquin right now is because Joker: Folie à Deux is coming out soon. Studios are waiting to see if that film is successful with the powerful neckbeard incel demographic before they completely write off Joaquin. It’s crazy that no one has sued him yet, which makes me wonder if Haynes does feel like there’s a shot at getting Joaquin to change his mind. But it’s also been weeks since he exited – are they still waiting around in Mexico? As for recasting the role… I get that there’s a Hollywood hive-mind and that currently, everyone wants to hire Pedro Pascal for every role, but there are other actors around? It’s completely f–king weird to be like “We should recast this, is Pedro available? Oh, he’s not, well, nevermind.” And of course this all would have played out differently if a woman had pulled this kind of stunt.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

24 Responses to “THR: Producers haven’t sued Joaquin Phoenix after he exited the Todd Haynes film”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kokiri says:

    Why can’t we have 2 Latino actors in the same film?
    I can’t quite put my finger on it. Seems a weak argument that it’s about a white cop blah blah. Just rewrite that part. Or don’t make the stupid movie at all)

    Anyway, Pedro also has Gladiator to promote, so he’s extra busy.

    Let’s hope Joaquin isn’t cast in any more films. He’s not even that great an actor. My opinion (so don’t @me how wrong I am)

    • Talia says:

      It sounds like the white privilege of the lead character may be a main plot point, though,, in which case, hiring a POC would require extensive re-writes.

    • Robert says:

      It is set in the 1930’s during the depression when Latinos of that time were being expelled from the USA and there were few police of any other color than white at the time, with the exception of Black police for Black areas in limited locales.
      The story between a white cop and a Latino man during that era would be very difficult to rewrite as the story would be completely different and have to be completely rewritten all the way down to the basic plot. There are stories that a person could be recast with anyone, and there are stories in which it could only be a person of a certain demographic based on the historical context of the times. But I would have liked to have seen this film made, even though I’m not much of a Joaquin Phoenix fan.

  2. orangeowl18 says:

    Seems like you could find a pretty big selection of actors willing to take the role, is it really that hard to find someone on short notice?

    • Talia says:

      Someone A list enough to get the funding but also willing to do an explicit gay role? I suspect that will be very difficult if not impossible to cast.

      • Jais says:

        I’m guessing they’re booked and busy but there’s Jonathan Bailey and Matt Bomer. Obviously, they’ll want a name as big as Joaquin but still. And honestly, can Joaquin not be forced to pay to keep it going regardless of who’s cast in the role. Maybe that’s the point of suing.

  3. D says:

    My old life pre-kids was in independent film and I know of or know people in this situation. If they sue him they risk alienating him and pissing off his agents, which can be problematic. The problem is that they already spent millions on pre-production in Mexico and they have to pay those salaries and costs, no matter what. So it’s a question of if they do it through an insurance claim, which risks the production company having a hard time insuring in the future, or sue. I’m sure this is not an easy decision. Even if they recast, they have to go back for funding if the original partners pull their money without Phoenix as the star. If they can find another big name (hence the Pedro suggestion), then maybe the money people won’t pull out. They could also be hoping that once Phoenix is done with the Venice Film Festival he can come down to start shooting. In my opinion that conflict was probably a big contributing factor.

    I don’t know why they would plan production to start right when Joker promotion begins. If they push it too long they risk Ramirez having to leave for other commitments.

    It’s just a mess and all avoidable if Phoenix hadn’t pulled out. I do feel for him since he literally watched his brother die on a Hollywood street. You don’t get over that trauma. But he is close to, if not 50 years old. Grow up and behave like the VERY well paid star that you are. George Clooney may be a smug a-hole but he would never!

    • NotTheOne says:

      Thank you for this background information. Sounds like he knew he could pull out with impunity.

  4. Lady Digby says:

    The director has a proven track record and if the script is high quality why not recast? It shouldn’t fall on the whim of JP who is very heavy going as an actor. Better casting with a fascinating actor would be the best screw you to the self indulgent JP, even better if he goes onto win the Best Actor.

    • Mia4s says:

      The problem is it’s not just about casting a fantastic actor, it has to be an actor that satisfies the investors. It has to be a certain level of “name” or the money people are going to take issue. Financing of movies is very interesting, different actors are valued very very differently.

      Also if he had a hand in writing or producing, that’s a whole other level of complication that gives him a financial stake. So bizarre.

    • Turtledove says:

      What I’ve seen previously says that the financial backers put up $$$ because it had JP attached. Without him, they are entitled to pull out. I don’t know the industry, but common sense would say that IF they found someone else comparable, the financers could agree to stay?

      But it sounds like that is like looking for a needle in a haystack. They don’t just need to find someone excellent, they need to find someone excellent that their financers agree to.

      According to Wikipedia JP has been nominated for 121 awards and won 47,those must be a lot of smaller less known awards include, but does also include 2 Golden Globes, an Oscar, SAG etc. I am a fan of his work, but think there are plenty of actors that are as good as him, but those awards are probably what helped get the checks written.

  5. NJGR says:

    I feel sorry for all the regular people who lost their jobs.

    • Turtledove says:

      It’s really gross. The guy has a net worth of 80 million. Is married to someone worth 20 million.

      And he could care less about “the little people” who are getting so screwed here. Tale as old as time.

      • Kirsten says:

        I realize that it’s not her money and certainly not his, but Rooney Mara’s parents are billionaires.

  6. Izzy says:

    He has a track record of pulling these stunts, they work with him at their own peril, and unfortunately it really screws the people working on the film.

    • Lau says:

      Ah the joys of being a straight white man and being allowed to get repeatedly away with that kind of bullsh*t.

  7. VilleRose says:

    He has a history of pulling out of movies at the last minute? He’s only getting away with this because he’s a white dude. If it had been a man of color or a woman, they’d be getting torn to shreds. I’ve always thought he was off, ever since he pulled that whole “I’m going to be a rapper” stunt for that fake documentary he collaborated on with his former brother-in-law Casey Affleck.

    • Robert says:

      This happened to Kim Bassinger in the early 90’s with Boxing Helena. She backed out, got sued, lost over 8 million and was bankrupted by it. It certainly does affect women differently.

  8. Jay says:

    It does feel like Hollywood is waiting to see how his new Joker musical (?) will fare before deciding on JP’s fate. If it is successful, all could be forgiven, he’s an artist, he’s entitled to be flighty etc. If not, my guess is that they will feel comfortable pissing off his agents and trying to recoup their costs. It’s not logical – he backed out of a legal agreement at the last minute, it shouldn’t matter how well his next movie does, but I think it will.

  9. Rnot says:

    I dunno, I’m kinda getting Kanye vibes. Like his mental health has always been a bit precarious but he’s a “tortured genius” and people like his product, so they put up with the disruptions and unpredictability. At some point too many decision makers will conclude that it’s not worth the tradeoffs. If the new Joker movie bombs, then that may be sooner than later.

  10. Oakley says:

    The fact that he is now linked to an Irish establishment family probably explains why lawsuit has yet been thrown at his way, or he was able to simply walk away from the project unpunished. I think he made calculations before he walked away and concluded that he would be untouched.

  11. bisynaptic says:

    It’s bonkers, to me, the arc that this man’s career has taken. How far from the first Gladiator, that he can now sink entire productions, with total impunity.

  12. Kat says:

    Joaquin has always struck me as someone who 100% believed every bit of hype about himself.

    He officially lost me when he did that bullshit documentary and had co-stars and others jumping through hoops not to piss him off over it. (Andy Kaufman wept).

    He’s in a position where he is (sadly) a bankable star that the studios will throw stupid money at. I say sadly because these kinds of actors very often win out over other much more talented but not as bankable actors. He’s also the husband of an heiress. (I have no beef with his wife, she’s always seemed like a sweet person.)

    I’m sure those two things alone would make him feel untouchable if he didn’t already have a Texas-sized ego and (seemingly) having zero concerns about leaving the cast & crew of the Haynes film high and dry. Unless there’s some super scandalous, left-of-field reason he’s dropped out, it’s real scumbag behavior.

  13. some dude says:

    The more I hear about this movie, the less I want to see it. I am sorry for all the people that lost their jobs (they should sue Joaquin, just saying) but that movie doesn’t sound interesting at all.

    Do we really need yet another age gap romance with a white protagonist who is GASP secretly gay! If I wanted to see that, I’d just watch The Power of the Dog. And I wouldn’t watch that because it’s a terrible adaptation of a really good book.

    Anyway, the only thing the movie had going for it is that they were going for real sex scenes, but I’m pretty sure there are a couple of queer movies that have already done that.

    That movie is so tired. Shelve it. As a gay man of color, I don’t want it.