Ashley Judd sues Weinstein over Lord of the Rings casting

[Rhom]

At least partially.  Its actually about a trend of lost opportunities, but Peter Jackson says he had her on a list until Weinstein discouraged him.

Quote

It is rare for people to recover damages for smear campaigns — for instance, quietly labeling actresses as “difficult” when they don’t acquiesce to powerful men — because of how complicated it can be to prove the action took place, let alone directly harmed someone’s career.

But Judd has an A-list director on her side: Peter Jackson, who came forward in December to say that he removed her from a casting list “as a direct result” of what he now thought was “false information” provided by Weinstein.

The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, involves Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings” films, the first of which was released in 2001. Jackson had wanted to cast Judd in a prominent role in the series. But Weinstein “torpedoed Ms. Judd’s incredible professional opportunity,” according to the complaint, by falsely telling Jackson that Judd was a “nightmare” who should be avoided “at all costs.”

As is often pointed out, LotR has very few "prominent" female roles in the series. The only three prominent roles for women in LotR would be Eowyn, Galadriel, and Arwen.

I looked up the actresses ages. Liv Tyler (Arwen) was born in 1977 and is significantly younger than her costars.  Miranda Otto (Eowyn) was born in 1967. Cate Blanchett (Galadriel) in 1969.  Judd was born in 1968.  Based on that, it would seem that she was being heavily considered for Eowyn or Galadriel.

I can't see Judd as Galadriel, so Eowyn maybe, but I don’t think she would have been better than Blanchett or Otto in their roles.

[red snow]

I'd imagine she was more likely to have been in line for Tyler's role based on appearance but guess she could have been in with a shot for any of them.

Jackson coming forward helps the case because even if she may never have got the role the fact she was denied the opportunity based on lies is useful evidence in her case.

[DanteGabriel]

Mira Sorvino was also the victim of a smear campaign like this.

I have to wonder how many talented actresses had their careers derailed by shitty predators in positions of power.

[Rhom]

In 1999, Judd starred in Double Jeopardy which earned over $100m at the box office.  Somewhere along the line her career went off the rails for sure.

[Isis]

Yeah, she seems more of an Arwen to me. The age of the actress hardly matters since Arwen is immortal. So long as she doesn't look 'elderly' I don't see the problem. 

It's about time women started seeing some compensation for this shit. 

[DanteGabriel]

11 minutes ago, Isis said:

It's about time women started seeing some compensation for this shit. 

And better compensation in general. As Ellen Pompeo stunningly pointed out, Faye Dunaway is driving a Prius.

[Trebla]

I would also guess Eowyn. I recall reading Peter Jackson's first choice for the role was Alison Doody who is best know for her work in Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. She reportedly declined the role since she had recently given birth. Alison Doody was born in 1966 so it seems they had a clear preference for the age of the actress for that role.

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

In 1999, Judd starred in Double Jeopardy which earned over $100m at the box office.  Somewhere along the line her career went off the rails for sure.

I remember seeing that movie when I was eleven and being blown away by how beautiful Judd was (and still is). It’s funny how you can remember the first people who leaped out to you as being extremely attractive.

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

And better compensation in general. As Ellen Pompeo stunningly pointed out, Faye Dunaway is driving a Prius.

This is one of the funniest sound bites I’ve ever heard:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2018/01/11/liam-neeson-wants-pay-parity-but-wont-take-pay-cut-himself/1026927001/

[James Arryn]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I remember seeing that movie when I was eleven and being blown away by how beautiful Judd was (and still is). It’s funny how you can remember the first people who leaped out to you as being extremely attractive.

This is one of the funniest sound bites I’ve ever heard:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2018/01/11/liam-neeson-wants-pay-parity-but-wont-take-pay-cut-himself/1026927001/

I’ve heard he has a very dry wit. Edit: if you’ve never seen his guesting on Life’s Too Short, you really should. 

[Nictarion]

3 hours ago, James Arryn said:

I’ve heard he has a very dry wit. Edit: if you’ve never seen his guesting on Life’s Too Short, you really should. 

Full blown AIDS

[Aemon Stark]

4 hours ago, James Arryn said:

I’ve heard he has a very dry wit. Edit: if you’ve never seen his guesting on Life’s Too Short, you really should. 

I do enjoy some improvisational comedy. 

[Mladen]

Finally!!! I think this has been long overdue. These things should not be just talked about, they should be processed at court.

But, it is tricky. Certainly she deserves compensation for being smeared by Weinstein which made her career take a deep plunge at some point, but can anyone actually argue it is due to not being in LOTR movies? Was a female role in LOTR movies incredible opportunity?

I mean, it would be incredibly difficult to prove the EXACT extent of that action. Neither Tyler nor Otto made some huge careers after LOTR, although Otto went from unknown actress to being in Spielberg's War of the Worlds with Tom Cruise. After LOTR, Tyler did, IIRC, "Jersey girl" (with Ben Affleck). Neither of those movies did wonders for the career of the two actresses. 

Blanchett is another story. LOTR was one of those high-profile projects she needed at that moment to establish herself as a movie star. Eventually, she was nominated for 6 more Academy Awards, winning two. 

That said, I am not sure how much LOTR actually did for the careers of any of the cast members.

But, it is all truly irrelevant...  He should pay and she should get some compensation.

On 5/1/2018 at 4:04 PM, DanteGabriel said:

Mira Sorvino was also the victim of a smear campaign like this.

I have to wonder how many talented actresses had their careers derailed by shitty predators in positions of power.

I fear the list may be endless... And it's not just shitty predators, but also many, many others who were in position of power to destroy someone's career out of spite or whatever else...

[Leofric]

16 minutes ago, Risto said:

Finally!!! I think this has been long overdue. These things should not be just talked about, they should be processed at court.

But, it is tricky. Certainly she deserves compensation for being smeared by Weinstein which made her career take a deep plunge at some point, but can anyone actually argue it is due to not being in LOTR movies? Was a female role in LOTR movies incredible opportunity?

I mean, it would be incredibly difficult to prove the EXACT extent of that action. Neither Tyler nor Otto made some huge careers after LOTR, although Otto went from unknown actress to being in Spielberg's War of the Worlds with Tom Cruise. After LOTR, Tyler did, IIRC, "Jersey girl" (with Ben Affleck). Neither of those movies did wonders for the career of the two actresses. 

Blanchett is another story. LOTR was one of those high-profile projects she needed at that moment to establish herself as a movie star. Eventually, she was nominated for 6 more Academy Awards, winning two. 

That said, I am not sure how much LOTR actually did for the careers of any of the cast members.

But, it is all truly irrelevant...  He should pay and she should get some compensation.

I fear the list may be endless... And it's not just shitty predators, but also many, many others who were in position of power to destroy someone's career out of spite or whatever else...

The total effect on her career is unknown, but at the very least, she should get compensation for the roles we know were directly effected.  If she was up for Eowyn, she missed out on two paychecks for Two Towers and Return of the King; if she was up for Arwyn, she missed out on 3 paychecks for the whole Lord of the Rings Trilogy; and if she was up for Galadriel, she missed out on 6 paychecks for the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit trilogies.   So that would be the bottom line for her suit, and build up from there as to how Weinstein's lies and influence damaged the rest of her career.

 

[red snow]

I don't know the details of how she's going about the case, this is more in response to some of the comments here.I think she'd be better suing for being blacklisted and the overall effect on her career rather than claiming she'd have got the role as that's something a lawyer could easily argue against. Whereas it seems hard to dispute she wasn't getting the opportunity to audition and I'm sure there's just as much money/justice/punishment to be made there. She was potentially cut from all films Weinstein had a role in, but worse her false reputation of being difficult would spread amongst other directors/producers. Also just because LOTR had a massive box-office doesn't mean all the cast members received a huge paycheck (unless they'd cut some percentage deal). Sean Astin apparently received $250,000 for the whole trilogy (although the main cast apparently got some nice bonuses at the end.

It would also set a precedent that would make it easier for others who have been similarly affected to sue as well and it not being dependent on the box office of the film they missed out on the opportunity of having a part in. But I guess lawyers know how to make the most for their client in any given case so whichever attack route they choose is probably the best for the individual. It would just be nice if there was something that benefitted all the victims of this type of thing equally. I guess a high profile case being successful will have a trickle down effect for others though in making it seem possible so I hope Judd's case is a great success.

[DanteGabriel]

20 minutes ago, red snow said:

I don't know the details of how she's going about the case, this is more in response to some of the comments here.I think she'd be better suing for being blacklisted and the overall effect on her career rather than claiming she'd have got the role as that's something a lawyer could easily argue against. 

Have you read the details of her story? Because Peter Jackson has openly said they were going to cast her until Weinstein's feedback. He's willing to testify in court to that too.

[Myrddin]

I don't think the goal is to be compensated for LOTR, but to establish that Weinstein was actively sabotaging her career by telling people involved with casting that she was trouble and should be avoided. Jackson is corroborating her story from the director/producer side. All they need is for another few directors/producers to relay similar stories and we have a pattern of behavior.

[Ran]

Judd certainly has the right to do this, and I think she has a case that deserves hearing out. But as others say, there's big hurdles against it actually succeeding in a judgment in her favor. But she deserves her day in court, and it may bring up more of Weinstein's moral and ethical failings, if not necessarily legal failings, to light.

 That said...

On 5/1/2018 at 5:17 PM, DanteGabriel said:

And better compensation in general. As Ellen Pompeo stunningly pointed out, Faye Dunaway is driving a Prius.

Dunaway is worth tens of millions of dollars. She drives a Prius and until recently lived in a duplex out of choice, not financial constraints. She surely could have been better compensated when compared to male actors with similar draw in her day, but her financial situation today is by any measure pretty reasonable.

[Leofric]

I agree the goal isn't just compensation for LOTR, but if you use that as a baseline for compensation she was denied because Peter Jackson can show that Weinstein definitely cost her that role, then you can extrapolate from there based on how many auditions and roles she missed out on due to Weinstein's influence and calculate how much he cost her financially, and then add punitive damages beyond that based on the slander to her reputation.

[red snow]

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

Have you read the details of her story? Because Peter Jackson has openly said they were going to cast her until Weinstein's feedback. He's willing to testify in court to that too.

I haven't read the case that has been filed but going off the OP link I still can't tell whether she was going to be cast, if she was on a casting list or if Jackson was interested in casting her. Most of those things suggest she may have been on a shortlist to audition - not that she was automatically getting the part if she wanted it. I just found a vox article that does say Jackson asked her which role she'd like which sounds a lot more definite than the aforementioned comments.  If her role was guaranteed prior to Weinstein's intervention that's a whole lot worse than her just being excluded from auditioning.

1 hour ago, Myrddin said:

I don't think the goal is to be compensated for LOTR, but to establish that Weinstein was actively sabotaging her career by telling people involved with casting that she was trouble and should be avoided. Jackson is corroborating her story from the director/producer side. All they need is for another few directors/producers to relay similar stories and we have a pattern of behavior.

With the publicity surrounding this you'd hope there'd be another director/producer willing to come forward/have their memories jogged. I guess it's tricky in the sense she would have had to have been on a wish-list for someone to maybe notice they were being dissuaded. But as others say she was a fairly big entity in the late 90s having carried her own films successfully so there probably were directors who'd have considered her.

[Yukle]

Having read about the case, it'll be hard for Judd to pursue any damages. The lack of laws protecting harassment means that she wasn't, strictly speaking, under his employ. Therefore there's little the law can do. Which is one of the many loopholes I am certain Weinstein and men like him are perfectly aware of when they behave as they do.

They say that you can't touch them and they know that it's true.