Senational News - Dreyfuss out and Nathan lane IN London Producers

[leeinlondon]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 7:32am

Richard Dreyfuss has sensationally dropped out fo the show the week that previews start but they have announced Nathan Lane will now star !!!

Whilst I am sorry that Dreyfuss had to drop out due to health reasons this is absolute dream for me !!!!!

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 8:24am

I can't even begin to imagine how much money they're paying Nathan Lane.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 8:24am

Considering that Lane is still nursing the injuries he recieved in THE FROGS (and THE PRODUCERS is considerably more physically demanding) and pre-production of THE PRODUCERS film is scheduled for November, I don't see how this is possible.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 8:29am

It's all true, Master. The official statement is on all the news sites now.

[leeinlondon]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 8:30am

Michael Riedel said they are paying him $100,000 a week to do the show for three months.

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 8:48am

I don't blame you for being excited, Lee...

...but I'd feel much better about this if Nathan totally healed and rested from his FROGS injuries first.

If he hasn't, then I would be very worried about him in the London PRODUCERS.

[leeinlondon]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 8:52am

I guess Nathan knows himself whether he could deliver a good performance without further damaging himself, if he is anything like professional he would have not agreed to do it if he was not up to the role or it would be bad for him.

[LittleFish8386]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:00am

Does anyone else find this hysterical, especially since Dreyfuss was just quoted saying that he will quit making movies to pursue his career in theatre.

HAHAHAHa

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:02am

Oh, Nathan is above all else a professional. He could be in traction and demand to be wheeled on stage.

But I have no doubt that if he's taken the role it was only after unrelenting and merciless pressure from Mel Brooks.

I wonder now if the PRODUCERS film will be re-scheduled, or put on ice for the time being.

Updated On: 10/18/04 at 09:02 AM

[timote316]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:12am

For $100,000 a week, I'll perform as Max with no legs.

Seriously, thats insane.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:18am

If pre-production only starts next month, shooting is more than three months away, I would have thought. And they can shoot around him not being there if necessary. This is costing them enough money as it is, moving the film schedule now would be lunacy.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:19am

that's what they payed he & Matthew for their return last year.But w a big per diem bump i'm sure!

[RadioTV2]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:23am

YAY!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 9:35am

Here's a link for the offical BBC statement on Dreyfuss...
Dreyfuss Pulls Out of Producers

Updated On: 10/18/04 at 09:35 AM

[leeinlondon]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:00am

Comments from Richard Dreyfuss on the "Frank Skinner Show" last week:

"The Producers opens November 9th. Come from Christmas on. Do not come before that, okay? I want you to know that the general manager just had a heart attack when I said that. Actors don't like people to come straight away. It's too stressful - wait till we have fun - then come. Come, come, come, keep coming, bring your friends. But if I see a face from this audience, before Christmas I swear I'll kill you - I'll skin you".

Courtesy of whatsonstage.

[Chrysanthemum62001]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:08am

I think what he's doing is great. I do hope he takes care of himself though. And $100,000 a week...honestly, I would say he deserves more.

[pab]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:11am

"Does anyone else find this hysterical, especially since Dreyfuss was just quoted saying that he will quit making movies to pursue his career in theatre."

NO. Not if it is fact true that he is ill and had to pull out.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:17am

True it might be, the full story it very much is not.

[sndtrklvr]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:24am

Guess the "early retirement" Lane said he was taking in the Times yesterday isn't true... Boy maybe he can run some kind of producers like scam. Let them hire washouts as Max and make a mint replacing them at the last minute.

[SamIAm]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:30am

While I am sure that there are people in London jumping up and down right now I have to weigh in on this and say that although Lane will ALWAYS be Max Bialystock to me...I am very concerned about his doing this role in London right now.

Yes, he will be a pro and bail out Brooks and company with Dreyfuss out the running, Lane answered the call. By the way, I doubt Dreyfuss will be back...yes, he was injured but rehearsals were from all accounts not going well and he had expressed a concern over being able to do this role anyway. The real question is, why did he take the role in the first place and WHY did Brooks cast him. But that is beside the point now.

They will probably use the wiggle room Lane has given them to find another actor but who? That has always been the problem with this role...they have had little success finding people in the U.S., in Canada etc and in fact Brad Oscar has had the most success with the role after Lane left it. We will see how Kind does when he takes over in January.

However, Lane was injured during the Frogs, and though he only missed 1.5 shows he was actually worse off than most people thought he was and should be taking a well deserved vacation. As it is pre production on the Producers movie starts in mid-November which means he will be participating in that long distance and the filming starts in mid-February so in spite of the business implications of the Producers in London, in spite of how much they are paying him to go there and save them, in spite of how Londoners will LOVE seeing him, the physical toll on him is likely to be high.

I find myself thinking that Mel Brooks is pushing all the right buttons to get what he needs out of this show and the man who made the role famous and Lane is a big boy and can take care of himself but I still think Brooks should have looked elsewhere for his London Max and let Lane quietly recuperate in the Hamptons so he would be ready for the movie and for his next project (which is hopefully bringing Butley to Broadway).

So, those people who are saying that Brooks never makes a casting error when referencing his choice of Kidman for Ulla in the film ought to think now about Goodman and Dreyfuss and these debacles.

[SamIAm]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:32am

Popcultureboy: You are right that this is not the full story, but Mel Brooks will never tell the full story publicly.

There is a lot more to this than there seems to be, I'm sure and much of it has to do with the choice of Dreyfuss for this role in the first place.

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:36am

Lane should have demanded that figure in pound sterling instead...

[SamIAm]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:36am

...and as for Lane's joke in the Times about early retirement...I'm sure it was just that. But though I'm sure he was looking forward to a month off, when Mel calls...

[blueroses]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 10:53am

Hey...what about Larry David?

Seriously, Londoners are in for a treat. Nathan Lane is fab!

I wouldn't begrudge him the $100K. Look at how much more all of the considerably less talented actors and actresses in Hollywood get for a crappy film.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/18/04 at 11:08am

Considering that earlier statement from Dreyfuss, the "illness" story seems a bit suspect. Clearly he was uncomfortable in the role already for some reason when he made that statement. How convenient to become "ill."