Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Mayor Proposes Huge New Fines ... | Dirty Tricks? »

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Randy Quaid Banned from Actors Equity

posted by on February 7 at 9:59 AM

ent078.jpg

Last September, Brendan Kiley reported on the rampant jackassery of Randy Quaid, whose odd and unprofessional behavior helped sink the $6.5 million would-be Broadway musical Lone Star Love during its pre-Broadway run in Seattle.

Today the New York Post has an update on the Quaid saga:

All 26 members of the Lone Star Love cast brought Randy up on charges with Actors’ Equity Association, claiming he physically and verbally abused his fellow performers and that his oddball behavior onstage and off forced the show to close, thus depriving them of their jobs.

On Friday, Equity handed down its decision. According to documents obtained exclusively by The Post, the union has banned Randy for life - life! - and fined him $81,572.

Full story (including the high-octane drama involving Quaid’s wife) here

(Thanks to Slog tipstress Beth.).

RSS icon Comments

1

Randy is, however, still available to perform at church events and children's parties.

Posted by J.R. | February 7, 2008 10:10 AM
2

@1, he can still do movies and TV. Different union.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | February 7, 2008 10:23 AM
3

That comes to $39.22 an hour. Is that good???

Posted by heywhatsit | February 7, 2008 10:24 AM
4

Shitter's full!

Posted by Cousin Eddie | February 7, 2008 10:25 AM
5

The Curse of Brokeback Mountain?

Posted by DOUG. | February 7, 2008 10:33 AM
6

The curse of his crazy-ass domineering wife, more like.

Posted by Greg | February 7, 2008 10:41 AM
7

@2: And movie and TV directors are always looking for drug-addled nutjob actors. Good call!

Posted by J.R. | February 7, 2008 10:48 AM
8

Why can't famous people go bat-shit privately on their own time? It's upsetting that all of Randy's work to date (from The Last Picture Show to The Last Detail to Brokeback Mountain) is now denigrated. Too bad because his LBJ was magnificent.

Posted by Bauhaus | February 7, 2008 10:53 AM
9

Why would you want celebs to go bat-shit PRIVATELY? It's more entertaining than their work products.

Posted by Fnarf | February 7, 2008 10:55 AM
10

Please give this man and his wife their own reality series. I just want to watch them 24/7.

Posted by Rachael F. | February 7, 2008 11:16 AM
11

Quick! Someone get him and Britney a deal for a remake of Tennesse Williams' BABY DOLL!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048973/

Posted by Andy Niable | February 7, 2008 11:21 AM
12

Why didn't they just fire him? Did I miss something?

Posted by Dougsf | February 7, 2008 12:35 PM
13

Yeah, I heard about the shin kicking incident when AFTRA's National President was in town earlier this week (The L.A. branches of AEA, SAG & AFTRA all share offices in the same building), poor man was TERRIFIED!

Makes me wonder if Evi Quaid's middle initial is "L"...

Posted by COMTE | February 7, 2008 12:40 PM
14

Dougsf @ 12: They didn't fire him from the original production because he and is wife were actually producing the show. Producers never fire themselves, they just put the rest of the company through hell with their vanity projects (and huge codpieces, apparently.)

Here's a question I can't figure out the answer for: that $81K fine is equal to two weeks salary. Who gets it? Equity? Or the poor actors themselves? COMTE? Got an answer on this one?

Posted by meh | February 7, 2008 12:49 PM
15

@14: Ahhhh... I missed the part about them producing the show, Meh. Sucks for all those involved.

I suppose the only bright spot is that this actually came to a head, ensuring the Quad's probably won't be putting anyone in the theater industry through this experience again.

Posted by Dougsf | February 7, 2008 1:01 PM
16

Hm, good question @14; I'll try to get an answer.

Posted by COMTE | February 7, 2008 1:20 PM
17

Now if only Equity did this EVERY time a lead actor or actress flipped out and acted like a total douchebag... maybe working in professional theatre would become a little more enjoyable.

Posted by Gomez | February 7, 2008 1:34 PM
18

@14:

I have a call in to Equity's L.A. office for a response. However, I was informed that, because of the likelihood Mr. Quaid will appeal the ruling against him, the specific details of the grievance claim may not be available for disclosure.

If I hear anything more, I'll post it here.

That being said, in general, when a member of a Bargaining Unit files a grievance against the employer (which is essentially a complaint against the employer for breach of specific provisions of a Collective Bargaining Agreement), as was done here, any monetary fines or penalties exacted against the employer, should they be found in breach of the terms of the CBA, would go to the employee or employees filing the grievance.

Posted by COMTE | February 7, 2008 1:39 PM
19

I should add that, if the grievance is sent to mandatory arbitration the costs are shared equally between the two parties until a determination is made, after which the losing party pays for the full cost of the arbitration process in addition to any fines or penalties imposed by the artibrator.

Posted by COMTE | February 7, 2008 1:43 PM
20

See, if he was a young woman, he could get off scot free.

Posted by Reality is a State of Media | February 7, 2008 2:07 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).