Lethal Weapon in the Media: "Well, I got news for you, Rog: I'm not crazy."

[DearEvette]

He may not be insurable now, but a strategic fade away for 6 mos to a year.  A stint in rehab.  An apology tour.  He'll get a part in something indie which will lead to a bigger part.  An voila he's back. If he manages to luck into something really big and manages to behave himself, this will be just considered a blip in his career. 

See: Robert Downey Jr.  Big names were still lining to up work for him even though he was completely unreliable.  It wasn't until he was deemed uninsurable that he began to lose parts in A-list projects.  After a long stint in rehab, a confessional on Oprah, and finally Mel Gibson( !!) paying his insurance bond himself, he was back on his comeback tour.  And look at him now.

[ChelseaNH]

Robert Downey Jr had almost 50 credits, mostly in films, including an Academy Award nomination, when he became uninsurable.  At this point, Crawford has around 60 credits, mostly in television.  Completely different careers.

I haven't seen any confirmation that Crawford is, in fact, uninsurable, let alone has a drug problem.  If he is, he won't need to go on an apology tour.  He'd most likely be up for guest parts in TV shows, which don't require completion bonds.

[Happy Harpy]

16 hours ago, DearEvette said:

See: Robert Downey Jr.  Big names were still lining to up work for him even though he was completely unreliable.  It wasn't until he was deemed uninsurable that he began to lose parts in A-list projects.  After a long stint in rehab, a confessional on Oprah, and finally Mel Gibson( !!) paying his insurance bond himself, he was back on his comeback tour.  And look at him now.

Indeed. The big difference for me is that Robert Downey Jr wasn't a bully and only hurt himself (and the producers' wallets, incidentally) as far as I know.

[Unclejosh]

Well the leaked audio from Variety today is not good for Clayne and clearly shows he has some pretty serious anger issues and gives credence to at least some of what Damon was alleging. This doesn't mean he was this way with everyone and many of the other cast could have had nothing but positive experiences with him, but that audio is pretty damming much like the Christian Bale's was.

[BetterButter]

‘Lethal Weapon’: Inside the On-Set Clashes That Nearly Killed the Fox Series (EXCLUSIVE)

[dargosmydaddy]

Well, that was an interesting read...

[MostlyC]

The article seems to show that the real problem was that the showrunners/EPs let both actors get away with terrible behavior from the get-go. The "kids"  (aka Clayne and Wayans) needed stern parents and they didn't get one. Someone should have set the tone of "No Divo BS" and held them to it.

What a mess.

[MissLucas]

12 minutes ago, MostlyC said:

The article seems to show that the real problem was that the showrunners/EPs let both actors get away with terrible behavior from the get-go. The "kids"  (aka Clayne and Wayans) needed stern parents and they didn't get one. Someone should have set the tone of "No Divo BS" and held them to it.

What a mess.

I couldn't agree more. 

I'm glad someone was trying to dig deep instead of  and clear up a couple of things that were really disturbing. It must have been an absolutely toxic set to work on with nobody trying to get things under control before they were out of control.

[Happy Harpy]

51 minutes ago, MostlyC said:

The article seems to show that the real problem was that the showrunners/EPs let both actors get away with terrible behavior from the get-go.

The narrative is pretty clear, isn't it?

[ParadoxLost]

1 hour ago, MostlyC said:

The article seems to show that the real problem was that the showrunners/EPs let both actors get away with terrible behavior from the get-go. The "kids"  (aka Clayne and Wayans) needed stern parents and they didn't get one. Someone should have set the tone of "No Divo BS" and held them to it.

What a mess.

While I agree that a problem was that no one made sure the environment wasn't toxic.  The real problem was that the actors were prone to toxic bullshit with a heavy dose of aggressive- aggressive and passive aggressive behavior.  Interesting how many times Crawford's violent outbursts seemed to tie back to people who had current or past relationships with Wayans.

I really do feel for the crew who seemed to be trapped between hating the environment and deciding which side they wanted to take violent asshole who was hyper committed to doing a good show or lazy prima dona asshole who hated being there and just wished the show would get cancelled and didn't really care if it was good or not.

I think after this article that I'm going to bow out of season 3.  I don't want to support Wayans behavior and I'm not really ok with the studio having let go 25% of the crew because they were friendly with Crrawford.

[VCRTracking]

Makes me appreciate Kevin Tighe and Randolph Mantooth, co-stars on the 70s show Emergency! who are best friends to this day:

 

Edited June 2, 2018 by VCRTracking

[WendyCR72]

Ah, Kevin Tighe. He guest-starred on an episode of Law & Order: Criminal Intent as a drug-addict doctor going around euthanizing his elderly patients and stealing family heirlooms.

But he actually did a good job playing the bad guy. Must've been fun going to the "other side" for a bit. And I'm familiar with Randolph Mantooth from his soap opera days.  :-) And Mantooth must have a portrait in his basement, because it doesn't seem like he is aging.

[WendyCR72]

On a more-related note: Twenty-five percent of the crew is now gone? That is straight-up BS. This set sounds worse than a kindergarten class.

[ChelseaNH]

8 hours ago, BetterButter said:

‘Lethal Weapon’: Inside the On-Set Clashes That Nearly Killed the Fox Series (EXCLUSIVE)

Finally, some actual journalism.

My bet, the show will downgrade the action and focus more on comedy.

[Anela]

On 5/27/2018 at 8:10 PM, ForumWarVeteran said:

 I mean they're already talking about comebacks for the likes of Louie CK and Matt Lauer for cripes sakes.

I know. I couldn't believe it when I read that, but of course they're already hoping for it. Winona Ryder shoplifted, and was out of the public eye for years. Men sexually harass women (or worse, rape them), they expect to be back soon. 

I haven't listened to the audio, I've just read the article. Damn. Neither one looks good, and I wish I hadn't read it. 

[WendyCR72]

Just read the article. No denying Crawford sounds like a nutcase - a more real-life volatile Riggs, so to speak - but Wayans, based on this article, comes off no better. Frankly, he's lucky I'm a nobody and not in charge at Warner Brothers, because, based on this article, I would have said, screw it, and canceled it outright. Kind of mystified why one was fired when it's clear both contributed.

And Lethal Weapon, the very title? Described Martin Riggs in the films. Said it before, but this series needs Martin Riggs, if not the same actor playing him.

Good luck to Mr. Scott, but I have a feeling, especially since this seems to be still a "thing", that S3 won't even finish. But, you know, maybe that's for the best.

My $1.50, for what it's worth.

[Anela]

And Wayans doesn't even want to be there? According to the article. WTF? A briefly great show, he's damned lucky to have a job. I really liked him before. I'm so disappointed in both of them. 

[kicotan]

20 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

Makes me appreciate Kevin Tighe and Randolph Mantooth, co-stars on the 70s show Emergency!

Loved that show!  My sister had a crush on Kevin Tighe! Lol!  Thanks for the memories?

[VCRTracking]

46 minutes ago, kicotan said:

Loved that show!  My sister had a crush on Kevin Tighe! Lol!  Thanks for the memories?

 

21 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

Ah, Kevin Tighe. He guest-starred on an episode of Law & Order: Criminal Intent as a drug-addict doctor going around euthanizing his elderly patients and stealing family heirlooms.

I first saw Tighe on an episode of ER where he played a cop. Then when he played Locke's father on Lost. A few years ago I started watching reruns of Emergency on MeTV. Great show.

If somebody had to go it was better it was Crawford. If it had been Wayans, they'd have to let go of Keesha Sharp and the kids too.

[catrice2]

51 minutes ago, Anela said:

And Wayans doesn't even want to be there? According to the article. WTF? A briefly great show, he's damned lucky to have a job. I really liked him before. I'm so disappointed in both of them. 

I don't believe everything I read, and even if it is true the same person who supposedly said he didn't want to be there also acknowledged that he gave a great performance regardless.  Over the years there have been many actors who have admitted that they hated the roles they played, many for several years, but continued to do so.  People every day go to work and complain..that doesn't make them bad people.  We are all lucky to have a job in today's economy, but that doesn't mean we appreciate it every day.   Maybe he was saying that because of the toxic environment and would could blame him?   I don't think Damon has lost all his money and was out there desperately searching for work.   

 Right now there is too much he said she said, and articles being written where they don't identify "sources" by name.   Who knows what really went on?  I would guess that if  they were both equally at fault one would hope they BOTH would have been fired, especially if most of the cast was supporting Crawford.  Why would they want to continue with a show with Wayans and a crew that hated him if he was the big problem?  If that is so, they are probably moving forward for some other reason that made more financial sense to continue with a third season rather than cancel so that they can write it off or something and don't expect it to be successful. 

Other than being extremely disappointed that two grown professionals were engaging in such a childish conversation I am particularly offended by Crawford's comment that Wayans  is only in the game because of his "brothers" plural.   True his BROTHER Keenen created  Living Color, with him but the other brothers as I remember it are younger, and Damon is the one that has had more television and film roles....if you are going to insult someone be factual. 

Crawford did an ok job, I was not blown away by either performance.  It was something to do that was not a reality show.  I don't get all these passionate "I will NEVER watch again!" reactions.   It is not like it was Law and Order or NYPD Blue.....both shows who parted ways with a crazy person.

[Happy Harpy]

3 hours ago, Anela said:

And Wayans doesn't even want to be there? According to the article. WTF? A briefly great show, he's damned lucky to have a job. I really liked him before. I'm so disappointed in both of them. 

According to one of the anonymous source in the article -the "passion for his work" one, I guess. Michelle Mitchenor tweeted that Crawford said he wished the show was cancelled.

I expected Deadline and their cohorts to jump on the click-bait opportunity, although the Variety article is mostly a rehash of their second one, with more (carefully chosen) details and more mud thrown at Wayans. I'm surprised they didn't, and it makes me wondering. Again, the show making the headlines with bad publicity anymore than it already did isn't in WB's interest -or even FOX's,  since they renewed for fall. But maybe now that they were provoked, they're considering.

I said it before, I don't have any love lost for Wayans as a person. I can't but think it's karma that he's now in a similar position as Cosby's accusers. People prefer to buy the culprit's narrative. because they like him better, he's a beloved black entertainer a cute white guy, he looks so wholesome, his friends vouch for him etc. I hope he realized and learned. Still, the situation doesn't sit well with me because it isn't fair.

Edit: Just in case, I hope it's clear the similarity mentioned above pertains to a position in the eyes of the public opinion/the media only, certainly not anything else. Because, no, not even close in a hundred billion years.

Edited June 3, 2018 by Happy Harpy

[Anela]

5 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

According to one of the anonymous source in the article -the "passion for his work" one, I guess. Michelle Mitchenor tweeted that Crawford said he wished the show was cancelled.

I expected Deadline and their cohorts to jump on the click-bait opportunity, although the Variety article is mostly a rehash of their second one, with more (carefully chosen) details and more mud thrown at Wayans. I'm surprised they didn't, and it makes me wondering. Again, the show making the headlines with bad publicity anymore than it already did isn't in WB's interest -or even FOX's,  since they renewed for fall. But maybe now that they were provoked, they're considering.

I said it before, I don't have any love lost for Wayans as a person. I can't but think it's karma that he's now in a similar position as Cosby's accusers. People prefer to buy the culprit's narrative. because they like him better, he's a beloved black entertainer a cute white guy, he looks so wholesome, his friends vouch for him etc. I hope he realized and learned. Still, the situation doesn't sit well with me because it isn't fair.

Edit: Just in case, I hope it's clear the similarity mentioned above pertains to a position in the eyes of the public opinion/the media only, certainly not anything else. Because, no, not even close in a hundred billion years.

 

I'm not buying anyone's narrative, and this isn't a racial thing. I'm pissed at both of them. I don't have a job, I couldn't afford to go to the doctor (been horribly sick for two weeks), and here's someone living the good life - it just pissed me off.  It all pisses me off. I wish I hadn't read any of it. I've avoided it for two weeks. 

I used to love Damon Wayans  (he was the draw for me, when I saw he was in it). I only know Clayne from Rectify, and I don't adore him. Just making things clear. I don't appreciate it being made a race thing. I don't like how any of it was handled, and they're both babies. 

Edited June 3, 2018 by Anela

[Anela]

6 hours ago, catrice2 said:

I don't believe everything I read, and even if it is true the same person who supposedly said he didn't want to be there also acknowledged that he gave a great performance regardless.  Over the years there have been many actors who have admitted that they hated the roles they played, many for several years, but continued to do so.  People every day go to work and complain..that doesn't make them bad people.  We are all lucky to have a job in today's economy, but that doesn't mean we appreciate it every day.   Maybe he was saying that because of the toxic environment and would could blame him?   I don't think Damon has lost all his money and was out there desperately searching for work.   

 Right now there is too much he said she said, and articles being written where they don't identify "sources" by name.   Who knows what really went on?  I would guess that if  they were both equally at fault one would hope they BOTH would have been fired, especially if most of the cast was supporting Crawford.  Why would they want to continue with a show with Wayans and a crew that hated him if he was the big problem?  If that is so, they are probably moving forward for some other reason that made more financial sense to continue with a third season rather than cancel so that they can write it off or something and don't expect it to be successful. 

Other than being extremely disappointed that two grown professionals were engaging in such a childish conversation I am particularly offended by Crawford's comment that Wayans  is only in the game because of his "brothers" plural.   True his BROTHER Keenen created  Living Color, with him but the other brothers as I remember it are younger, and Damon is the one that has had more television and film roles....if you are going to insult someone be factual. 

Crawford did an ok job, I was not blown away by either performance.  It was something to do that was not a reality show.  I don't get all these passionate "I will NEVER watch again!" reactions.   It is not like it was Law and Order or NYPD Blue.....both shows who parted ways with a crazy person.

I didn't even understand the comments about him only having a career because of his brother. I've known him as an actor in his own right, and yeah, that is an awful thing to say. 

I probably won't watch, because it's just been destroyed for me. A happy little show, that was a source of comfort for me, right after my mother died. In the shock after losing her to an aneurysm, I grabbed onto a few things, like really sweet TV shows. I had a shitty winter, the Spring has been no better, and it's another small something that I thought was good, that's now gone, because of two idiots. One really fucking angry one, yeah, that's toxic. If I watch at all, it will be for the family. I love the family, Keesha Sharp, that baby of theirs. I'm seriously soured on the rest. 

Edited June 3, 2018 by Anela

[Happy Harpy]

2 hours ago, Anela said:

I'm not buying anyone's narrative, and this isn't a racial thing. I'm pissed at both of them. I don't have a job, I couldn't afford to go to the doctor (been horribly sick for two weeks), and here's someone living the good life - it just pissed me off.  It all pisses me off. I wish I hadn't read any of it. I've avoided it for two weeks. 

You said "according to the article", so I wasn't talking about you in particular. I had switched subject to my opinion of Wayans, and he was confronted to those people on Twitter, mostly. I'm sorry you had such an awful time and I hope things get better for you. 

[loki567]

If nothing else, this whole situation just shows the amazing amount of ego management that goes into making even the most basic television show. Look at this:

 

Quote

A copy of an internal memo obtained by Variety that was sent by a member of Wayans’ personal team to a production staffer ahead of Season 1 included three pages of detailed instructions about Wayans’ diet. “DAMON MUST BE GIVEN FOOD EVERY 2.5 hours,” the memo read. “Even if he’s in the middle of a scene, or doesn’t want it at the moment, please make sure he’s aware that the food is there for him, and where the food will be.” An additional memo from the same team member noted, “Nap time is a big big thing for Damon, especially during lunch. After he’s had lunch, he’ll want to be left alone until absolutely necessary.”

This for freaking, "hasn't been famous since 2005," Damon Wayans. Jesus, just imagine what happens on The Walking Dead or something. 

[FinnishViewer]

Quote

This for freaking, "hasn't been famous since 2005," Damon Wayans. Jesus, just imagine what happens on The Walking Dead or something. 

I don't know about the naps, but the food situation is due to his having diabetes according to some poster on AVClub.

[Happy Harpy]

6 minutes ago, FinnishViewer said:

I don't know about the naps, but the food situation is due to his having diabetes according to some poster on AVClub.

It is. It was also mentioned in the Variety article.

[Sonja]

4 hours ago, FinnishViewer said:

I don't know about the naps, but the food situation is due to his having diabetes according to some poster on AVClub.

Coming from a family of diabetics and working closely with one, I have yet to see an adult who needs someone else handling their diabetes. Food being made available by the employer is of course different in this case because if they are on location, it can be difficult to bring your own stuff, but emercengy gels, etc aren't bigger than a phone anymore, they fit into your pocket. Most Type I diabetics I know (don't know if Wayans is one) by now have an implant in their arm that is connected to an app, so if my local national health insurance provider pays for those things, I doubt he'll be unable to afford one.

I'm all for supporting people with chronic issues, but how many employers would remind their diabetic employees to eat every 2.5 hours and then send them off for a nap (which is unrelated in my opinion).  Again, I'm not griping about the food being available, but about babying a grown man.

This thing reads like band riders; some are regular, some put in jokes to see if anyone is actually reading them (no blue M&Ms) and some think they have to be waited on hand and foot. Seems Wayans' agent tried and WB signed which is their own fault but shouldn't be taken out on the crew.

As for Crawford, he's not a teenager anymore FFS, it's not that hard to not yell at people, frustration or not. I'm working in an open space office, so if I need to concentrate, I listen to music and interviews on youtube via headphones and a few months ago landed on a podcast ep with him as guest. Apart from not being the most interesting interviewee, I was wondering why he would go back to Hollywood when it's apparent from just listening to him that this is not a healthy environment for him or doesn't bring out the best in him.

And as some others mentioned, where were the showrunner and the studio in all of this?! I hope someone manages to get out of their NDA so that this can be taught as a 'how not to do' example in film school.

[DearEvette]

Yeah, the Wayans thing sounds like a contract rider of sorts.  But since it seems to be health related I wonder if it is explicitly included to for liability issues in the event something does happen while on set related to his diabetes and he can't claim that his health was not being accommodated by the show?

The Variety article still hasn't swayed me from believing that Crawford comes off as rather toxic and that the Wayans stuff is fairly minor in comparison and is included in some ways to present a picture of balanced reporting but can be viewed in some ways a deflection from the more critical issues.  Is Wayan's riders, including his not wanting to table read, responsible for the problems on set? According to the article those things were all in place prior to the show even starting in season 1.  So what precipitated the animosity between Crawford and Wayans?   Was it there is S1?  or did in grow in S2?

Crawford seems to have some sort of dick measuring stick where if 'you can't take a hit' you're a pussy and must be ridiculed for it.  The two or three confrontations noted in the article all seem to be precipitated by Crawford.  The walk off by Eric Laneuville, a veteran tv director with decades of experience and tons of directing credits, was precipitated by Crawford's reactions.  It was Crawford's pay that got docked because of the delay and change in directors.

Even though I still think Crawford comes off sounding like a massive asshole and has deservedly been reprimanded, I do think the show-runners  and ep have alion's share of the blame in how it appears they have no control over the set.  His outbursts, no matter how 'passionate' he is for the work, should never have been tolerated from the get go.  Lead actor or not, he is not the boss.  Say what you will about Wayan's 'Divo' demands.  They all sound like they were duly agreed upon as part of his contract.  Crawford yelling profanities at people was not.

[kassygreene]

Not to take a side in this (I would have fired them both a year earlier), but the 2.5 hour eating condition in the contract is probably there to force the show to give him the scheduled time to eat.  Show biz is a Business, and the pressure to put off a food break would be ongoing.

It's not that much different then a contractual obligation to let a nursing mother breastfeed or pump.

[Sonja]

22 hours ago, DearEvette said:

 Is Wayan's riders, including his not wanting to table read, responsible for the problems on set?

Crawford seems to have some sort of dick measuring stick where if 'you can't take a hit' you're a pussy and must be ridiculed for it.  The two or three confrontations noted in the article all seem to be precipitated by Crawford.  The walk off by Eric Laneuville, a veteran tv director with decades of experience and tons of directing credits, was precipitated by Crawford's reactions.  It was Crawford's pay that got docked because of the delay and change in directors.

That's another thing I don't get. The decision about there being table reads or not should never be one actors, but the producers. Agreeing to this was a mistake.

Crawford's behaviour was definitely inexcusable and I tend to side-eye everyone who uses the word pussy as a put down.

2 hours ago, kassygreene said:

Not to take a side in this (I would have fired them both a year earlier), but the 2.5 hour eating condition in the contract is probably there to force the show to give him the scheduled time to eat.  Show biz is a Business, and the pressure to put off a food break would be ongoing.

I have no issue with them providing food for him every 2.5 hours, but I can't get over 'takes nap time very seriously'. Whoever wrote this either didn't let anyone proof-read or doesn't like the guy much. 

[Irlandesa]

On 6/1/2018 at 6:36 PM, ParadoxLost said:

I really do feel for the crew who seemed to be trapped between hating the environment and deciding which side they wanted to take violent asshole who was hyper committed to doing a good show or lazy prima dona asshole who hated being there and just wished the show would get cancelled and didn't really care if it was good or not.

I finally got a chance to read and respond to this article. 

I think the perspectives are fascinating. Crawford made sure everyone knew, in word and deed, just  how committed he was to making things perfect. And yes he had outbursts but it was just because he cared so much about perfection.  Since he did bring it on screen, many coworkers accepted that reasoning.  Wayans gave the impression of being less committed to perfection, less interested in controlling things to make sure that perfection happened and less energetic overall. But he also didn't try to justify the "laziness" others reported seeing. That said, on screen, I think he also brought it when the cameras were rolling.  In spite of all the drama, both did their jobs and even had chemistry when they had scenes together.

So for all Crawford's assurance that the outbursts were just because he wanted things to be great, Wayans different process shows that no, that probably isn't the case. 

We hear similar discussions surrounding certain directors like David O'Russell who apparently is a screaming bully on set but it's okay because of "art" or whatever.  I've also heard a discussion from writers who served as writing assistants and how some writing assistants want to become show runners to stop the writer's abuse of writing assistants/lower ranked crew while others want to become show runners so it's their turn to be the bully. 

On 6/2/2018 at 6:27 PM, catrice2 said:

Maybe he was saying that because of the toxic environment and would could blame him?   I don't think Damon has lost all his money and was out there desperately searching for work.  

Right.  Both of their desires to leave could be tied into how much they didn't get along.

On 6/4/2018 at 10:51 AM, DearEvette said:

Yeah, the Wayans thing sounds like a contract rider of sorts.  But since it seems to be health related I wonder if it is explicitly included to for liability issues in the event something does happen while on set related to his diabetes and he can't claim that his health was not being accommodated by the show?

The Variety article still hasn't swayed me from believing that Crawford comes off as rather toxic and that the Wayans stuff is fairly minor in comparison and is included in some ways to present a picture of balanced reporting but can be viewed in some ways a deflection from the more critical issues.  Is Wayan's riders, including his not wanting to table read, responsible for the problems on set? According to the article those things were all in place prior to the show even starting in season 1.  So what precipitated the animosity between Crawford and Wayans?   Was it there is S1?  or did in grow in S2?

I think this is what it comes down to.  Wayans apparently notified the network of these requests before filming started on Season 1.  And I don't think they're that bad.  It's easy to put some PA on food duty to make sure there is food available to him.  And crew union contracts mean there will be meal breaks that Damon would like to spend napping.  He doesn't want to be called to set until it's absolutely necessary.  To me, it sounds like that's how he preserves his energy for the on screen work.  That's not to say his behavior was beyond reproach but if I'm a producer and I have to pick a side between two actors who show up on screen, I absolutely see why they went with passive aggressive over aggressive aggressive.

10 hours ago, Sonja said:

That's another thing I don't get. The decision about there being table reads or not should never be one actors, but the producers. Agreeing to this was a mistake.

In one of the earlier articles I read, it was mentioned that it wasn't that unusual.  I haven't read about it before for shows in their first seasons but I absolutely have read about it for shows in their later seasons....instances where some stars have standins for any rehearsal.

[ForumWarVeteran]

Honestly the whole thing sounds like a poorly managed shit show from top to bottom.

[lizzyp]

On 5/26/2018 at 3:55 PM, Irlandesa said:

We aren't necessarily going to get details. The WB and HR aren't likely going to release the details.  It's one of the hardest things with a co-worker is fired.  Everyone wants to know why and yet it rarely is shared.  The person Crawford paid likely signed an NDA.  And people have a lot to lose in speaking up.  Wayans spoke up and is largely attacked on social media for being jealous, a lying liar who lies....etc.  Wayans has enough clout to weather that, although he left social media, but for a lower level person, it's probably not worth it.  Heck, even for an upper level person, it's probably not worth it, especially now that he's gone.

It was my understanding that Crawford wasn't fired- his contract wasn't renewed.  Legally that is a big difference, and it would mean that there was no real reason that people couldn't talk about it.  What made my whiskers quiver was that Wayans waited until after the re-cast to take it to Twitter.  Whether it was or not, it FELT like he was kicking the guy after he was already down, and it felt unnecessary to me.

[Irlandesa]

14 minutes ago, lizzyp said:

It was my understanding that Crawford wasn't fired- his contract wasn't renewed.  Legally that is a big difference, and it would mean that there was no real reason that people couldn't talk about it. 

I think firing him and not picking up his option when he appeared to want to continue is a distinction without much of a difference, especially when it comes to HR matters.  HR departments aren't usually prone to sharing information about employee discipline unless they're rather dysfunctional (and there are plenty out there.)

I get why Wayans spoke up. He felt he was unfairly being blamed for Crawford's firing and he probably was.  But he probably would have been much better not taking to Twitter and instead let things leak as they have.

[Happy Harpy]

30 minutes ago, lizzyp said:

What made my whiskers quiver was that Wayans waited until after the re-cast to take it to Twitter.

The fate of LW depended on the recast (Deadline etc.) and both were announced as the same time. So he kept silent until the show was renewed which, considering what has happened since, was the responsible thing to do for once.

8 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

I get why Wayans spoke up. He felt he was unfairly being blamed for Crawford's firing and he probably was.  But he probably would have been much better not taking to Twitter and instead let things leak as they have.

Exactly. It didn't convince the conspiracy theorists on Twitter, anyway.

[MissLucas]

1 hour ago, Happy Harpy said:

Exactly. It didn't convince the conspiracy theorists on Twitter, anyway.

That's hardly surprising considering that his twitter statements gave plenty of food for more conspiracy theories. 

[Happy Harpy]

36 minutes ago, MissLucas said:

That's hardly surprising considering that his twitter statements gave plenty of food for more conspiracy theories. 

Yeah, wasn't there a whole hoopla about Wayans being delusional or pathological liar for his mention of Lance Henriksen, who "was never even a guest on LW"? And then, oopsie!  

Anything and everything feeds conspiracy theories, that's the principle :))  Had Wayans regretted the situation and wished Crawford well, I'm quite certain some would have seen it as an admission of guilt. That's why he'd have been more inspired to keep quiet.

He didn't answer after the last wave, so either he got it, either WB tightened the gag order. They're probably preparing a promo campaign for summer or early fall to get the focus back on the show.

[lizzyp]

6 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I think firing him and not picking up his option when he appeared to want to continue is a distinction without much of a difference, especially when it comes to HR matters.  HR departments aren't usually prone to sharing information about employee discipline unless they're rather dysfunctional (and there are plenty out there.)

I get why Wayans spoke up. He felt he was unfairly being blamed for Crawford's firing and he probably was.  But he probably would have been much better not taking to Twitter and instead let things leak as they have.

Whether he felt he was being unfairly blamed or not, the simple fact is that he has a job and Crawford doesn't.  He'd already gotten what he wanted, so whether it was or not, it seemed like a late hit.  I'm a middle child, what can I say?  I don't know what went on and I'll keep watching the show, but I'm having a hard time picturing Scott bringing the complexity to the character that Crawford did.  Doesn't mean that I won't still enjoy Wayans performance, and I agree with so many above who have mentioned the wonderful dynamic the Murtaugh family has.  I may also enjoy Scott's performance. 

It just means that I think Tweeting some of what Wayans tweeted was unnecessary.  Saying in an interview that someone was mercurial, hot headed, difficult or any number of other things is very different from posting pictures of 'he's an emotional terrorist' stickers. 

[ChelseaNH]

Unnecessary and kind of weird.  The shrapnel thing was strange.  Shrapnel is flying debris.  You can generally predict that an effect will cause shrapnel; you can generally predict what area it might cover.  You can't predict that a piece of shrapnel will follow a particular trajectory to a particular spot.  Action scenes are highly choreographed.  The director's job is to make sure everyone is comfortable with the choreography (both in the sense of what they're supposed to do and how it will all come together safely) before calling action, but he can't actually make people do what they're supposed to do when they're supposed to do it.  If little accidents are common, that's a problem, but this seemed to be an isolated incident that Wayans was taking awfully personally.  And the "emotional terrorist stickers" sounded over the top.

I have no idea if Wayans had any involvement in any decisions, and I can get being happy that a difficult coworker is gone, but agents are usually better than talent at managing perceptions.

[Happy Harpy]

On 6/10/2018 at 4:07 AM, lizzyp said:

Whether he felt he was being unfairly blamed or not, the simple fact is that he has a job and Crawford doesn't.

The simple fact is that for all his flaws, Wayans didn't abuse anyone and Crawford did. That's why one still has a job and the other doesn't.

1 hour ago, ChelseaNH said:

The shrapnel thing was strange.  Shrapnel is flying debris.  You can generally predict that an effect will cause shrapnel; you can generally predict what area it might cover.  You can't predict that a piece of shrapnel will follow a particular trajectory to a particular spot.  Action scenes are highly choreographed.  The director's job is to make sure everyone is comfortable with the choreography (both in the sense of what they're supposed to do and how it will all come together safely) before calling action, but he can't actually make people do what they're supposed to do when they're supposed to do it.  If little accidents are common, that's a problem, but this seemed to be an isolated incident that Wayans was taking awfully personally. 

So, you're insinuating that it's somehow Wayans fault if he was hurt whereas Crawford was in charge of the set...and he's kind of a you know what for being upset he was hurt on his workplace?

The WB investigated the incident, and they found Crawford responsible since there was a reprimand; a reprimand Crawford himself admits to. Again, simple fact.

[ChelseaNH]

3 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

So, you're insinuating that it's somehow Wayans fault if he was hurt

No.  Actions scenes involve dozens of people who have to do the right thing at the right time in sequence.  I have no information what anyone was supposed to do, so I have no idea who, if anyone, failed to do what they were supposed to do when they were supposed to.  Therefore, nothing I said indicates that Wayans failed to follow the choreography, and I don't see where you got the idea that I implied any such thing.

[Happy Harpy]

1 hour ago, ChelseaNH said:

No.  Actions scenes involve dozens of people who have to do the right thing at the right time in sequence.  I have no information what anyone was supposed to do, so I have no idea who, if anyone, failed to do what they were supposed to do when they were supposed to.  Therefore, nothing I said indicates that Wayans failed to follow the choreography, and I don't see where you got the idea that I implied any such thing.

Here: "he can't actually make people do what they're supposed to do when they're supposed to do it." Wayans being one of those "people" involved, he could be the one who didn't follow the choreography even if his name wasn't mentioned here, which is the point of an insinuation. I got this idea because of your previous posts, but I wasn't certain hence the interrogation point at the end of my sentence.

Indeed, someone obviously failed to do what they were supposed to do. The person who got a reprimand.

[lizzyp]

5 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

The simple fact is that for all his flaws, Wayans didn't abuse anyone and Crawford did. That's why one still has a job and the other doesn't.

I never said anything about whether one deserved to be without a job or not, I simply said that since Crawford had already been removed from the show, there was no longer any 'threat' to Wayans or any other cast or crew member, so taking it to Twitter seems excessive.  I stand by that, no matter who did it or which 'side' of the stick they were on - it was a done conflict.

[ChelseaNH]

5 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

Wayans being one of those "people" involved, he could be the one who didn't follow the choreography even if his name wasn't mentioned here, which is the point of an insinuation.

I wrote in completely general terms, and you figured I meant to be specific.  I don't see how I could be any farther from being specific.

[Happy Harpy]

6 hours ago, lizzyp said:

I never said anything about whether one deserved to be without a job or not, I simply said that since Crawford had already been removed from the show, there was no longer any 'threat' to Wayans or any other cast or crew member, so taking it to Twitter seems excessive.  I stand by that, no matter who did it or which 'side' of the stick they were on - it was a done conflict.

Excessive? Wayans took it to Twitter to answer and defend himself, after the show was renewed, against the accusations and insults that he was a victim of there from the moment the news broke. The Twitter tinfoil hats accused him of blowing things out of proportion, of being the only one to complain about Crawford, of inventing everything, of being the one who endangered the show (?!), of being responsible for Crawford's firing out of jealousy, etc. Those accusations and insults I'd call "excessive", and I don't see how he could have responded without talking about what Crawford actually did and how his firing was the result of Crawford's own doing. He sounded outraged, not gleeful -which is why he should have stayed silent, imo, it's always better to speak with a clear head.

He had stayed silent until then and has stayed silent since, even after the last Variety article. I didn't see Crawford's apologists protest too much about this one, by the way, although it was a done conflict since he was already fired.

But it's not done, since some people still try to find excuses to Crawford by diluting his abuse in mud thrown at Wayans (like in the aforementioned article).

1 hour ago, ChelseaNH said:

I wrote in completely general terms, and you figured I meant to be specific.  I don't see how I could be any farther from being specific.

Yes, I did. And my point is, the situation calls for being specific, since there is one responsible for this incident and it's Crawford.

[MissLucas]

8 minutes ago, Happy Harpy said:

But it's not done, since some people still try to find excuses to Crawford by diluting his abuse in mud thrown at Wayans (like in the aforementioned article).

Pointing out that Wayans did some shitty things is not trying to find excuses for Crawford nor excusing his behavior. 

[ChelseaNH]

6 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

And my point is, the situation calls for being specific, since there is one responsible for this incident and it's Crawford.

Then how, specifically, is Crawford responsible?  What specific action or decision of his resulted in the accident?  What was the specific chain of events that shows causality?  In the interests of specificity.

Unless, perhaps, there are limits on the need for specificity, in which case, perhaps those limits do not need to encompass everything that is said by everyone.

[lizzyp]

6 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

Excessive? Wayans took it to Twitter to answer and defend himself, after the show was renewed, against the accusations and insults that he was a victim of there from the moment the news broke. The Twitter tinfoil hats accused him of blowing things out of proportion, of being the only one to complain about Crawford, of inventing everything, of being the one who endangered the show (?!), of being responsible for Crawford's firing out of jealousy, etc. Those accusations and insults I'd call "excessive", and I don't see how he could have responded without talking about what Crawford actually did and how his firing was the result of Crawford's own doing. He sounded outraged, not gleeful -which is why he should have stayed silent, imo, it's always better to speak with a clear head.

He had stayed silent until then and has stayed silent since, even after the last Variety article. I didn't see Crawford's apologists protest too much about this one, by the way, although it was a done conflict since he was already fired.

But it's not done, since some people still try to find excuses to Crawford by diluting his abuse in mud thrown at Wayans (like in the aforementioned article).

Yes, I did. And my point is, the situation calls for being specific, since there is one responsible for this incident and it's Crawford.

...and like I said before, he could have dropped hints, he could have used words like 'difficult' or 'passionate' or 'hot headed' but he chose to got with 'emotional terrorist' and that, to me, seemed excessive.  I was talking about my feelings, I did not present it as 'fact' and I haven't claimed to know the truth.  Nor have I defended Crawford because I don't know what happened.

Your constant reference to 'the Twitter tinfoil hats' tells me that you are quite convinced that your opinion is correct and no other will be tolerated, so how about we just stop it all right here - I will NOT apologize for my feelings and I'm not making judgements or accusations, so it really doesn't seem like something worth 'arguing' about.

[Guest]

Please make sure your comments are directed toward the show/media coverage of the show- not arguing with other posters. You can express differing opinions, but please remember our overarching rule of “Be civil.”