View Single Post
Old 09-19-2012, 08:27 PM
Originally Posted by DaMovieMan View Post
I just never read that an actor said the set was a disaster. LaPaghlia had Underground to do and from what I understand he felt indebted to the director for that film (fellow Aussie, nowhere near as big as QT, etc.) so I get why he left but still...doesn't sound too good to me.
If I recall the article correctly, he was calling it a disaster (I'm not sure he actually used that word) in the sense that it was over-budget and over-schedule. He said he was just sitting around while other stuff was being shot, waiting to shoot his scenes. Judging by his filmography, I don't think LaPaghlia has ever encountered a production of this size. A 170 page Tarantino western probably isn't going to be the smoothest of shoots. He should have known that going in.

This has happened with most of Tarantino's films. They're so large in scope that you end up with inevitable scheduling and budgeting issues. I remember hearing about Kill Bill's production and how out of control it was. I remember it being in production for an incredibly long time.

Ultimately, in the end, you know Tarantino got the footage that he wanted, which is really all that matters for those wanting to watch the film.
Reply With Quote