Hi Bev!

I read that, too, but Coppola never asked anyone else (that I know
of) to sign that kind of contract. He either learned his lesson or
that was the excuse for being fired that Keitel used. Like DKelly
said, no one really knows what the "real" reason was. The difference
of opinion of how Keitel should have played the character makes the
most sense to me. They were from two different worlds and Keitel can
be frightening in some of his chararacters.
Who knows?

Chaille



--- In harveykeitelfans@yahoogroups.com, b c
<teenyweenyminiaturecottage@y...> wrote:
> It was because Coppola wanted exclusivity for a long period of time
on HK's films and he was not about to sign his life
away................Bev
>
>
> There is 1 message in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
> 1. Re: Reflections In A Golden Eye
> From: dkelly26666
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
__
>
______________________________________________________________________
__
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 00:08:48 -0000
> From: dkelly26666
> Subject: Re: Reflections In A Golden Eye
>
> Hello!
> I'm not sure anyone knows the specifics of why Keitel was
> fired. He was famously cast in the lead role of Willard during pre-
> production in 1975. He would have played opposite Marlon Brando and
> Robert Duvall. It truly was the role < I feel, that would have made
a
> huge star out of Keitel, much like the Godfather films did for Al
> Pacino and (in Part II) Robert De Niro. Unfortunately, just about
two
> weeks into production, Coppola suddenly fired Keitel, much to the
> dismay of the film's other producers. Production was halted,
> temporarily, until Martin Sheen was cast as his replacement, and
went
> on to do this very famous film. Sheen was great in the part, but I
> often wonder what could have been with Keitel in there.
>
> Anyway, neither side have much wanted to talk about it since.
> Keitel DID say in his Playboy '95 interview that he didn't hold any
> grudges againt Coppola after all these years. He said something to
> the effect that they would have to be some really sad old men to
> still be bearing scars about that one. I once heard someone
speculate
> that Harvey and Coppola's personalitites simply clashed. That
Francis
> was this rich California kid from some fraternity at UCLA, and
Keitel
> was this tough, blue-collar kid from Brooklyn. Also, Keitel had
> mainly worked with friends like Scorsese and De Niro up to that
> point, and he may have been used to a bit more creative freedom
than
> a tyrannical Coppola was willing to give him. In any case, it
DIDN'T
> happen, and they obviously have never tried to work together again.
>
> Sadly, Keitel's big Hollywood career took an instant nose dive
> after that, and he wouldn't be back for many years. He always
worked,
> mind you, but he never again achieved a big level of stardom until
> about 16 years later.
>
>
>
> --- In harveykeitelfans@yahoogroups.com, Carrie Anderson
> wrote:
> > HI,
> >
> > Can anyone tell me why Keitel was fired during
coppolas 'apocolypse
> now'?
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
__
>
______________________________________________________________________
__
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]