David Prowse Banned - Not Paid Royalties

This seems to be a typical business practice.  I know in my past career, the person footing the bill for a new building would often push costs from one job to another.  The movie industry is no different.  And when it comes to grudges that's the easy accounting to send a message.

Here's a recent case:

http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=18219&count=0

Deadline got its hands on profit statement for "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix," the 2007 Warner Bros movie which grossed $938 million in worldwide ticket sales on a $150 million budget. But if you take a look at the statement below, the studio claims that the film actually lost $167 million.

Oh-kaaaayyyy....

How do you get from Thornton to Westminster in under 1 minute?

Fooled you!  I have no idea how.

Another question:

I believe Clive Revil(the original Emperor from ESB) is still alive.  Does he get any residuals now that he is totally cut out of the film since the 2004 updated version?

This came up last year, I think it turned out he's talking about his profit points in the 1997 release of Jedi, which I believe is different from residuals? (Do we even know how much money Jedi '97 actually cost to do? Besides the restoration and marketing, there was that shitty musical number and I doubt John Williams wrote that new doctor's office music for free. And it ultimately made a lot less than Star Wars.) 

It does add fuel to the idea that the special editions are legally considered a totally different movie and were only done to give Lucas more control over them from then on.

But is Prowse really getting it any worse (if its true he's never earned a dime) than any other actor in a similar position?

And in all honesty, given that he was frequently doubled for the fight scenes, is there much that Prowse did that any person 6'5" couldn't have done?

SilverWook said:

It's a dick move on Lucasfilm's part if true. Fans will still stand in line for Prowse's autograph after all these years.

Whether somebody else could have played the part is really not an issue. People want to meet the guy who originally did.

I just meant in regards to the royalties. With no face, no voice, and a considerable ammount of doubling for the fight scenes, Prowse was kinda a glorified stand-in. Even Peter Mayhew had eyes showing. Vader's most dramatic moments could have been done with a helmet on a stand.

I agree it sucks he wont be at events.

TheBoost said:

I just meant in regards to the royalties. With no face, no voice, and a considerable ammount of doubling for the fight scenes, Prowse was kinda a glorified stand-in. Even Peter Mayhew had eyes showing. Vader's most dramatic moments could have been done with a helmet on a stand.

In fairness, he did also have to learn all the lines well enough for other actors to interact with him in a natural way.  I remember from the LOTR extras that people thought Andy Serkis was just a stand in, until they realized how much he brought to the role.  You might argue that Serkis did more than Prowse, and I would agree, but if Prowse had not learnt his part well, we might have had a similar problem to that of the prequels, in which actors had to deliver their lines to empty air in front of a blue screen.

edit - looks like SilverWook beat me to it.  That will teach me to type something off and on, whilst doing several other activities.

I met Dave Prowse last October and got some stuff signed by him , when he was signing a Darth Vader photo he told me he got a letter from the lawyers representing george lucas / lucasfilm saying David Prowse is not to sign any more autographs  " Dave Prowse is Darth Vader ".

I'm not sure if that's even possible?

Lucas owns the rights to the name and image of Darth Vader but not Dave's name and if you buy a photo of Darth Vader and ask him to sign his name across it what legal mechanism could be used to stop him?

I wonder if there would be a problem if Kate Garner signed pictures of Marion Robert Morrison with the legend "John Wayne Is Big Leggy"?

Or Roger Moore signing a picture of Sean Connery?

Or if Sarah Brightman signed a picture of Jake Lloyd with the caption "Evil Darth Vader Has Been Banished To Mars"?

Erikstormtrooper said:

I think LFL's issue is that Prowse writes "David Prowse is Darth Vader", not just "David Prowse".

In that case, I understand Lucasfilm's objection, although I do not agree that Lucasfilm should be empowered to ban him from writing the slogan.  "David Prowse is Darth Vader" sounds awfully like he is minimising the contribution of other artists to the character. Why not just sign it "David Prowse"?  No one could justifiably object to that; it would identify him with the character without sounding as if others were being sidelined, and everybody would be happy.