Actor downplays reports in the media on his flammable temper

May 13, 2010 07:20 GMT  ·  By
“I’ve been sold as an angry person and that’s just not true,” Russell Crowe says of how he’s portrayed as one of the most difficult actors in the industry
   “I’ve been sold as an angry person and that’s just not true,” Russell Crowe says of how he’s portrayed as one of the most difficult actors in the industry

Not long ago, Nicole LaPorte came out with “The Man Who Would Be King: An Almost Epic Tale of Moguls, Movies, and a Company called DreamWorks,” a book offering a look behind the curtain of the movie industry. It also included accounts of how Russell Crowe acted like a diva on the set of “Gladiator,” which only added more fuel to already circulating rumors of how he was one of the most difficult persons to work with in the industry.

Now promoting his latest film, also a collaboration with Ridley Scott, “Robin Hood,” Crowe says in an new interview with the Telegraph that his bad temper and even worse manners have been well blown out of proportions in the media. He’s not a diva by any means and he’s certainly not the mean guy he’s been portrayed in the tabloids. What happened was that he got stuck with this bad-boy image after one particular incident and now he simply can’t shake it off.

“When you read it in black and white it sounds like I was being ridiculously aggressive, but one of the main misunderstandings is that I’ve been sold as an angry person and that’s just not true. I like to put a lot of effort into what I do and that comes with a certain amount of energy, especially when you’re weary and it requires you to dig deep inside yourself… I certainly have a temper that can flare up, but having a temper is a completely different thing from being an angry person,” Russell explains.

In the same interview, he also talks about “Robin Hood,” which is already getting very positive reviews a few days ahead of the official release. For instance, Crowe says it was a real honor and a pleasure to be working with Scott again (they also teamed up for “Gladiator”) because he has the utmost confidence in him being a very responsible and organized director. For instance, Scott would never exceed the approved budget, says the actor, though that’s not what ongoing reports claim: “Robin Hood” had an initial budget of $80 million, which it surpassed almost the day when it went into production, heading towards $155 million. After it wrapped, the budget turned out to be somewhere in the vicinity of $237 million, before promo and marketing costs.

“We never assume that he is a charitable person, he’s not. He’s totally about looking after himself but he develops into this other thing, mainly driven by the desire, I suppose, to be loved by Marion,” Crowe says of his Robin Hood. Indeed, reviewers also say that this is not the goody-two-shoes character we’ve been acquainted to in past movies.