By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy. We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Ruby Rose wanted off Batwoman — and no one was going to stand in her way.
Although the actress’ sudden, surprising departure from The CW superhero drama after just one season was framed on Tuesday as her choice and her choice alone, sources confirm to TVLine that the split was — at best — a mutual one.
“It wasn’t 100-percent her decision,” concedes a source close to the show. “It was a breakup. She wasn’t happy working on the show, and did that make her fun to work with? No. So everyone decided it would be in the best interests of the show, and for all concerned, if they parted ways. It just wasn’t a good fit.”
According to an insider, Rose — coming off the features John Wick: Chapter 2 and The Meg — was distressed by the long hours demanded of a lead TV role and did not acclimate well to life in Vancouver (where the show shoots). Batwoman marked the actress’ first full-time series gig, following her debut as the Scarlet Knight in the Arrowverse‘s December 2018 “Elseworlds” crossover and a short arc on Orange Is the New Black.
Reps for Warner Bros. and The CW declined to comment for this story. Rose’s spokesperson, meanwhile, could not be reached for comment.
In a joint statement released Tuesday, Berlanti Prods. and Warner Bros. Television confirmed that Rose’s iconic role would be recast — and with another LGBTQ actress. “[We] thank Ruby for her contributions to the success of our first season and wish her all the best,” the two companies said. “The studio and network are firmly committed to Batwoman’s second season and long-term future, and we — along with the show’s talented creative team — look forward to sharing its new direction, including the casting of a new lead actress and member of the LGBTQ community, in the coming months.”
Batwoman Season 2, like many returning CW series, is not slated to premiere until January 2021.
Rose landed the role of Kate Kane/Batwoman in August 2018, following a brief search for an out LGBTQ actress to portray the famously gay vigilante. But within a week, Rose had shut off Comments on her Instagram after a wave of backlash.
“Where on earth did ‘Ruby is not a lesbian therefore she can’t be batwoman’ come from — has to be the funniest most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read,” she posted. “I came out at 12? And have for the past 5 years had to deal with ‘she’s too gay’ how do y’all flip it like that?” She added that the time since her casting had been a “rollercoaster,” and that she would take a break from Twitter to focus on work. “If you need me,” she signed off, “I’ll be on my Bat Phone.”
Last September, Rose shared (with a graphic video) that she had months prior undergone emergency surgery after herniating two discs while performing stunts on an unspecified project. She said the injury came close to severing her spinal cord, leaving her in “chronic pain.”
I figure she was hard to work with. She gives off that vibe even while acting.
“Acting” been (or should be) the keyword in that statement.
“Acting” been? please explain what that verb tense means
Autocorrected in my brain to “being,” but thanks for flagging typos on the internet.
Typos on the internet could lead to war, just saying. Not only do spelling errors make you seem dumb, but they can change the entire context of a sentence. Grammar and correct spelling, is becoming a lost art.
Have you ever heard of dyslexia? Don’t be so judgemental.
“Grammar and correct spelling, is becoming a lost art.”
Says the guy with the misplaced comma. Sweet. Were you aiming for irony or did karma just show her pretty little head?
You have to remember that this forum doesn’t have an editing feature. It is easy for mistakes to slip by.
Well, heck I didn’t even know what you were saying. Sometimes a clarification is needed. If they were being jerks they would say “Acting been” or “Acting Being.” Don’t take it personal.
At least it was known when to stay stop rather than letting someone who did not enjoy what she was doing continue that work. Nothing but respect for all those involved and she would not have known she couldn’t handle the long hours without trying so… Now she knows!
I’m assuming she auditioned for the role. So what was she thinking her schedule was going to be as the lead character? Seems to me she didn’t think this gig through.
Not the first time that this sort of thing has happened. I recall the casting of Genevieve Bujold as Capt. Janeway on “Star Trek: Voyager,” only to discover after partially filming the first episode that not only was the actress a bad fit for the character and for the show, but Bujold was unprepared for the rigorous schedule of filming a show like Star Trek.
Fortunately, with Bujold’s case, it was discovered early enough on that they were able to recast and re-shoot before the show premiered, not a year on as in this case.
Great comparison!
I figure she was hard to work with. She gives off that vibe even while acting.
The other thing I remember about that is Bujold was hired without an audition. They assumed she’d be so perfect they just signed her up when they found out she was interested.
What ever happened to casting based on there talant as an actor/actress, I don’t like reading about someone being cast because there white, black, lesbian, gay, Hispanic, Swedish what ever happened to tallant pure unadulterated talant.
I really liked Ruby Rose as Kate Kane and Batwoman. I still do. However, I only reply because I think your comment (@John O’Farrell) might be the best comment on the internet I have ever read. Intended or not, it’s smart. And a smart crowd will appreciate it.
I really liked Ruby Rose as Kate Kane and Batwoman. I still do. However, I only reply because I think your comment (@John O’Farrell) might be the best comment on the internet I have ever read. Intended or not, it’s smart. And a smart crowd will appreciate it.
Yes, I was just remembering the ST:Voyager story as well. Kate Mulgrew wound up being great in that role, so hopefully the same will happen here.
She probably didn’t realize how long the hours would be and she’s certainly not the first actor to dislike living in Vancouver. But this is life and it’s best to leave a miserable situation if there’s no way to improve it.
I also think the stunt injury that almost severed her spinal cord and has left her in chronic pain could have been a reason why she was unhappy.
Yes! Why is everyone ignoring this? We wouldn’t be venting on message boards with that kind of pain, let alone starring in a TV Show.
it was the first thing I thought of, as I deal with chronic pain in my neck, back, legs and have migraines most days. Over the years, when I have been overwhelmed with long hours at work, I loose my normal positive & chipper outlook on life. Its unfortunate that she is dealing with so much and had to bow out of her first lead role.
What is wrong with Vancouver. I spent quite a bit of time there at one time and I thought it was one of the nicest places in Canada too live…only reason I didn’t move there permanently was the cost of living was too high.
I read on the comments section at Dark Horizons last year that Vancouver has a very poor social life for young people and the traffic congestion is very bad. It is very difficult for actors to go to different sets within the city. The comments were written by an agent who had actors playing on the now-cancelled “The in-Between”
The congestion is bad if you need to drive across the bottleneck of the Lion’s Gate bridge but there is nothing wrong with the social life. Plenty to do, much more than most other cities in North America.
Hey, I am just reporting what the agent said! I am pretty sure one of the two actors he or she was representing was either the lead or co-lead on that show.
First lead role on a TV show, so she thought she could do it but it turned out she didn’t enjoy it and resigned.
I mean I’m sure we have all resigned from jobs we couldn’t stand and it’s not like she’s going to need to go on welfare while she looks for something else either.
PERFECT analogy.
True, but many other have done the same thing, never to be heard from again. The red headed CSI Miami guy (I can’t remember his name, oh wait, David Caruso) had a stellar career, then he became difficult and quit to become a Movie Star! He came crawling back to the show, but it pretty much destroyed his career. Katherine Hiegle (Wrong spelling I’m sure) has never done much after leaving Grey’s anatomy. their Managers did their best to talk them out of it, but…I wish her the best of course, nobody should have to keep a job they hate, I just wish she had done it before shooting the first season because it may not only ruin her, but it will most likely take the show with it. Just my opinion.
Did you forget the injuries to her spine? That would be a reason not to return
Not too be callous, but if her injuries had been that severe, she couldn’t have done the job this long or this well. If they’d been that debilitating, she couldn’t have gone back to filming.
Not to be obvious, but what you wrote is nonsense.
-spinal fracture
-stars regularly are coerced into preforming under awful conditions. Jim Carrey/The Grinch torture training, Jane Alexander/Blindspot skin damage from fake tattoos, any action star or wrestler ever. You could probably find 10 famous stories in less than 10 minutes
Come on, man….
I wouldn’t be shocked if they went for her specifically because she was a high-profile lesbian actress
I honestly thought the same. She must of thought “wow show headliner I’m in” then came the working hours and wanted to leave. I think she’s more famous for her a unique name than for having actual talent.
That WAS the reason they went for her. They wanted an out named lesbian for the role. They said so. They want another one to replace her. They said so. It’s one of the reasons that lead to this.
This is the reason why they shouldn’t make this mistake twice. The producers said they would find another lesbian for the role instead of finding the best actress for the role like they should be doing regardless of orientation. I mean, if an actress is going to audition, are they going to ask for her sexual orientation or are they going to make her do something to prove it? Either way… isn’t that illegal?
I thought the same thing. If you’re going to say “the actress must be a member of the LGBTQ community,” that seems like a discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen.
Gay people aren’t a protected class, so there’s almost no chance a discrimination suit will go anywhere. In most US states gay people can be fired just for being gay. So this would be an interesting suit to watch, were it to happen.
I’m always kind of amused when casting decisions lead to internet debates. This is kind of the opposite of the arguments made when the Fantastic Four movie cast a black Johnny Storm. The character had never been black before, so this was wrong. The Batwoman character has always been a lesbian. The producers want to honor that. But somehow that’s wrong too. There are plenty of fine lesbian actresses out there. I’m sure they’ll cast someone suitable for the role.
Here here people, late to the party,I can’t repy to that cluless user dark but I hope he reads this msg. Batwoman was NEVER a lesbian before 2010 comics, that then did wrong by the character converting it for agenda porpouses. The seres is a such a travesty that even the left wing imdb can’t adjust the score. That is why Rose left, becouse they wen too far with the agend, and even the left wing public couldn’t cope with it. Stop excusin Rose, that all she wants is to save herself. She was casted pushed and promoted in begining of her career becouse she promoted herself as a lesbian and not for her talents, a young not complety ugly lsb.
No, it’s not illegal. Everyday, casting directors put out notices specifying male, female, age range, race, etc., actively excluding most actors from auditioning for most roles. A black, 20-30 year female is not going to be let in the room for a role calling for a white, male ’40s. Technically, anyone can play anything, but the public outrage that follows shapes the casting process.
I do recall a lot of scrutiny for the Fantastic Four. However,they cast Michael B. Jordan who is a pretty popular actor among fan boys so the backlash died quickly. It’s always a matter of who is cast. Ruby Rose isn’t very well liked among fan boys and her poor acting skills didn’t win them over.
She was probably thinking that it wasn’t worth continuing if it damaged her health to such a degree she was in chronic pain and was almost paralyzed.
Agreed. Spin thing new to me. Also am surpise how much injury happen on the first season to.
Was upstaged by the Alice every week, Rachel Skarsten is by far the better of the two and was carrying the show.
I’ve only worked on indie stuff, but I’ll say this, what seems feasible from the onset becomes grueling at times. Add to that an on-set injury and lots of night shoots, it’s easy to see why she wanted out.
Having only done movies to this point, this tv series was a first time for her. She did not adopt and therefore is no longer with the show. Sometimes it is hard to switch between the two mediums. Many actors do it with no problem. Ruby Rose perhaps because she is used to short term work from modeling (her first job) and then acting in movies, was unprepared for the lengthy filming of 22 episodes (20 in this case due to the pandemic). When you film that many episodes, you are occupied 40-44 weeks on average. For a movie, depending if you are a main role or not, it ranges up to 40 weeks but many are much shorter, like 8 to 10 weeks of filming if not the main role. Long hours are involved in all three mediums, but the duration of enduring it is the longest on TV shows. Guess she was not prepared for that amount of work. She still has modeling (maybe).
Kudos to Michael on his excellent scoop.
Now that I think about it. She was a very intense Actress with her intensity showing through on screen. Whatever happened, was for the best. I’ll miss her. Hopefully she recovers from her injuries to able to work a fulltime gig? Time to move on and find another Batwoman for the same Batchannel.
You’re kidding right? She can’t act worth sh-t. She’s a pretty lesbian face and that’s the extent of it.
Wow butt hurt much?
No, he/she is right. Her acting was so stiff and wooden that it was difficult to watch her on the show especially opposite Alice.
I liked her acting. Maybe no one or only a few agree. But her stiff face was a good thing for me.
I said a few weeks ago that if Rudy for some small chance leaves the roll ( she will be missed) but the characters sister should be the next batwoman to honor her sister so yes Alice should be Batwoman
So looking EXCLUSIVELY for a LGBTQ actor/actress is not discrimination?
Oh jesus. Relax. Is this REALLY hurting you? Were you going to audition?
And the past has shown us that if casting directors or producers don’t seek to be inclusive, it doesn’t happen. Is it so terrible for you that they’re opening up the door to an LGBTQ actress who may not get work otherwise?
The world is changing. If you can’t handle the idea that opportunities are being given to others, lock your door, disconnect your phone and internet, and keep to yourself.
Yes opportunities should be given all actresses EQUALLY to get the role.
There is plenty of work out there for non-LGBTQ actors. Chill out. Don’t make a problem where there isn’t one. smh
Well based on your own logic, your suggestion is also discrimination as you are specifying that actresses rather than all actors regardless of gender, sexuality, or sex.
Thank you. It’s not discrimination. If it was, every single actor could sue any producer over casting notices specifying male, female, race, age, etc. “We’re looking for a white male, 20-30” for this part. BAM, every actor that is not those things can now sue saying they weren’t allowed to audition.
I’m not following how that’s the same thing. I agree that a 60 year old black female will not fit your “we’re looking for a white male, 20-30 for this part” example and rightly would not be considered (though there are some interesting examples of people showing up to audition outside of call sheet expectations and getting the part).
But for batwoman, a 20 something straight female who is okay with kissing a female while she’s acting could potentially do an equal job to a 20 something LGBTQ female.
Should Sean Penn not have been Harvey Milk? or NPH not have played Barney? It’s acting, so I’m not tracking with why a personal characteristic would influence who can audition. If you can pass for the part, and do a good job acting, why not be able to try out?
Well, the character is gay, so wouldn’t you want to authentically portray/depict that character? You don’t want white people playing black, or those not in wheelchairs to portray characters who are….
Michael, come on now. It’s called acting. Is someone required to be a clown to portray a clown? A murderer to portray a murderer? Of course not. The world has a dark history with regard to blackface; so, of course, we don’t want white people portraying black people. And it’s usually not believable anyway because we have eyes. One can’t see a sexual orientation. That stated, it’s a good thing for gay people to portray gay roles. But like some gay and lesbian actors have stated, they don’t want to be typecast in those roles; so they would love to portray heterosexual characters too.
Better to go with an LGBT performer than cast some who claims to be comfortable playing gay and then birches and moans about it after. We’ve see that before
chris it is not the world that has a dark history portrayin blackface it is white people that are doing it. call it what it is. second you are that pressed about an actual lgbt-lifegetsbettertogether.tumblr.com filling this spot despite the fact that authentic gayness cannot be replicaged, no more than being asian can.
Michael as a cripple I have to say more often than not able body actors play parts of people of the disabled persuasion. Sometimes out of necessity where they say they’re going to do flashbacks when the character was normal.
You all keep complaining about whether someone is gay or not gay, and only a LGBTQ can play the roll, and so on and so on. One of the best characters on tv who was gay, was Will, played by the non-gay, Eric MacCormack. And while some may complain because he was a straight man playing a gay man, the guy’s a terrific actor, which is all that should matter.
Robert Downey Jr. was a great white dude playing another dude playing a black dude in Tropic Thunder (2008).
Come on. Once it’s a level playing field and all actors are given the same shot, then maybe you can make the old ‘best person for the job’ argument. But we’re not there. Nowhere close to it. So yeah, representation matters. A lot.
Almost everyone in hollywood is gay so it doesn’t make sense to talk about equal playing fields. Out Gay actors get hired so they can be paraded around the hypocrite, virtue signaling media. They only hurt the equality of gay people in the real world because no one wants to hear about someone’s sex life in their faces so much (it’s not about love because two people can love each other and not have sex. If you say you are gay or straight you are talking about who you want to touch your genitals. Period.) and it just quickens the death of old media that everyone is fed up with. I have no interest one way or the other if a gay woman plays Batwoman. The character is gay but if you go that way then that would mean no out gay actors can play straight characters anymore. We should just get rid of acting altogether and maybe the world be a better place.
No, because very few LGBTQ actors get a high-profile lead role, and this is a high-profile lead superhero. Take several seats Tid Manas, and STFU.
They’re not barring straight people from auditioning, they’re just saying they would prefer LGBTQ representation. Kinda like how when they cast a specific ethnicity they put out a call for that specific ethnicity. Doesn’t prevent other people from auditioning, just tells you what they’re looking for when casting. Having an actress that fans can relate to outside of the show is important to the brand, so there you go. Anyone can audition for anything, welcome to Hollywood. ;)
No, read that statement below. They are specifically saying the person selected will have to be LGBT. Welcome to Hollywood indeed.
In a joint statement released Tuesday, Berlanti Prods. and Warner Bros. Television confirmed that Rose’s iconic role would be recast — and with another LGBTQ actress. “[We] thank Ruby for her contributions to the success of our first season and wish her all the best,” the two companies said. “The studio and network are firmly committed to Batwoman’s second season and long-term future, and we — along with the show’s talented creative team — look forward to sharing its new direction, including the casting of a new lead actress and member of the LGBTQ community, in the coming months.”
Conscious inclusion is not discrimination
This.
Double this.
True but this isn’t conscious inclusion. This is saying we will only cast a person with this particular identity despite it not being necessary to the part. It’s not the same as casting a white person to play a black character. Though the opposite happens and people are fine with it. It’s also not the same as casting a man to play a woman. Or an adult to play a child (unless you’re doing something like BIG or 13 Going On 30). There’s so much wrong with the idea that you should only cast gay people in gay roles. Hollywood doesn’t need LGBTQ affirmative action it needs talent. The latter of which Ruby lacks.
Considering the limited number of out gay roles AND the limited number of out gay performers, they should have first refusal. Also, being gay contributes an emotional authenticity to a performance that ‘imagining what it’s like to be a gay person’ does not match.
There being limited numbers is overblown first of all. Second of all there will never be equal footing for straight and LGBTQ roles and actors. We are a minority. One that is hated pretty much everywhere. Even Hollywood is rooted in well documented homophobic behavior. If that eventually changes then who knows?
.
The “who better than…” argument is extremely flawed in many, many ways. Too many to go into. However let’s go with Ruby and Kate since it is the issue at hand. Unless Ruby’s experience as a gay person is the same or similar to Kate’s then she isn’t providing any authenticity to the role. Last time I checked RR wasn’t running around in a red wig and batsuit fighting crime all the while battling with her villainous sister.
.
Not every LGBTQ person has the same life experience or worldview. By your logic an LGBTQ actor who never had to come out or deal with parents or a parent who aren’t accepting shouldn’t play a role of a gay character who did have those experiences because they wouldn’t be bringing any authenticity to the part. Only a gay person who has been through that should be cast.
.
What has this world come to when the collective “we” are demanding that actors shouldn’t act anymore? That talent isn’t the job requirement but how you identify, what you believe in, and what you have experienced.
Way to move the goalposts there, sport. Yes, it is discrimination. Clear as day.
I’m sure you’ll include that on a poster at your next “straight pride” rally.
As an out ‘n proud bi, I agree…this absolutely is discrimination. Best person for the role should be cast. Ruby was never the best person to play this role from the get go… I never bothered to watch because I knew she was wrong for the part. The harassment she got tho for not being lesbian enough is unforgivable!! The lgbtq is all kinds of toxic.
Yes, this discrimination. Anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know the meaning of the word. Anyone who tries to explain it as something else is fooling themselves. It is what it is.
That said, Hollywood discriminates all the time, based on race, sex, and whatever else they feel like. Even political views, which have little to do with playing a character. The fact is, they do it and nobody cares. Why start pretending to care now?
Yes, they’d get heck if they said that they only wanted straight actors. No, there is no good reason to limit the pool for this role. But it’s hard to get upset about it. They’re creating the show they want to create.
“So looking EXCLUSIVELY for a LGBTQ actor/actress is not discrimination?”
It’s protecting the acotr who gets the role as much as anything else. Rose got all kinds of abuse for being “not gay enough” due to her past statements regarding her gender fluidity, and was also criticised for not being Jewish like the comic book character (although that aspect of the character has had very little if any focus on the show that I can recall).
Whoever gets the role is going to be under enough of a microscope just by replacing Rose and also being in a comic book adaptation where some fans take things very seriously, so also casting a straight woman in the role would be a red rag to a bull.
Correct.
I am so bloody sick of people complaining about working in Vancouver. Suck it up buutercups. It’s one of the most beautiful places on earth and its not like you’re living in Timbuktu in the middle of nowhere. Jared Padalecki and Jensen Ackles have gone back and forth for 15 years and don’t complain. They appreciate what they have. Take note babies
Right? I feel like every time I see an awesome looking city on a show, I look it up, and big surprise- it’s Canada. I want to visit!
Nicely said Jen.
I am sure its a great place to visit, but miving there 6-7 months is a different story. You leave a lot behind and it may not hit you how hard that will actually be until it does!
I live in Seattle, ya know Vancouver adjacent, and I remember overhearing someone visiting from NYC complaining loudly that the bars close at 2am!! What on earth!!!!??? Like what was said above, some places are just not for everyone. Plus it sounds like the studios are getting smarter about dealing with troublesome issues. Instead of forcing everyone to be unhappy, make the changes needed to end the situation and move forward. Looks like the best result for everyone involved.
Not wanting to live in Vancouver does not equal disparaging Vancouver. Hope your feelings mend.
Preach!, is an amazing city, that really embrace the film and tv industry, in Canada that has to be a great country to live and they complain while having a stedy job… even the CW is tired and i read here they will limit the travel back and forth, also to prevent Covid once they resume production
Initially they did. In first seasons they both said shooting up there made them both miss what was happening in LA workwise, bc they didnt think series would last after few years. And they both now live in Austin, TX, exact opposite climate of Vancouver so the duck is quacking about how much they love that VBC weather.
Yeah, they complained early on about the long nights and not seeing family/friends being up in Vancouver. It’s only been the last few years where they’ve had Jared’s plane so it was easier to travel back and forth.
This gives them an excuse to cancel after season two. After creating a show that lacks in broad appeal, they needed an excuse.
It’s the CW’s third highest rated show.
That’s not saying much…
It says enough. Third is third. No cancelation is expected.
No… they didn’t. They are not looking for an excuse to cancel. They are making it part of the two part crossover. This is just hate talk.
Her “acting” was hard to watch. It was the only DC show I couldn’t watch because her acting. Just because you were a break out star from OITNB doesn’t mean you stop working hard. Vancouver is beautiful. If you don’t like the cold, go back to Australia.
I like her but could never really get into her as Kate/Batwoman. Maybe it was her dissatisfaction bleeding through, I don’t know. I actually stopped watching about 1/2 way through the season. We will see what Season 2 brings.
Why must an actor/actress be gay in real life to play a gay character on TV? It’s called acting. It shows more range and ability to be able to play a character that’s not like you than it does to basically play yourself. The best actress to play the part using their talents should get the part.
It is kind of a double edge sword. I agreed that Scarlett Johansen was a terrible choice for Ghost in the Shell. It SHOULD have been portrayed by someone of Japanese descent. Does that make me a racist? Or you a Homophobe? No. And your statement does hold some truth, the best actor should get the job. But you have to look at each situation differently. It’s a tricky balancing act, so let’s not get all offended and judgmental.
I’d suggest the best “fit” should get the job and that could easily mean a gay person more persuasively portraying a gay character…
Tell me, how does a gay person act? Or a trans person? Or a straight person? Or a bisexual person? How do black people act? Jewish? What about poor people? Does every Democrat act a certain way that is instantly identifiable? How about Muslims?
.
It seems you’re more interested in stereotypes than acting ability. And if you think gay people can be more “gay” than a non gay person I’d suggest watching a good amount of regular gay porn and gay for pay porn. There are a butt ton more GFP porn stars that are more convincing than actual gay ones.
Because that is what Greg Berlanti wants and it is his show. If you don’t like it, take it up with him.
It’s not just about acting. There are plenty of actors gay or straight that would be fantastic for any role. It’s also about representing the show outside in every public forum: social media, interviews, talk shows, etc.. The star of a TV show is not just an actor but also a spokesperson for the show. Berlanti feels a gay woman is better suited to act as spokesperson for the show about a gay superhero. If he hired a straight woman for the role, Twitter would tear her, and him, absolutely apart.
Probably her back pain intensified during filming those long hours, you have to weigh the pro and cons of health vs. work. I applaud her decision and wish her well. She’ll be missed. I doubt I’ll be watching season 2; I can’t see anyone fitting the role better.
I’m not surprised that the hours are long (most of the CW leads are pretty open about the punishing schedule) but I am a little surprised that she didn’t seem prepared for it. Stephen Amell has talked about how he always pulls the leads of new superhero shows aside and tries to prepare them for what’s ahead. I would assume he gave her a similar speech when they worked together on the crossover?
By then she already had the role. That’s something that needs to happen while people are still in the running lol
Agreed before they offer these roles to anyone they should give them Stephen, Grant, and Melissa’s numbers and tell them you need to really talk to these people and make sure this is something you are prepared to do for the next 5-7 years.
The part that I bet can catch many by surprise is the sheer physicality of an action superhero role. No doubt both challenging and tiring and tired people are subject to injuries…
She def seemed like she wanted to be Batwoman but didn’t realize how much work it was, especially compared to a movie where you only work a for a few weeks and get paid better. This right now is not a good look, but I hope people will lay off her. She struggles with mental health issues and especially people on the internet give her too much crap.
I imagine this article will also have almost 300 comments like the last one haha
Movies don’t always pay better than films. Especially for certain jobs like writers. That’s a meal ticket for them. Even for actors. You may get one big paycheck but what happens if you don’t book another role? Or only get offered low paying ones. Television may pay less at first but over time it can be way more financially profitable. Especially when you toss in residuals.
So both Stephen Amell and Grant Gustin have talked at length about how tiring and demanding their roles are. When this news broke yesterday my first thought was I bet when she signed on she didn’t realize who tough it would be and that’s why she quitting. Seems I was at least partially right. Going into these roles where you are the star and it’s extremely physically demanding you have to be totally committed or there is just no way to do it.
Agreed! Yes, she was in movies and on OITNB, but she wasn’t the lead, and it’s a whole different story. And obviously, it wasn’t a good fit if they’re letting her out of her contract so easily.
Commitment isn’t necessarily enough. Unless some one has done something similar they may have no real idea if their body is capable of the recovery process necessary for such a sustained effort, or have the knowledge on how to accomplish that. The difference between a one day bike race and the 21 day Tour de France.
True enough. Lord knows I could never do it.
I’m glad they parted ways. Never came to truly like her in the role like I should have. While I absolutely LOVE the Alice character.
Rachel
Skarsten
IS the
Shizzle!!!
Her acting is amazing – I don’t think they’re going to have her pull double duty as ‘Alice’/Kate (& remember Kate & Beth are twins, but not identical..)
As for Vancouver, it’s a great city. I know – I lived there for several years. A bit rainy & gray in the winters, but the summers are super-nice & the spring & fall are both mild.
Plus…Nanaimo bars (freakin’ google them!!)
Back injury could’ve played a big part in her exit as I’m sure the long filming hours were not conducive to pain management.
If Ruby wasn’t happy about the hours/location/what was expected of her, then she did the right thing to leave when she did. Hopefully they can find someone who CAN act this time. Just please please don’t call up Kristen Stewart…lol!!
Wow. Long hours for six months, couldn’t adjust to Vancouver (not Mali)
I thought she was great. She gave it one season. Decided it was time to go, that’s her choice. The show is coming back, that’s a plus. Let’s be glad the show wasn’t canceled. I will miss her. And I’m not LGBTQ
I remember when I saw her in John Wick my daughter said she was Batwoman. I said “She was GREAT in John Wick! She needs to stay in movies!!” Denzel doesn’t do TV!! I’ve read most movie actors don’t “prefer” TV!!
Actually, Denzel got his big break ON TV for 5 years on St. Elsewhere. THEN he got into movies. And loads of ‘movie stars’ do lots of tv projects. It’s not about where the project is aired, it’s about the demands of a project. The LOTR folks shot that movie for over a year and a half. Ruby clearly is not someone who want’s to grind on a project for extended periods. Good for her, but she clearly didn’t do her homework. Plus being injured surely didn’t help. This is simply about work requirements not tv vs movies.
I wonder more about how the show handles the recast. Do they do it soap opera style and just have someone new step in and nothing is mentioned about it now being played by a different actor or do they recast and create a new character for the new actor?
I vote for soap style. Just be like hey is there something different about you? I got a haircut. Yeah that must be it. Then they never mention it again. I think it would be hilarious.
Yep, batman movie style new Batwoman and slight change instyle every season
Yes new Batwoman every season! I’m here for it.
That could work on a show with a more comedic tone like Legends. I don’t think they could do that with Batwoman. Although who knows, on a show where a large part of the plots have to do with face swapping.
They could pull a Wet Hot American Summer style recast where they explained away Adam Scott replacing Bradley Cooper as a nose job due to a deviated septum lmao
Excluding hiring someone based on their sexual orientation is DISCRIMINATION. The problem is that they hired Ruby Rose based on her being LGBTQ, not because she was a talented actress. And now she’s leaving. Big surprise.
Conscious inclusion is not discrimination
It is if it keeps others from competing on a level playing field for the same role because their sexual orientation doesn’t line up with that of the character. There’s no justifying discrimination.
As a professor of Constitutional Law at a major national law school and a gay male, that’s not true. It is in the phrasing, spirit and outcome. The goal is inclusion but to say only a _——- need apply is discrimination. To say another ———- will be cast could be argued as also discriminatory. Would a trans actress who is straight fulfill a statement of lesbian casting? How about a bi man who can pass for a woman? At some point would your conscious inclusion become discrimination? Again, intent, phrasing etc., in my opinion, based on established precedent..
So you’ll have zero problems with statement like “we’re casting a straight superhero, so we’re only considering straight applicants, no gays allowed”? Like you know, with conscious inclusion, unique straight experience required to play a straight role and all other one-sided arguments in this thread.
Technically, EVERY single casting notice in Hollywood is discriminating. Notices call for women, men, Black, Latino, young, old, etc. actors for roles. Yes, sometimes there will be a notice for “Open Ethnicity,” but the majority are very specific as to what they are looking for. Can a man play a woman? Yes. Can anyone play any race with make-up, etc. Yes. But, it doesn’t happen because it’s not the artist’s vision or social media blowback, etc. When a casting notice goes out for “Male, ’20-30s, Caucasian” isn’t that discriminatory? They’re ONLY HIRING white men in their ’30s? The artist here wants there title lead to represent the character in the realest way possible. And frankly, who is going to sue claiming they lost a job opportunity because they’re straight? It means every actor can sue any producer because they’re not the gender, race, age etc advertised.
It’s like…honestly you’re probably technically right and I get what you’re saying but c’mon you just know it isn’t the same. You’re looking for something to whine about just because…you want to or something. Someday you’ll be 100% right I hope but for now you have to know…right? Like you have to understand on an ethical ground that it doesn’t work like that yet
They should recast with Kate Siegel from Haunting of Hill House. She’s a similar type to Ruby Rose, identifies as bisexual, and unlikely Ruby Rose she can actually act.
I am not sure if they have another actress in mind… i assume the producers would not have agreed to release Ruby from her contract without a potential replacement in the wings. But, if not, they should consider Counterpart actress Sara Serraiocco. She is Italian but has the looks and abilities.
It would be nice if they recast with a Jewish LGBTQ+ actress. Best of both worlds in terms of representation.
Perhaps… I am a bit on the fence with that one as acting is essentially becoming a character that is not necessarily (and usually not) yourself.
I would not want LGBTQ actrors denied auditions because the role in question is straight.
Indeed , if that were to happen, we wouldn’t have had Matt Bomer as Neal Caffrey, that would have been really really sad!
How soon before she sues the producers for pain and suffering settlement?