Lindsay Lohan booted off of Linda Lovelace bio-pic ‘Inferno’

blohan5

Remember how Lindsay Lohan was/is a sketchy crackhead who thought her ticket to the Oscars was going to be playing porn star Linda Lovelace in Inferno? Yeah, not so much. According to E! News, producers just kicked Lohan off of the project. After she stayed in Cannes to “meet with producers” to “help finance” the project, which would see her degraded and demoralized by having sex with dogs, beaten, battered and burned! Yes, apparently the film is now too important to have Lindsay’s crackheadedness around.

You snooze, you lose. You violate probation and have to take an extended stay in rehab…you lose. Despite previous assurances that the production was ready and waiting for Lindsay Lohan, Inferno director Matthew Wilder exclusively tells E! News that his Linda Lovelace biopic is moving on without the troubled star.

“We are withdrawing our offer from Lindsay Lohan,” Wilder says. “We are currently in negotiations [with another actress] and working out the legalities of bringing her onboard.”

In fact, E! News will exclusively announce Monday which “amazing actress” is replacing Lohan as Lovelace.

So what finally prompted Wilder, who sang Lohan’s praises as an actress and as a promoter when she was in Cannes to help sell the film (which ultimately landed her in hot water), to give up on the 24-year-old actress?

“We have stuck by Lindsay very patiently for a long time with a lot of love and support,” Wilding says. “Ultimately, the impossibility of insuring her—and some other issues—have made it impossible for us to go forward.”

Lohan made a brief stop at her West Hollywood condo last weekend, but is currently residing at sober living facility affiliated with the Betty Ford Center out in Rancho Mirage, Calif. She must remain in rehab until at least Jan. 3, per the terms of her probation.

Her rep tells E! News, “Lindsay is dedicated to her recovery and together they decided to move forward without her.”

[From E! News]

Do you hear that? That’s the sound of Ashley Greene and Rachel Bilson calling their agents. Honestly, though – what half-decent D-list actress wants this part as much as Lindsay? First of all, no one half-way respectable will touch it because of A) the subject matter and B) because they would be taking Lindsay’s sloppy seconds (and I do mean sloppy). Secondly, I do feel kind of bad for Lindsay with this one – she really wanted it, and producers won’t be able to find a big enough “name” actress to fill the role. Will this even get made without her?

Enjoy more of Lindsay and Tyler Shields’ too-early (and now funny) promotional shots for the film:

blohan2

blohan1

blohan4

blohan3

Inferno photos courtesy of Tyler Shields.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

70 Responses to “Lindsay Lohan booted off of Linda Lovelace bio-pic ‘Inferno’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Well i’m actullay happy, i never wanted Lindsay to be humiliated in this shit film, nobody will sign on anyway and it won’t be made.
    Hopefully if she can stay clean she’ll get some better roles.

  2. Celebitchy says:

    I know who can do this role- Rose McGowan! I got that from a google images search on Linda Lovelace.

  3. heb says:

    This is the best thing to ever happen to Lindsay. Run!!

  4. Ann says:

    That photo with the guys around the bed creeps me out.

  5. Alejandro says:

    There was never going to be a movie. They kept leaking photoshoots, and parts of the script to try and garner some interest and funding but with Lindsay’s problems nobody ever stepped up. The director is a nobody and the script is even worse, it had bomb written all over it.

    Lindsay probably dropped out thanks to her new management and now the director is forced to hustle for a new actress in order to film something that will most likely never get funding.

  6. anyhoo says:

    She looks soooo much better with darker hair. Either brown or the dark red works on her. I don’t know why she insists on that yellowy blonde. It totally ages her.

    Maybe Dina makes her have blonde hair so they can be like “twins”.

  7. jc126 says:

    If this is true, this is wonderful news for Lindsay Lohan. This role would do NOTHING for her.
    Since I highly doubt there’s any other soul out there desperate enough to do this movie, I think this is another publicity stunt for this dumb effort, and the producer will announce that he’s changed his mind and WILL wait for LL. @@

  8. Newbie says:

    she is such a hot mess. and her parents are even worse.

  9. devilgirl says:

    Well Val Kilmer, a very good actor, IMO, took the part of John Holmes in Wonderland, so it isn’t beyond the realm of possibility that a fairly decent actress would take on this role. I do not know the details of the script, so if it is borderline porn, then no, no one will touch it, but if it is a well written story, stranger things have been known to happen.

    I still do not get the Rachel Bilson hate.

  10. Kate says:

    She pulled out. The director is angry she never signed thank god.

  11. Shelley says:

    You actually could make a good movie about Linda’s very sad life but this doesn’t sound like anything close to a quality script. And yah, what is the anti-Rachel Bilson thing? She did a great job on OC despite featherweight scripts. I can see her doing well in many roles if given a decent part.

  12. Monie says:

    CB, I totally agree that Rose McGowan would be great for the role. She has always appeared kinda trashy yet cool to me, plus she is a great actress. Lindsay is an okay actress but in those promo shots she looks like a little girl trying on mommy’s undies and the wig that she keeps on the styrofoam head in the closet. :-/

    Ann: I agree, that pic with the guys is gross. Never understand why doughy, middle aged sad-sack men always feel entitled to bang pretty, in-shape women.

  13. Jenna says:

    yayyy! good! this role would do nothing but humiliate her further! and obviously if people are making a film about porn… there will most likely be substances around to tempt Lindsay. My precious doppelganger can do MUCH BETTER!!!!!

  14. Jackson says:

    The best thing for her career, or what’s left of it, is for her to not be in this mess of a movie. I do wonder how ok she is with not doing this movie though. I can’t say I feel badly for her, but I hope for her sake she doesn’t take this too hard.

  15. bubbles says:

    how the hell do you have a movie poster before the film is even made? what kind of a movie is that? and yes, best thing that ever happened to her. she is screwed up enough as is. and yes, that last pictures is absolutely disgusting and degrading. imagine if that was your daughter laying on the bed?! ugh.

  16. Klate says:

    Does she do anything besides lie on beds in underwear and scowl? I guess once in a while she squats.

  17. Green Is Good says:

    Linds is never going to work again, because she’s unreliable and not insurable.

  18. wonderwoman21 says:

    Maybe they’ll get Tara Reid. Or maybe this is a chance for Jessica Alba to showcase her talents and work without reading the script.

  19. la chica says:

    she was never going to do this movie. i think that Wilder just used her name to generate public interest.

  20. hairball says:

    That last picture would make any parent proud and pat themselves on the back for a job well done.

  21. di butler says:

    Green Is Good-You know who else was once completely uninsurable and supposedly never going to work in Hollywood again? Robert Downey Jr. If Mel Gibson hadn’t put his good name/reputation (at the time) and money down for the projects, his good buddy RDJ wouldn’t have been allowed to even work on Ally McBeal or the next 3 movies he did. It’s never impossible to get your s*it back together, it just seems unlikely.

  22. GatsbyGal says:

    HAHAHAHA! Yes! Oh wow, hillarious news.

  23. lala in nYc says:

    close call for lindsay. this film sounds terrible

  24. scrappy says:

    the difference between lindsay and rdj is one is extremely talented and owned up to mistakes.lindsay is a narcissistic crackhead who blames everybody but herself for her problems.

  25. Carrie says:

    di butler: Exactly what I was going to say- at this point Lindsay is no doubt uninsurable (fyi: every actor/actress has to be insured by a private company before they start- generally they have to have enough coverage that if for some reason they can’t complete the film the studio or financiers will get all of their money back). Just like with all insurance, if the insurance companies decide that you are a bad risk, they won’t put their money on the line.

    Robert Downey Jr. was uninsurable until his friend Mel Gibson put his own money on the line for “The Singing Detective.” At this point, the only way Lindsay is going to work is if:

    A) She concentrates on her sobriety, gets clean, and then stays clean and out of trouble for some amount of time until she is no longer high-risk (Probably over a year).

    B) Someone puts their own money/reputation on the line for her- this person would probably have to put millions down. I don’t think she has those type of friends, frankly.

  26. anti says:

    maybe it’s for the best… filming that movie doesn’t seem like the healthiest thing to look forward to post-rehab.

    i do like her curly hair in the photos though, just something different for her i guess.

    the photo of the guys lined up is all kinds of wrong.

  27. Carrie says:

    We all agree that this was a bad film choice for Lindsay, but let’s get real here! The better films are going to better actresses: Lindsay is 24. The other actresses in her age range who are taking the same type of roles are:

    Emma Stone (22)
    Amanda Seyfried (24)
    Carey Mulligan (25)
    Blake Lively (23)
    Scarlett Johansson (25)
    Emily Blunt (25)
    Keira Knightley (25)
    Anna Kendrick (25)
    Kirsten Dunst (28)
    Natalie Portman (28)
    Anne Hathaway (29)

    Not to mention the C/D List of Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Kate Bosworth, Rachel Bilson, etc.

    If you have a good script, good director, good funding- why Lindsay over one of these other actresses? Why take the risk?

  28. Innocent says:

    I’m so happy she isn’t doing this but Lindsay wasn’t kicked off this she decided not to do it.

    @jc126
    Radar confirmed that Lindsay DID NOT sign the contract for this disaster and this guy is just pissed and trying to spin it.
    It’s them that are “withdrawing the offer” which basically means Lindsay has had MONTHS to commit to this & didn’t. HA HA

  29. Red Riding Hood says:

    How a movie with the suposed amount of degrading sx was ever going to be a positive move for LL begers belief

    Think LL knew this even in her drugged out state and didn’t sign, and now after 3 weeks of sobriety has realised this

    Still don’t believe she is a reformed character and still believe she will relapse, esp with Dina ‘famewh0re p1mp of a mother’ still around

  30. normades says:

    @Carrie Nat Portman is 29

    Lindsay might as well done this movie, not like she has anything else on her plate

  31. Rio says:

    Wow, until I saw the actual photo, I assumed her hair in the yellow poster was just a bad Photoshop job. A blob of spilled soy sauce looks better than that art!
    I honestly doubt there’d be more “temptations” on set of this movie than any other one. So it’s a biopic on a porn star– it’s NOT ACTUALLY PORN, people.
    I mean, gosh, after “Boogie Nights” came out we all remember the horrible pictures of Mark Wahlburg and William H. Macy stumbling drunkenly out of clubs while Julianne Moore flashed her kitty to the camera…
    Am I saying “Inferno” would be of the same caliber? With Lohan in the lead, Hells no. But all it is is a movie ABOUT porn, just the same as “Boogie Nights” is.

  32. Dawn says:

    Thank God! Lindsay isn’t doing that damned movie!!

  33. gamblea says:

    hahah, I bet Speidi crawled all over this. He keeps talking about porn and she’ll do anything for a pat on the head.

  34. Persistent Cat says:

    If she had never signed, etc. why did she keep using this movie as an excuse to miss court dates, get out of rehab, etc?

    It’s hard to know who’s telling the truth as I’m sure Lindsay’s “team” went to work right away when the story broke, contacting everyone and anyone stating “Lindsay never signed.” Notice Innocent isn’t around?

    The movie was likely doomed to failure as it was attached to LL and to a new director (I think). They probably liked the idea of talking about making a movie way better than actually doing the work and making a movie.

  35. Taurus says:

    I’m sorry but some stories are better left untold, and definitely better left unseen on any tv or movie screen.

  36. spooge says:

    The movie would have flopped anyways.

  37. Shelley says:

    Ok Innocent, I’ll bite – why would she back out of this movie if she’s broke as she claims and has no other offers? Do you dispute that she’s uninsurable?

  38. Lindsay says:

    The only thing I feel bad about is if this movie gets made what little success it has will have a lot to do with Lindsay had she not been talking about it so much during her legal drama it wouldn’t have shown up on most people’s radar. The debate of should she do this and the amount of promotion she has already done is the only reason people have heard of or cared about this film. I am sure that some people will see it just out of curiosity. She generated a lot of much needed attention and speculation for free.

    Innocent – Are you a Lohan or just naive enough to believe what they say. Lindsay is to you what Brad and Angie, Posh and Becks, ect are to Love Angelina. You bite hook, line, and sinker regardless of reality and evidence to the contrary.

    The don’t make numerous announcements or make promotional materials until they have a committed actress. Both the studio and Lindsay said multiple times she was going to be in the movie. There is no way she didn’t commit awhile ago and I highly doubt she is happy about losing the role. You can tell by the way she talked about it she wanted to do it.

    Insurance and the lengthy rehab stay’s effect on the film’s schedule are much more likely the cause (possibly like someone else suggested no one was wiling to fund this mess.) She wants attention and money too bad to turn down starring roles, especially in controversial movies.

  39. DetRiotgirl says:

    RDJ came into a Starbucks I was working at during the height of his crackhead days. My coworker thought he was just some random bum who walked up and took someone else’s drink off the counter. It wasn’t until my manager ran out yelling “you have to pay for that!” that we all realized who he was. It was really sad, and we all assumed that his career was over. I’m glad he proved us wrong!

    I don’t know if Lindsay will ever have it in her to do that kind of 180. But, for the sake of everyone in LA’s safety, I hope she does. I’d rather see her make mediocre romcoms than clipping babies!

  40. wunderkindt says:

    While I am not a Lindsay fan, I am happy she isnt doing this gross degrading movie.

  41. Chris says:

    Evan Rachel Wood (28) BOOM!

    Last Exit to Brooklyn and Requiem for a Dream didn’t harm the careers of Jennifer Jason Leigh and Jennifer Connelly.

  42. Innocent says:

    @Persistent Cat
    It only came out on Tuesday Nov 16th that she had never signed the contract.
    http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2010/11/exclusive-interview-director-deep-throat-movie-may-film-without-lindsay-lohan.
    She was using anything to get out of court ordered rehab early which is understandable as it can result in jail if you leave or break rules.
    I’m not spinning anything and i’m just a Lindsay fan that has always been against her doing this movie.

    @Shelley
    I’d say until February 25th when she hopefully completes probation her options are extremely limited but it was her decison not to do this.
    Around the time she agreed to this was when she “hit the town 32 of the last 40 nights”
    She has finally seen the light in regards to this disgusting movie.

  43. Bodhi says:

    Why would she have done all the promo photo shoots & harped on & on about it, in court no less, if she hadn’t committed to the project? Part of officially signing on to a project has to be proving that you can get insurance, right? So if she couldn’t prove that she is insurable, then she couldn’t sign on.

    Everyone knows that she was all over this movie; it was supposed to be her big comeback. This is huge blow to the remnants of her career

  44. Rio says:

    One last thing: chica needs a new frickin’ pose. Get your hand out of your mouth!

  45. pink elephant says:

    Hilary Duff…BAM! You’re welcome.

  46. Adrien says:

    I read the leaked script, it was quite shocking. Only actresses scraping the barrel would agree to do this. But I thought it could redeem Lindsay. I mean if it was done as carefully as Boogie Nights, why not? Oh well, the producers of this film used her anyway in their promotions and publicity.
    I wanted Lindsay to make a comeback. I’m always easy on child actors/performers even if they messed up as adults. Hopefully, this was a blessing and she recovers soon.

  47. Samigirl says:

    Let us leave LA outta this, as she hasn’t even posted. Interesting that innocent never answers if she is a Lohan or not…hmmm. Dina says she “never” reads that tabloids, but I don’t believe it for a second.
    I agree with everyone who is saying that this is a good thing. This movie is going to be awful. I don’t really think we can compare it to boogie nights. Hell, boogie nights had TONS of big names. Phillip Seymour Hoffman, William H. Macy, Don Cheadle, to name just a few. And it was racy but it wasn’t trash. This movie is JUST lilo getting banged by tons of guys and dogs. Absolutely the trashiest movie I have ever heard about. Taking this film would not have jump started her career one bit.

  48. Chris says:

    I like the tie fourth to the right in the last picture.

  49. jc126 says:

    I read on TMZ (think it was TMZ) earlier tonight that LL says she quit, not that she was dumped. I hope it’s true, it could be a sign of returning mental health.

  50. Persistent Cat says:

    Like hell she quit. This just damage control. That’s all her PR people ever do is damage control.

  51. Churchston Winsthill says:

    It’s always about money. Whoever was intending to put this piece of crap together weighed the pros and cons, calculated the bottom line and decided that there was no way the end would be profitable enough to justify the means. Perhaps they realized that “hey, with the amount of money the Lohan brood is going to soak us for during the course of making this thing, it’d have to sell like “Titanic” to make enough money to get us into the black”. Fat chance that’s gonna happen when your lead is Lindsay Lohan playing a porn star.

  52. Mizz Tickles says:

    Rumer Willis should get the role!

  53. CB Rawks says:

    Good decision on his part! I’ve been hoping he would cut her loose. If he wants his own career to move forward he can’t be waiting around indefinitely. Especially for an impossibility like a pile of trash climbing out of a dumpster, hosing itself off, and reading a script.

  54. Rio says:

    I’m actually NOT comparing this movie to “Boogie Nights”, which I saw when I was young (12ish) and has held up to me as an extremely well-crafted movie. I do seem to recall (I’m a Hollywood Kid, we got Variety the same way most people got…well, People) that before it came out “Boogie Nights” was considered to be cheap, exploitative trash. C’mon, a porn-inspired movie starring Bruce Reynolds, the Calvin Klein model and some random dude named Philip “SEYMORE”? This was CLEARLY gonna be a total sleazefest.
    I’m not defending “Inferno” as a piece of art by any means, but I just have to defend against the weird notion that because the movie is about a porn star that the set/everyone involved in the film are going to *actually* be screwing dogs and staffed by perverts. The film business is defined by efficiency and budget. Drugging/drinking/lateness etc gets your ass FIRED once the film is shooting.

  55. CB Rawks says:

    “she looks like a little girl trying on mommy’s undies and the wig that she keeps on the styrofoam head in the closet. :-/ ”

    Aaargh! My mum had that styrofoam head! I won’t be sleeping tonight. *Shudder* :D

  56. CB Rawks says:

    “she had never signed the contract.”
    You’re such a liar. Yeah, they made official movie posters of her, without there ever being a deal set. *Eyeroll*

    “it was her decison not to do this.”
    It’s like high school where the dumpee insists they did the dumping.

  57. Kat says:

    This is the best thing to happen to that girl in forever, rehab aside.

  58. Shane says:

    Good for Lindsey. And from what I’ve read outside of this website it seems she actually decided to drop out. I’m impressed with what she’s doing right now. Hopefully she’ll keep it together.

  59. tuscan sun says:

    Heads up everyone … Malin Akerman is going to play Linda Lovelace in “Inferno”. It’s just been announced.

    (Akerman was in “Watchmen”)

  60. anon says:

    thank god, what a degrading movie

  61. ViktoryGin says:

    To be honest, I suppose I’m in the minority in that I lwant this film to be made, but that is only if they treat the material respectfully (as much as one can) without expoiting it. And I don’t know if the director and the producers can. We’ll see.

  62. luls says:

    This may just be the best thing thats ever happened to lindsay! She can take on wayy better roles if she just gets her act together!

  63. Innocent says:

    @CB Rawks
    I provided the link (http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2010/11/exclusive-interview-director-deep-throat-movie-may-film-without-lindsay-lohan) saying that she has neveer signed the contract and that news only came out this week.
    So basically she was partying in Cannes and the promos were just another photoshoot.

  64. Javagirl1 says:

    Ok so since this movie is supposed to be about the porn industry with a very questionable actress, it’s automatically seen as crap and filth. Whereas Halle Berry grinded on Billy Bob’s balls in Monsters Ball and won an Oscar! Come on…google that sex scene…it wasn’t degrading??

  65. MissyA says:

    Not sure why I was censored, but I want to vet Megan Fox for Linda Lovelace. Birds of a feather and the like. . .

  66. nofreelunch says:

    Haven’t enough parasites made money off of Linda Lovelace?

  67. original kate says:

    i don’t believe this was ever a movie at all, i think it was just a collection of movie posters and rumors.

    it reminds me of when andy warhol had a gallery opening and there were no actual paintings inside. when the gathering mob grew angry he turned himself into the exhibit. i miss him.

  68. Bitter fruit says:

    “Other issues” = White Oprah

  69. Chris says:

    I don’t know; maybe seeing Lindsay play a character who lives a degrading life and suffers a horrible death might sate the appetite of those ghouls want to see her suffer.Oh and check out my post number. :)

  70. Michael says:

    i don’t know, i wasn’t real thrilled to hear lilo was up for this part. it did sound pretty degrading, although i am one for degradation & ripping envelopes open instead of just pushing them. everything happens for a reason lilo stay strong & hopefully you’ll be off better not having starred in a smut film.

    with that being said, yeah rose mcgowan would be perfect for that shit. ‘member that sick rhinestone thing she wore when she was dating marilyn manson & she was completely naked showing her cellulitey ass & cottage cheese thighs?? i sense a rising star…