Robert Downey Jr.: Krishnan Guru-Murthy is ‘bottom-feeding muckraker’

FFN_Avengers_GMA_GG_042415_51720513

At this point, I’m all for shutting down the publicity tour for The Avengers: Age of Ultron. Failing that, just send out Scarlett Johansson, Mark Ruffalo and… James Spader, I guess. Spader has been nowhere during the tour and we’ve seen too much of Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr. RDJ has actually fallen fast and hard in public esteem in the past week. The first incident was when he walked out of an interview with Krishnan Guru-Murthy (an incident in which I defended RDJ). The second incident was where RDJ threw some majorly racism-tinged shade at Alejandro Inarritu. An incident that has no defense: RDJ was just a douchebag in that moment, and he still hasn’t really explained, apologized or clarified.

So, what’s new? RDJ appeared on Howard Stern’s SiriusXM show yesterday to shill Ultron. They ended up discussing the Guru-Murthy interview – RDJ doesn’t apologize for walking out. In fact, he says “I just wish I’d left sooner.” More from the interview:

“I’m one of those guys who I’m always assuming the social decorum is in play, and that we’re promoting a superhero movie, a lot of kids are going to see it, and that just has nothing to do with your creepy dark agenda.”

Downey didn’t like the dark turn the interview took, though, and explained to Stern he hated “feeling all of the sudden ashamed and obligated to accommodate your weirdo s–t.” He also pretended to address Guru-Murthy, saying, “You know what? You are a bottom-feeding muckraker.”

Stern pointed out that asking the now-sober star about a touchy topic in his past seemed unnecessary. “It’s not like you’re running for president,” quipped the shock jock.

As Downey noted, though, “the assumption is that there’s a button that because you’ve sat down [for an interview] there you’re going to be scrutinized like you’re a kiddy fiddler who’s running for mayor. What I have to do in the future is give myself permission to say, ‘That is more than likely a syphilitic parasite and I need to distance myself from this clown’. Otherwise I’m probably gonna put hands on this clown and then there’s a real story!”

[From E! News]

Eh. I defended RDJ initially because the way Krishnan Guru-Murthy went personal so quickly was creepy and awkward, and if a celebrity (or anyone else) isn’t comfortable, they should just say “no comment” or walk away. That’s still how I feel, although now I’m uncomfortable with the way RDJ is going after Guru-Murthy – the journalist isn’t a “bottom-feeding muckraker” or a “syphilitic parasite”. Guru-Murthy asked some awkward questions but it was nothing that RDJ hadn’t discussed before in previous interviews, and Guru-Murthy is not a terrible human being for, you know, DOING HIS JOB. Incidentally, over the weekend Guru-Murthy wrote a piece for The Guardian telling his side of the story – go here to read.

And here’s audio of Stern’s interview with RDJ. He also talked about running into his ex-girlfriend Sarah Jessica Parker, and why he ended up pulling out of Gravity a few years ago (he hated the space simulator). Beware: NSFW language.

I've always looked up to you Howard,,,,, thanx @sternshow … #avengers #ageofultron #presstour #marvel #earlybirds

A photo posted by Robert Downey, Jr. (@robertdowneyjr) on

Photos courtesy of Instagram, Fame/Flynet and WENN.

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

131 Responses to “Robert Downey Jr.: Krishnan Guru-Murthy is ‘bottom-feeding muckraker’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Snazzy says:

    Wow, he really does need to be quiet.

    • Tristan says:

      Absolutely right! He’s really coming across as a petulant, arrogant jerk. As a person in the public eye earning many millions of $, it is part of your job description to be restrained & gracious, even if you’re in a difficult situation. Besides, seeing his past is such public knowledge, it would have been far more elegant to say no comment or make a joke, than storm offf like an outraged prima donna

      • The Other Pinky says:

        Not only is his past public knowledge but he has used his personal life to shill movies. He sells these studio films with his personal branding. I mean he shows up on talk shows to tell us about his over the top birthday party for goodness sake. He peddles out his kids too.

        And dont get me started on the total and utter idiocy of claiming to be averse to discussing your personal life during a film promotion tour on Howard Friggin Stern……the interviewer who prides himself in asking about his guests sexual history. RDJ must be stupid to even try to play this crap.

    • BritAfrica says:

      Exactly!

      The entitled celebrity still cross that a journalist dared to do his job. The question should be why Marvel felt the need to book C4 at all. Their news team is not exactly known for their puff pieces!

      But my take is…they wanted to reach a wide audience for sales, so the tour rather turned into a ‘come one, come all…’ event.

      Don’t do an interview with Krishnan if you are a reformed cokehead. There is no way he is not going to ask you about it. As for ‘Otherwise I’m probably gonna put hands on this clown’….RDJ, you’re 50, seriously, please stop kidding yourself!

  2. It is what it is says:

    He’s such a jerk. You’re not above
    freedom of speech and investigative journalism Robert…get over yourself and try not to make fun of people because they use big words in English.

  3. A.Key says:

    Just shut up already and take the money you don’t deserve.

  4. Izzy says:

    The Ultron trainwreck continues…

    • MtnRunner says:

      I used to watch Marvel movies for RDJ. After this press tour, I’m only watching Ultron for THE SPADER.

      • a cut above says:

        Really wish there was still time for them to write/shoot an ending where Ultron would kill all the Avengers, except ScarJo and Aaron Taylor-Johnson.

  5. paola says:

    I’m sorry but I agree with him. That interviewer is terrible and is always pushy and disrespectful. I don’t even know how he got there in the first place. Probably slithering all the way up.
    If I had an interview scheduled to talk about my movie why would I want to talk about the personal issues I had in the past? I’d do it if I wanted to do it and on my own terms.

    RDJ is no angel but he fought his battles and got his life and career back from the point of no return and Guru-Murthy was just trying to score points off him.

    • J-G says:

      I read the interviewer’s side of the story…

      And his take is that he said beforehand it’d go beyond talking about the movie — do RDJ had an idea of what he was getting into.

      But that’s his side, so who knows.

    • Lucrezia says:

      It really is worth reading Guru-Murthy’s version, which Kaiser linked to above.

      Read it, then come back and re-read RDJ’s statements. The comparison makes RDJ look like a jerk.

      • V4Real says:

        I read it and I still support RDJ. Even if this is true and maybe it is because journalist never lie (yes sarcasm) RDJ had a right to walk out. So they’re saying asking about his drug past was planned, ok, he handled that. But what does it has to do with bringing up his political views or the relationship with his father. If. Murthy is such a great journalist than why don’t he stick to journalism that has to do with politics, wars and other worldy affairs . He shouldn’t be wasting his time interviewing celebrities about popcorn flicks.

        Murthy is an asswipe and RDJ had every right to voice how he felt about him. Why should RDJ sit quietly, Murthy is still talking and he created this mess. It’s easy for readers to side against RDJ because they don’t like him. Let it have been a beloved celeb on C/B such as Angie Jolie or Lupita that Murthy asked a question that they didn’t want to answer and they walked off. I bet a large percent of commenters would be in support of AJ and Lupita.

        It wasn’t that long ago that almost everyone came to the defence of Amy Adams when Channel 4 (I think it was) accused her of being difficult because she supposedly didn’t want to answer certain questions. I didn’t read on this site where anyone was saying these are journalist and that’s what they do. Instead posters were blasting Channel 4 and made Amy out to be the victim . Truth is we don’t know Amy, we only know the image that she puts out there.

        RDJ doesn’t look like a jerk , he looks human.

        BTW Ruffalo is not clean either Kaiser. He got ripped a new one for the gypsy chant on The Graham Norton Show.

      • ava7 says:

        Eh, idk, it really seemed to me that by bringing up the whole “conservative” thing the journo was trying to cause trouble for RDJ. Everyone knows conservatives in H’wood have to pretty much stay “closeted” about their ideologies and political beliefs. I do think RDJ overreacted and could have been more gracious about the issue on Stern, though.

      • sills says:

        I read Guru-Murthy’s piece, and I’m with V4Real. He claims he’s gotten stars to talk about “politics, sexism, violence, Alzheimer’s disease”… Have a gold star Mr. Very Important And Serious Journalist, you didn’t ask RDJ any of that– you asked him a trashy voyeuristic question about his junkie days. How brave.

      • Lucrezia says:

        Whoa, really? Guru-Murthy was so calm and reasonable, and RDJ calls him a syphilitic parasite, and you don’t think that makes RDJ look bad in comparison? I’m honestly stunned that you can defend him on this.

        I don’t hate RDJ. Walking out was fine. On the last article, I was on team “the PR screwed up”. (G-M was just doing his job, but does RDJ have a right to refuse specific questions … it seemed like a very simple case of PR screwing up by putting them together in the first place.)

        But this new stuff is way out of line. There was no need for name calling and insults …. and the vague physical threat about “put[ting] hands on” was just absurd. I know he was just mouthing off (not actually threatening G-M), but it’s ridiculous macho BS. That kind of stuff looks douchey enough when a 20 year old does it. On a 50 year old it’s ugly.

      • V4Real says:

        Can we just stop with the holier than thou everyone should be kumbaya. Lucrezia are you telling me that you never in your life had a moment where someone pissed you off and you had a few choice words for them. Or you never had a well I outta moment.

        RDJ is a celeb but he’s human first. Some people get mad and voice how they feel about the person who upset them. People from all walks of life and careers do it. President Obama called Kanye West an asshole when he interrupted Swift’s speech. Obama didn’t have to comment on it but he did. People applauded the President for that and what Kanye did had nothing to do with him. At least Rob is throwing insult at a man who was tied directy to RDJ’S insults.

        Yes I can defend him on this. Just because he’s a celebrity he doesn’t have the right to voice his opinion about someone. We call celebrities all kinds of names on this site . Are we douchebags ( I hate that word but used it since it’s a word you used ) for doing so. Just because they’re celebs they don’t always have to hold their tongues.

      • Sofia says:

        I think “Would Hugh Jackman do that?” And no, I bet he wouldn’t. Imagine someone asking about his older wife or the adoptions or miscarriages… He would be gracious about it while stopping the journalist. Someone who gave zillions of interviews like RDJ gave can’t handle a nosy journalist? He doesn’t even acknowledge he could’ve reacted differently which just reinforces (for me) how entitled he feels: “How dare this lower life person ask me this!”

      • V4Real says:

        WHAT Would Hugh Jackman do? That’s your first mistake. Stop comparing these celebs to each other. Everyone is different and handles situations differently. Do you want people at your job comparing you to someone else who works with you?

      • Sofia says:

        @V4Real, that’s exactly what they do. That’s what everyone does when you are talking about people with similar experiences in similar contexts. They are different, my example was just to show how someone in the same circumstances could have handled it better.

    • aga says:

      He is real journalist, not another ass-kisser. RDJ only showed total lack of intelligence. There are many ways of dealing with unwanted questions, walking out is the worst.

      • MtnRunner says:

        I agree. He should have refused to answer. RDJ is justifying his behavior and blame-shifting to the journo, when RDJ alone is responsible for his actions. Walking out is the sissy, childish way to “make a statement” when no one was forcing RDJ to answer the question in the first place. The continued character assassination is consistent with his juvenile behavior.

      • Hmmm says:

        I don’t think a real journalist would have asked a question so non news worthy as RDJ’s drug past.

    • Heat says:

      I am Team RDJ all the way. As he stated, he’s promoting a superhero movie; the audience of which is, in a big way, children. There are kids out there who idolize Ironman…and RDJ, himself. His past is NOT something that they need to idolize.
      Also, let’s keep in mind that this man is dealing with the substance abuse issues of his own son; perhaps he blames himself and his past for the influence it had on Indio. And, perhaps, he doesn’t want his past to be responsible for influencing any other children.
      I know, I’m just speculating, here, but I totally give RDJ a huge pass. The interviewer was slimey and creepy to me.

    • Catherine says:

      KGM is a political interviewer – he took Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls to task on C4 News last night. The problem appears to be that RDJ wasn’t briefed that he’d be interviewed by a news journalist. Going on about is just making him look unprofessional IMO.

  6. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    I think the interview got creepy, but RDJ is exaggerating the extent of it. Move on.

    • Shambles says:

      + 1. He acts as if he’s the first celebrity to have to sit through an uncomfortable interview. You can tell he thinks way too highly of himself. Goopy.

      • Josefa says:

        RDJ has always striked me as an arrogant prick. Maybe he really is a nice person, as that’s not incompatible. But he always has this “I’m RDJ, I’m so much cooler than you” vibe around him.

        I don’t blame him for walking off set, but I blame him for acting like the interviewer commited a crime against him. This was an awkward interview that went wrong, not more than that.

    • Kitten says:

      +2. You know what they say: three sides to every story. The truth lies somewhere in between each RDJ’s and the journalist’s version of events.

    • Kiddo says:

      Yeah, it’s hyperbolic. He could have kept it at, “I didn’t appreciate the direction where he was going”, but all of this kiddy fiddler nonsense, and “It’s all about the children” was absurd too. There is violence in these films, this is not some tame Disney production. Just admit that you were personally offended by it, not that you were reacting because of the way it would affect others, like your actions were altruistically driven.

      • Marty says:

        Exactly Kiddo, and RDJ has talked about his past in a joking manner while on the Iron Man press tour, so I don’t understand that lame excuse either.

    • taterho says:

      + me too. RDJ is butthurt now and just acting childish.

    • MtnRunner says:

      RDJ is acting like a spoiled brat. He should have politely and firmly refused to answer the question and redirected it back to the movie. Walking out of the interview was the equivalent of a tantrum when he could have sat there silent until Guru-Murthy asked him a film-related question. Calling him names only confirms his immaturity. He should behave better than that.

  7. The Other Maria says:

    I no longer give a damn about this man, especially after his comment regarding Alejandro.

    • Ana Maria says:

      totally agree with you…I wish someone, anyone in the media would confront him regarding the comments about Inarritu; somehow that has been lost in the dust…shame…

  8. Tiffany says:

    For someone who spent years rehabbing his image, you would think he would know better. I stated when the Black Widow story hit, none of these clowns have a great BO record that is not a franchise. Travel the world first class, stay on script and go cash your check. How is that difficult.

  9. Wilma says:

    That Guru-Murthy piece was interesting. I tended to side with him in his Tarantino interview because of the news element to Tarantino’s approach to violence. I don’t think RDJ’s drug issues were that relevant. He could have asked him about the vigilante approach to fighting crime. But it was nice to read some context.

    I have been done with RDJ for a while now. He comes off as an asshole who pretends to be nice, but that is my gut feeling and I can’t really substantiate it. The comments on Inarritu were just ugh.

  10. ds says:

    I enjoyed Guru-Murthy’ text. Haven’t watched the interview, but as someone who negotiated interviews with studios I dare say he must be telling the truth. They have a strict policy about it, and if topics were previously discussed (obviously they were) then someone from the PR crew didn’t do a proper job. But I also doubt that, since they’re very thorough.

  11. Kiddo says:

    Meh. I don’t love him, don’t hate him. But I do find a lot of celebrity interviews boring, if they only blather on about a film. That’s why journalists try to grab something else out of the time.

    Does all this actor shilling cost the studios less than running trailers? I ask only that if the actors only speak of the roles in these junkets, couldn’t the studio just run more ads?

  12. Betti says:

    Guru-Murthy is a political correspondant – he’s normally grilling politicians so what he did to RDJ was tame in comparison. Both are arrogant idiots.

    • Jegede says:

      Guru-Murthy could have skipped that ‘shallow’ assignment to interview RDJ though, and given it to another Channel 4 correspondent. But there are no headlines to be gained from that.

      • Kiddo says:

        Not necessarily. I don’t know who he works for, but he might have been given the assignment.

    • Sixer says:

      Actually, Jegede, he couldn’t have really. As explained in Guru-Murthy’s piece, Channel 4 doesn’t do “shallow assignments” at all. They do engage with culture and cultural phenomenons, but only in a serious way. Channel 4 does not even have a dedicated entertainment or culture correspondent.

      The fault here was not Channel 4′s. It probably wasn’t even RDJ’s. The fault lies with the handlers, whose job it is to know the mandate and raison d’etre of different journalistic outlets. They invited Channel 4, who don’t do puff. They negotiated with Channel 4, agreed the content and issued a double time slot. For whatever reason, and despite knowing what KGM planned to ask, they must have expected it to go well. Looks like gross incompetence on their part to me: either by booking the interview in the first place, or by failing to adequately prepare their client.

      Do I think KGM can be an arse? Surely, yes, I do. Do I think RDJ can be an arse? Surely, yes, I do. But news shows in the UK ALWAYS scrutinise movie stars. They have to by the broadcasting standards here. They’re not allowed to broadcast advertorial.

  13. Burgher says:

    Could you imagine being in a Sales meeting trying to sell a product and have the person you are meeting with begin to question you personally about a DUI you have under your belt or an abortion you had or a strained family relationship, etc.? It would be so out of line!

    I fully support RDJ.

    Celebrities are in fact people and don’t owe any journalist a story that are not comfortable covering with them.

    It doesn’t bother me either that he would have huge security detail. We have no idea what kind of problems celebrities face with stalkers, etc.

    • candice says:

      The sales meeting analogy isn’t valid. Even though the celeb is obviously there to promote their movie, it’s commonly known by both sides that it’s give and take. The celeb gets to chat up their film, but the interviewer can go off course and ask questions beyond the scope of the project. Unless it’s a standing up, 2 second sound bite on the red carpet, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask questions about the past.

      Agree with you that the celeb doesn’t owe any particular journalist a story. But then again, it works both ways.

      Edit — Was this a junket or a lengthier sit down? If the former, then I am going to backtrack on my comment

    • Kiddo says:

      I get what you are saying, but at the same time, it’s not just a sales meeting. Interviewers, in general, want something out of the interview too. If the interviews are all the same, then they are simply redundant ads with the celeb saying the same stuff over and over. I don’t know whether this interviewer needed to bring up past drug history, if it wasn’t relevant to the story, but the question about super hero stories doesn’t seem so far out of left field, considering that this has been the staple of Downey’s career for the last several years.

      ETA: he should have been asked if he was a feminist. This seemed to be standard fare there for a while.

  14. Talie says:

    It was a junket with rotating 5-min interviews. There are certain outlets — outside of a junket — where its understood that hard questions will be asked. He’s right, no matter how you slice it.

    • aga says:

      I watch the junket interviews of my favourite actors and generally there are always some questions about private life and non-relevant to the movies.

  15. Mia4S says:

    It’s interesting that Scarlett Johansson managed to get away with doing relatively less publicity. As I’ve always said the whole $20 million raise for her was clearly a myth. She’d be on the hook for a LOT more publicity. Hemsworth also did bare minimum. My theory with Spader is nothing major; Marvel cheaped out as usual and didn’t bother including him.

    • Jegede says:

      And ScarJo’s not adverse to saying stupid s*it herself.

      I so wish Emily Blunt had accepted the Black Widow part, when she was originally offered.

      • Mia4S says:

        Oh the Emily Blunt story is horrible. She WAS going to do the part! 20th Century Fox had a multi picture deal with her though and had priority. The movie they put her in instead of being Black Widow? Gulliver’s Travels with Jack Black.

        I would have burned Fox studios to the ground.

    • Beth says:

      Hemsworth’s been busy filming. Last press tour, Evans had to be away for awhile and Hemsworth got paired with Ruffalo for a few interviews; this time, Evans got paired with Renner while Hemsworth was out, hence how we ended up with the slut-shaming debacle. From what he has done, though, I think Hemsworth has been a delight on the press tour. Too bad it is going unnoticed, but I guess that should not surprise me. :/

    • The Other Pinky says:

      Scarlett has been on all the major junkets, what are you talking about? Not that anybody would fault her if she wasnt, the woman has a young baby.

  16. lisa2 says:

    The interviewer asked what 1 or 2 questions. He is very lucky because there are some celebs that get far worse questions and have their past thrown up in their faces daily. People that have turned their lives around too. So I guess his skin is a bit more sensitive.

  17. Lilacflowers says:

    Social decorum? Because going on Howard Stern is all about social decorum.

    RDJ, be quiet now and go work on your next film next week. Don’t be surprised if Feige doesn’t sign you up for the PR for that one. Sebastien Stan will handle those duties for the next go-around.

    • jen2 says:

      Yes, he can go to his “bro” to get his ego stroked while trashing someone else. Why is he allowed to disavow his past while others have faced it, answered questions about it without being whiney divas and moved on. Why is he such a special snowflake?

      • V4Real says:

        See, that’s where you’re wrong. He has faced his past. RDJ has been asked about his drug past so many times I can’t keep count. And he has answered questions and candidly talked about it. Don’t take my word for it YouTube interviews with him. He has even discussed it on entertainment talk shows such as Letterman, Leno and Craig Furgerson. So why does he have to continue to talk about it. What more can we learn about it. He’s said it all. He has a right to say he no longer wants to talk about his issues from 12 Years ago. Perhaps it just wasn’t the place and time for that discussion.

    • Hmmm says:

      Don’t be surprised if this interviewer gets less press time. I think the whole problem with this interview is that he wasn’t trying to get an answer out of RDJ (he had only 2 minutes left anyway, because he spend the first 4 on fluff). He deliberately asked a very personal question out of the blue to get a reaction. That is not journalism, its headline grabbing. BTW the guy just did a reddit AMA.

  18. Marty says:

    So according to RDJ, any jounalist that ask questions he doesn’t like runs the risk of him “putting hands” on them?

    RDJ is a grown man, he should start acting like one, instead of an immature brat.

  19. Ms. Turtle says:

    I agree with RDJ in that he was unfairly asked about his drug past (and “father issues”) in a celeb junket movie promo interview. It wasn’t cool. BUT stop talking about it, Robert. Beating a dead horse makes you a jerk. Being gracious would have been the way to go. On Stern, he could have simply said, “It was inappropriate and I chose to leave.” Now he looks like an ass.

  20. Tara says:

    Well he is right in this case about that journalist. He’s promoting a superhero movie and that jerk was trying to create a moment. Robert Downey Jr. does have a huge ego though.

    • Mrs. Darcy says:

      Did you read the link to Guru-Murthy’s piece? RDJ and team were well aware this was a less fluffy interviewer, they agreed to do it regardless.

    • Catherine says:

      See Sixer’s reply above, C4 News aren’t allowed by UK broadcasting standards to do advertorials.

  21. MrsBPitt says:

    I have no problem with the fact that RDJ got up and left the interview. If he didn’t want to answer personal questions, and frankly, made it perfectly clear that he did not, then the interviewer should have moved on to questions about the movie.

    However, the comment about Alejandro Inarritu was just nasty! I think RDJ has a sarcastic, asshole, type of humor, that most people do not find funny. I know a person like that! He thinks saying really nasty, crappy things are funny, and when people say something to him, its always “that was a joke, can’t you take a joke”….NOT FUNNY RDJ…

    • Kitten says:

      Yeah, I completely agree with all you say here. RDJ can be really persnickety and acerbic and I think many people interpret that as arrogance—and there might be a little of that there too. I do think sometimes he’s a bit too sharp for his own good.

      Ultimately, these actors have to learn to temper their outbursts and play the game.

      I love RDJ but lately he’s just seemed like such a brat. Maybe he’s exhausted by all the Avengers promotional crap, or maybe his ego has just gotten the best of him.

    • Sixer says:

      But the questions were agreed beforehand. From the KGM article:

      “We don’t do promotional interviews on Channel 4 News. We agree with PR people that as well as talking about a new movie for a while we want to ask wider ranging questions on relatively serious topics, and we don’t guarantee to run any answers in particular. When Robert Downey Jr’s PR man rang up asking what we wanted to talk about, we said we had no particular agenda but would ask about the new Avengers superhero movie and his recovery from jail and drug abuse to Hollywood stardom. We were given what they called a “double slot” of 10 minutes.”

      So clearly his people knew what was going to be discussed and, far from being concerned about it, actually booked KGM double the usual time!

      • Kitten says:

        Maybe it’s easier for RDJ to blame the reporter than to throw his PR people under the bus, but it seems they dropped the ball for sure.

  22. ShinyGrenade says:

    But… why the surprise? The attitude, the stupid tinted glasses, that’s RDJ.
    Oh, and he can’t take a joke about his past. Remember Ricky Gervais?

    He is a huge egomaniac douche. He should shut-up and concentrate his efforts in doing cute things for kids.

    • Kitten says:

      What happened with Gervais?

      • Kiddo says:

        Yeah, I don’t recall this either.

      • taterho says:

        Gervais made a crack about RDJ at the Golden Globes and RDJ got all huffy about it on stage. From what I’ve read though, RDJ was in on the joke.

      • The Other Pinky says:

        RDJ was most definitely not in on it. His comment went something like “what a sinister and unfunny host” before he started reading from the teleprompter. To be fair he was saying what we were all thinking, Gervais was an awful host. That incident does still serves to illustrate the size of this mans insane ego, if not a lack of a filter.

      • V4Real says:

        @the other pinky. RDJ was in on it. Just because a person doesn’t need to fully rely on a teleprompter doesn’t mean jack. After all they are actors and remember lines for a living.

    • V4Real says:

      @ShinyGrenade If you’re talking about when Ricky Gervais hosted the GG and joked about RDJ’S drug past while he was introducing him, it was planned.

      Gervais cracked a joke about RDJ and RDJ responded to it when he took the mic to speak. Gervais was accused by the media of making mean spirited jokes about Tim Allen, Tom Hanks and Rob. Gervais blasted the media and revealed that it was all planned. Hanks, Allen and RDJ was in on it. RDJ’S response was a planned rehearsed response. Gervais said he had drinks with Allen and Hanks after the show. Later on he and Downey did a promo skit for IM2.

      Looks like the joke was on the people who wasn’t aware it was a joke.

  23. Donald E. says:

    Well he’s done with the Press Tour. He came back to L.A last night so no more b**** from RDJ for a while.

  24. Sopha says:

    I find it interesting that Howard Stern indicated that Guru-Murthy’s questions were unnecessary. Isn’t he the king of asking inappropriate questions? Like bringing up Fran Dreschet’s rape without her permission. Or do I have the wrong shock jock?

    • Kitten says:

      To be fair to Howard, no one goes on his show without being fully aware that any topic, no matter how personal, is on the table.

      Celebs know exactly what they’re getting into yet they still flock to Howard because they know in the end that Howard will make them look good–he has a way of humanizing celebrities.

      • Kiddo says:

        This goes back to what Sixer said the other day, though. If RDJ doesn’t like a particular type of interviewer then meeting this journalist for questions falls squarely on his management for not knowing the style and then giving the go-ahead.

      • MrsBPitt says:

        I used to be the biggest Howard Sten lover!!!! But, he needs to give it up! He seems to kiss more ass than kick it lately.. he is not the Stern of old!!!

      • Kitten says:

        @MrsBPitt-I listened to Stern since I was 14-years-old when he was on WBCN at night until he left public radio. I admit that I haven’t listened to him since he moved to satellite, so maybe I’m not the best judge.

  25. Nev says:

    He’s become tired and grumpy and mean and slightly racist. He will fade.

  26. perplexed says:

    I think the way the interviewer phrased his questions was a bit clumsy. Maybe he even thought so too because he kept going “um…um” like he knew he was going to push a button. The part where he asked “Are you free of all that?” (I assume he was talking about addiction) was particularly oddly phrased. He has a right to ask his questions, but could have been more skilled in how he asked them. That’s the part of the interviewer’s personality I was a little baffled by — why did he ask questions in such a way as to make the subject feel so awkward? Diane Sawyer probably would have asked the same questions but in a more skilled way.

  27. tila says:

    Can somebody please explain how this interview was creepy? He was just asking pre approved questions..

    • Artemis says:

      If the journalist is to be believed, than RDJ was well-aware that the conversation was not going to be confined to just promo. At the end of the day, Guru-Murthy is a news journalist not a gossip blogger. His interests are not going to be to please RDJ and set him up for some soundbite friendly interview. He wants newsworthy quotes. Can’t fault him for that.

      It also seems like RDJ is only capable to discuss sensitive matters when he’s in control of the story, setting and the situation. When he’s made comfortable in a studio with pre-approved questions so that he can rehearse his answers over and over again. Basically when he’s getting the moviestar treatment that he thinks he deserves. Imo, he NEEDS it because he can’t handle a real situation meaning dealing with a person who has their own interests instead of the usual asskissy gossip journalist who is there to accommodate his and the studio’s interest.

      The fact alone that he would get aggressive because the questions are not what he’s used to just shows what a prick he still is. He’s admitting he’s capable of violence when the situation really doesn’t call for it. What ‘adult’ deals with frustration by wanting to lash out? That’s not normal.
      If it’s true that the temperature in the room can cause him to walk out too, you know you got a diva on your hands which makes me kind of side with Guru-Murthy although I was initially on nobody’s team. At least he was doing his job without getting violent.

      • Marty says:

        100% agree with everything you wrote!

      • Hmmm says:

        If this interview proved anything its that this guy is a gossip feeding attention seeker and far from a news journalist he pretends to be. No respected journalist would want his name attached to this controversy.

  28. L says:

    See, the journalist has a history of trying to get interview subjects upset so more people talk about his interviews (see: Quentin Tarantino), which is hardly good journalism. He didn’t just bring up RDJ’s drug past, he brought up a politically charged statement from years ago that RDJ has explained pretty damn well just a few months back. If it had just been “let’s talk about the past”, fine- mr. Downey’s down that in plenty of interviews! But those two topics…whatever you think of Downey, facts indicate the journo was just trolling.

    • Kiddo says:

      Then why sit with him if there is a documented history?

    • Catherine says:

      The Tarantino interview was the same reason, it was approached as a news piece (that’s explained in KGM’s Guardian article). Also to give more context to this check out Richard Ayoade’s interview with KGM – 10 times more intelligent and shows the whole farce of the interview/promo situation .

  29. Mrs. Darcy says:

    Thanks for including Guru-Murthy’s response – I’m team Krishnan now that Robert won’t shut up about it. Yes he fumbled the interview but now RDJ just comes off like a petty tool bag, moaning to kiss a** Howard Stern, “Woe is me, I got asked a couple of uncomfortable questions” (love Murthy letting us in on the icebox temperature requested room and the fact RDJ ignored his request for an autograph for his kid beforehand). Gee Robert maybe if you acted like a human being in the lead up real reporters doing their jobs wouldn’t be so inclined to make you squirm a bit.

  30. Pop says:

    Krishnan Guru-Murthy is a well respected journalist and yes he’s done way more difficult interviews with non celebs and especially egomaniacs like RDJ. Krishnan said he is not there to promote his film which is true, perhaps RDJ thought he was going on some celebrity feeding news channel. I think the highest paying actor title is going to his head, he is sounding like some bully.

  31. sills says:

    Meh. I like RDJ Jr, minority opinion around here but whatever. I usually find him thoughtful and saucy and refreshing, though I’ll admit the Inarritu remark the other day came off as petulant.

    Guru-Murthy in that Guardian piece, though– “Robert Redford, Michelle Pfeiffer, Samuel L Jackson and Carey Mulligan have all happily taken the chance to talk to me about things ranging from politics to sexism, from violence to Alzheimer’s disease” … LOL, “their drug-addicted pasts” doesn’t seem to appear anywhere on that list. It’s a press junket for a superhero movie, dude. Get over yourself.

    • Ursaline (Ursula) says:

      So here’s my question: What’s the point of trying to go all ‘in depth and profound’ with the questions as a *serious* journalist, knowing that you have ten minutes first thing in the morning and the subject of your interview is there to talk about his superhero movie, over and over and over again all day? I think it stands to reason that even if RDJ was expecting the same old rehashed crap questions about his drug abuse that have even been parodied on the Oscars, why get into the thing with his dad or try to get a rise out of him for a ten minute piece? Maybe if it was some two hour Diane Sawyer gig where he outs something like Bruce Jenner did and is emotionally prepared for it, but it seems like they both just rubbed each other the wrong way and got a bad vibe.
      So I can’t place that much blame with just getting up and walking out versus telling him off right there and then. It may sound a little entitled, but more controlled than other stupid things that we hear about. And obviously from the HOUR LONG interview with Howard Stern, they are far more comfortable with each other and have an established rapport. Howard’s show has been all about talking crap in whatever way or form that may or may not be applicable pretty much from the start. I would’t take comments made on that forum without a grain of salt. The language is usually dirty and they get into disgusting humor just for the juvenile fun of it.
      But the comment he made about Alejandro Inarritu wasn’t nice and did more damage to his credibility than the stupid remarks on Stern’s show. Shame, RDJ. I’m still a fan, but I’d rethink that attitude that you were putting off. It wasn’t pretty at all.

      • Ana Maria says:

        you expressed exactly my feelings, and I’m thinking now that RDJ is talking non-stop about the walkout interview in order to distract the public from the really nasty comment about Inarritu, and I think he is succeeding…

  32. sage says:

    What a douche. Lol at Howard Stern for accusing a journalist of asking UNNECESSARY questions. Pot, kettle.

  33. kri says:

    FFS, just GIVE E SPADER!!!!!!! He probably can’t tolerate any of them. I know I’m having a rough go of it.

  34. Miss Jupitero says:

    This what journalism is. It is not PR, it is not fluffy entertainment spotlight pieces where they just follow the lead of the publicist. Rdj should have understood what he was getting into. He’s the douchbags here.

  35. original kay says:

    “kiddy fiddler running for mayor’”?

    excuse me?
    is he referring to someone being a pedophile and being asked about while running for office? WTF?

    I think that is one of the most offensive things I have ever read.

  36. Mona says:

    I have a feeling that RDJ is about to unravel and fall off the sobriety wagon.

    • Beep says:

      I was thinking he already fell off.

      • Mich says:

        Me too.

        Been there. Done that.

      • Tara says:

        Me too. His demeanor seems a bit cokey.

      • Jaded says:

        I think he’s just become way too Hollywoodized and self-important. And people like RDJ who have gone to one extreme on the addiction pendulum and then clean up tend to swing to the opposite end of the pendulum just as strongly. His wife has him on a short leash too and has stated that if he EVER does ANY drug again she’ll divorce him in a New York minute and take the kids.

  37. Micki says:

    …” I’m always assuming the social decorum is in play”
    Does that mean softball “feel good” questions?
    I don’t like repetitive boring interviews Iron Man.

  38. Beth says:

    This hasn’t been tour de force press tour it needed to be, but let’s be real: this will all be forgotten by the time Civil War comes out. Except for maybe Hemsworth and Renner, these actors tend to get a lot of good will from bloggers, press, the public, etc, that this will a minor blip on the radar of the MCU.

  39. meme says:

    RDJ, SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP. That is all.

  40. meme says:

    Someone should remind RDJ that Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are the most famous, beloved or hated couple, lied about, sought after movie stars in the world and they NEVER complain about anything. And I’ve never heard of either getting snotty with a reporter or walking out of an interview.

  41. EM says:

    I think he makes a valid point. The issues that the interviewer brought up were resolved so many years ago. How are they relevant to the film he is promoting now?
    There is a difference between promoting a film and going into a detailed discussion about your personal life and/or medical history. I think some celebrities who provide too much information are setting a precedent that journalists find tempting, but they need to realise that not all celebrities are like Angelina, to update the world on their medical situations or [Lohan} rehab situations, etc.

  42. MSat says:

    I don’t think regurgitating old quotes that were published in previous interviews from 15 years ago qualifies as a “serious interview.” I agree with RDJ on this one. This Guru-Murthy guy is in the same camp as Piers Morgan – he has a huge ego and takes himself VERY seriously – but in terms of actual journalistic skills and integrity, he’s full of shit. Any intern could do a Google search and dredge up old RDJ interviews. I hate reporters who try to make the story about them.

    • Ella says:

      Totally agreed!

      It kind of annoys me how, any time a celebrity dares to have principles and take a stand against the invasive, vulture-like tendencies of our current media culture, they get mocked and called “uppity” by many, including here on this site. People bemoan the vapid nature of the celebrity world and yet whenever there’s a celeb who’s actually intelligent and has principles (like RDJ, or George Clooney when he hit back at the Daily Mail a while ago), there’s immediate backlash against them for “thinking they’re better” or “not being gracious.” I’m certainly not saying either of those guys (or any celeb) is without their faults and hubris, but when it comes to their attitudes toward the bottom-feeders in the media, I’m with them all the way.

  43. Anon says:

    I just watched RDJ on Oscar round table, he brought his drug arrests and how Japan asked him many questions about his drug arrests/prison time before allowing him into their country. Perhaps what has changed, RDJ doesn’t want anyone to correlate the generational cycle of addiction….via grandparent/father/son. I thought RDJ over-reacted myself, truth hurts as it was a teaching moment for his fans (as he is a recovering drug addict and it is a kids’ movie) and way to show that addiction cycles need to be broken through the generations.

  44. Veronica says:

    His behavior is coming across as very defensive to me. Entitled, sure, you expect that, but RDJ is usually better at hiding it. It really makes me wonder if he’s going through a “struggle” period of addiction, and the interview hit a nerve.

  45. Saks says:

    That “kiddy fiddler” comment really disgusted me, just another celebrity using molesting terms for their stupid fame/celebrity analogies…

  46. Anne tommy says:

    I think there is far too much being read into these incidents. WTF is there left to say about his drug problems? And the relationship with his father? Does the interviewer think he’s Sigmund effing Freud? RDJ was right to go. And As I understand it the director is Mexican. That’s Not a race. And the remark was not very offensive anyhow, if a bit patronising. RDJ does have a particular too cool for school persona but he seems smart and funny and A survivor. Good enough for me.

    • Ana Maria says:

      I thought his comment about Inarritu was demeaning, condescending; it implies that people whose native tongue is spanish are incapable of forming or using cultural references; why do you think it wasn’t that offensive? I really would like to know…

      • Anne tommy says:

        I did not interpret RDJ’s comment as you have. I did not infer from it a generalised disrespect for Spanish people’s capacities. Somewhat Patronising as I say. But Frankly if that is regarded as an insult worth getting insulted about, one is probably in the wrong business and should take up flower arranging or crochet for a living.

  47. Sara says:

    As a Brit I don’t really care he walked out of that Interview. The interviewer has been awful (a d***k) in other interviews as well so good on you Robert. However, Robert don’t take it too far.

  48. Ella says:

    I’m Team RDJ here. Some are saying Guru-Murthy was “doing his job” but that’s only by the twisted definition of journalism that we have these days. There is no public entitlement to know about an actor’s personal life especially when it includes events that were painful to live through. Guru-Murthy’s JOB is helping promote a film. He’s got delusions of grandeur that make him think he’ll be more of a “real journalist” if he asks tougher questions, but the fact is, RDJ’s personal life and political beliefs don’t qualify as hard news anyway. If KGM wants to be a hard-hitting journalist, he should go down that route and cover politics/world events, not celebrities promoting an action movie. So his questions were both inappropriate and pointless. Celebrities/actors don’t sign away their right to privacy just because they’re obligated by the film studios to go out and promote a film.

    • laughing girl says:

      Eh, Krishnan Guru-Murthy IS covering politics and world events – this was one of those very rare times he’s covering cultural events (he did a rather famous interview with Quentin Tarantino). He’s a top political journalist, not an entertainment puff piece writer. Prior to the interview RDJ’s people were informed that Channel 4 (which is the equivalent to the BBC by the way) doesn’t share questions in advance, that no topic is off-limits etc. I don’t disagree that RDJ isn’t obligated to answer but surely there’s a better way of handling this than stomping off like a toddler with a strop? I mean, this is RDJ’s game, his thing, this is what he does for a living? This is what he’s getting paid to do? Promote and interact with journalists? Obviously his PR team screwed up by not doing their research – and perhaps as Americans they are unfamiliar with serious news outlets in the UK – or the rather abrasive questioning style for which UK journalism is famous. No, he’s under no obligation to answer but pretending that answers about his addiction, politics etc are out of bounds when he was happy to promote the **** out of his past when he was rehabbing his image is surely a bit disingenuous. Also his continued bad-mouthing of KGM reflects much more poorly on him particularly in comparison to KGM who’s responded calmly and factually to the interview fall-out.

  49. Iheartgossip says:

    I agree with RDJ on the interview walk-out. I’m worried that he might start using again; with all the drunken shenangins going on with the others on the press tour. Cause ‘the others’ seem coked up and soaked in booze. Other than that – Take your $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ RDJ and chill, brotha.

  50. Sam H x says:

    I found his comment about Alexander Innaritu very ignorant and patronising. It has taken him down a few notches in my books! Articulacy & substance don’t seem to be RDJ’s forte.

    Looks like someone in RDJs camp screwed up and didn’t do enough homework on Krishnan or Channel 4 for that matter. I did see the clip he did give Robert the option to not answer if he didn’t want to. It could have been dealt with more diplomacy from both sides.

    Angelina & Brad seem to deal with interviews & press more graciously and eloquently (esp Angelina.)

    More like Howard Stern is a bottom feeding muckraker!

  51. Brasileira says:

    RDJ: Serious need of a time out.
    JAMES SPADER: Pleeeeease, give me some!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  52. Who ARE these people? says:

    Muckrakers was the term given a century back to reform-minded investigative journalists. We would benefit from their talents today. Downey is glib but not articulate; alert but not informed. Irritating to think he may have rebranded a socially beneficial movement by likely confusing it with bottom-feeding scum suckers (lawyers LOL).