Prince NEVER Respected Chris Tucker… Here’s Why | HO

Chris Tucker’s iconic performance as Ruby Rhod in The Fifth Element has been praised by some as groundbreaking and by others as outright ridiculous. But what if we told you Prince was supposed to play that role?

However, Prince, who had no problem designing his own flamboyant outfits, was appalled at the Hollywood costumes for the character. But why?

The late Prince Rogers Nelson was a music and cultural icon, known for his groundbreaking artistry and unapologetic individuality. He was a man who fiercely guarded his principles and his image, rejecting anything that felt exploitative or misaligned with his vision. Among many of his decisions was a choice that raised eyebrows: declining the flamboyant role of Ruby Rhod in The Fifth Element, which eventually went to comedian Chris Tucker. This decision, and the subsequent fallout, has fueled speculation about whether Prince truly respected Tucker and what deeper issues were at play.

When The Fifth Element director Luc Besson was crafting the character of Ruby Rhod, a larger-than-life, gender-bending figure, Prince seemed like the ideal candidate. His flamboyant style, eccentric personality, and charisma aligned perfectly with the character. However, despite his penchant for designing and wearing bold, unconventional outfits on stage, Prince rejected the role.

Chris Tucker eventually stepped into the part, delivering a performance that was both praised as innovative and criticized as over-the-top. The character became iconic in sci-fi cinema, but for Prince, Tucker’s acceptance of the role represented something more troubling—a willingness to compromise and conform to Hollywood’s norms.

Though Prince was no stranger to flamboyance, reports suggest that he was appalled by the costumes proposed for Ruby Rhod. He allegedly found them distasteful, even by his own extravagant standards. Prince reportedly told Tucker, “This is my design,” emphasizing that his flamboyance was self-created, not dictated by anyone else.

Prince’s rejection wasn’t just about the costumes—it was a rejection of what he saw as a broader agenda in Hollywood. The music legend was known for his unwavering control over his image and his disdain for being boxed into stereotypes or rituals he found degrading. His decision to pass on the role of Ruby Rhod was emblematic of this ethos, reflecting his refusal to play into what many believe is a Hollywood trend of emasculating black men.

The idea that Hollywood often pressures black male actors into humiliating or emasculating roles has been a long-standing critique. Many prominent figures, including Dave Chappelle, Cat Williams, DC Curry, and Michael Jai White, have spoken out about this trend. The so-called “dress ritual” involves black comedians and actors being cast in roles that require them to wear dresses or portray exaggerated, often offensive, caricatures.

Dave Chappelle, for example, famously turned down millions of dollars because he refused to wear a dress in a sketch. He later revealed that this moment was a turning point in his career, as he realized the industry’s tendency to compromise actors’ integrity for cheap laughs or symbolic humiliation.

Cat Williams echoed similar sentiments, stating, “Show me one person that ever wore a dress in Hollywood unsuccessfully. That’s how you understand what a ritual is.” These statements have fueled conspiracy theories about Hollywood’s exploitation of black male actors and the symbolic significance of such roles.

Prince’s decision to reject Ruby Rhod was consistent with his lifelong philosophy. He maintained strict control over his artistry, rejecting both the music and film industries’ attempts to exploit or diminish him. His famous battles with record labels, particularly Warner Bros., demonstrated his unwillingness to compromise his principles for financial gain or broader acceptance.

On the other hand, Chris Tucker’s acceptance of the role sparked questions about his motivations. Did Tucker’s decision reflect a willingness to conform to Hollywood’s demands, even at the cost of his integrity? Some critics argue that Tucker’s portrayal of Ruby Rhod, while memorable, played into stereotypes that Prince consciously avoided.

Though Prince and Tucker were reportedly cordial, there are indications that Prince’s respect for the comedian may have been diminished by Tucker’s decision to play Ruby Rhod. Prince’s own comments, and his refusal to budge on issues of image and integrity, suggest that he saw Tucker’s choice as a compromise he would never make.

However, it’s worth noting that Prince was not one to publicly criticize others. His disdain for Hollywood’s exploitative practices was directed more at the system than at individuals. Whether or not he respected Tucker on a personal level, Prince’s rejection of the Ruby Rhod role served as a powerful statement about his values and his unwillingness to conform.

Prince’s decision, and the subsequent debates it sparked, highlight larger issues within Hollywood. The industry’s treatment of black men has long been a point of contention, with many actors and comedians calling out its tendency to pigeonhole them into roles that perpetuate negative stereotypes or diminish their masculinity.

This trend is not limited to Ruby Rhod or even to men in dresses. It reflects a broader pattern of exploitation and control that many artists, including Prince, have fought against. From his battles over music rights to his rejection of conformist roles, Prince’s career was a testament to the power of saying “no” in an industry that often demands compliance.

Despite the controversy, Tucker’s performance as Ruby Rhod remains a defining moment in his career. The character, with his high-pitched voice and flamboyant mannerisms, is a polarizing figure—viewed by some as a groundbreaking representation of gender fluidity and by others as an example of Hollywood’s exploitation of black talent.

For Tucker, the role solidified his place in Hollywood, but it also raised questions about the cost of fame and the compromises required to achieve it. Did Tucker “sell out,” or did he simply seize an opportunity that aligned with his comedic style? The answer likely depends on one’s perspective.

In contrast, Prince’s legacy remains untainted by compromises. His refusal to play Ruby Rhod is just one example of his commitment to authenticity and artistic freedom. While his career was marked by struggles—both personal and professional—Prince never wavered in his dedication to his principles.

For fans and critics alike, the story of Prince and Chris Tucker serves as a fascinating case study in the intersection of art, integrity, and Hollywood’s power dynamics. It raises important questions about the choices artists face and the price of staying true to oneself in an industry that often demands conformity.

In the end, Prince’s refusal to play Ruby Rhod was not just a rejection of a role—it was a rejection of a system. His decision, and the broader debates it has sparked, continue to resonate, offering a powerful reminder of the importance of standing firm in one’s values, no matter the cost.