It's really interesting. On one hand, I can see why they wouldn't want to work with Glover again for the sequel. On the other hand, the prosthetic thing is completely out of line. They should've simply re-casted the role. So both parties were at fault up to a point. Good video man!
Yeah I agree, both parties needed to just take a breath. Also, how they kept referring to Jeffrey Weissman as “Crispin” is just weird and not cool to the actor playing him. Awkward stuff. Thanks for watching!
Crispen Glover didn't think that the end of Back to the Future should be about monetary gain, yet when it came to himself and doing part 2 it was a dispute in which he wanted more money. The irony.
it's more to do with being paid fairly. He said he was only offered less than half of what biff and Lorane got which he didn't think was fair. He later sued and won because his prosthetics were used without permission and laws were changed so it couldn't be done to others
This video only follows the side of people who had a reason to dislike Glover. Funny how the actors who worked with him don't trash talk him. Think about that. They did Crispin wrong, he wasn't hard to work with. Stoltz was. If crispin was as hard as they claimed he would have been fired too and they wouldn't have abused his rights to his own likeness to add him in the second movie. If he was so horrible?? How come the actress literally avoided the person they hired to sneakily play him? Out of dedication to Crispin? Yeah sure sounds like someone who is hard to work with. More like sounds like these elites rewriting the truth about why they refused to pay him his worth.
@@mrhonestbee4638 It's a team project. What a stupid thing to say. Of course most Directors want the input of what they feel is right for the characters. Also, the writer came up with that ending. Not the director. But hey who cares about being objective so long as we can all be subjective right?
@@theceng - I'm a huge fan of directors, who allow input from actors and are willing to discuss and debate ideas, but it's ridiculous for an actor to take such a strong position and hold their ground on a minor creative position and at the end of the day, you're not the director, and as an actor why should your opinion be enforced on the other actors as well who may also not agree with you. And I could maybe even agree with him if the message appeared to be about money, but Marty getting the truck in the end was merely a result of everything aligning and falling in place and now he could go to the lake with Jennifer, which is merely a simple teenage pleasure. They don't have another 30 minutes to elaborate on the details of George's book, etc but the truck was merely a brief simple way of demonstrating that George's book was a success as opposed to it being a Tommy Wiseau project. But I agree with you... in that they offered Glover a ridiculously low amount, but I'm guessing they likely did it to make a point about his monetary gain argument and I think he was so difficult to work with that they gave him a take it or leave it offer and prepared for him refusing.
@@ScottyDunn if that was me I would accept the offer but ask for a couple thousand dollars more to see if I would get an if they agreed ok if not I would still do the role if the new offer was still on the table.
What they did with Glover’s likeness was over the line. But like you mentioned there was no rule then against such a thing. Yeah they waited too long for the sequel. 3 years is commonplace but 4 years is a bit too long. Anyway but Glover was CRAZYY for expecting Michael J Fox money. He’s always been weird. Which has helped him as far creating unique characters. But being difficult, well that’s just impractical.
I stumbled upon this video tonight and watched it with my father. Which also introduced me to this trilogy many years ago. I just LOVE the way you introduce to us these crazy facts about my favorite movie. Thank you so much, man. I appreciate ya
I’m glad you enjoyed the video! Thank you so much for watching. I have a kid now and I’m going to introduce him to the trilogy when he’s old enough! Very cool that you and your dad are Back to the Future fans. Such a good series. Thanks again!
Crispin completely missed the point of his characters transformation. George's relationship and family didn't become more loving and stable because of money. When George defended Lorain against Biff, it boosted his confidence. Something he didn't have before, helping him break out of his box. George took more risks, like publishing his book, that paid off. The money George earned was incidental. It was his new founded confidence that improved his family's disposition.
Wow this was such a GREAT look at crispin glover and zemekis. I didn’t really even half of that and was thoroughly drawn in! Thanks for this deep dive!
that part about Zemeckis not being able to make the two movies at once is kinda funny considering he did it a decade-ish later with Cast Away and What Lies Beneath (although admittedly the Cast Away filming was halted temporarily so Tom Hanks could lose a ton of weight)
I totally DID NOT know that George McFly was recast in 2 and 3 until I watched these videos! Now, to be fair, George had a much smaller role in the sequels, but yeah I could not tell he was being portrayed by a different actor.
Thank you Dalia, I really enjoyed making this one and taking a look at what else Crispin had been up to. You can find Rubin and Ed on RU-vid here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-brjJF3xtkEI.html
The stories surrounding Crispin Glover's behaviour on BTTF only came out after he declined to come back for part 2 and won the lawsuit about wrongfully using his likeness. It's the studio's way of getting even and holding him back from other movie parts out of sheer spite.
I always thought it was such a shame things had to go down that way. Glover’s acting in the first movie was phenomenal and I loved his character so much. Would have been great to have him in the other movies.
I hope Crispin holds no ill will towards Jeffrey Weissman for replacing his role. Weissman was a man who took work to provide for his family, likely he was completely unaware of the legal issues around his work. And lets also face it, had Weissman not accepted the job, someone else would have done it.
At the end of the first movie, I thought they were rich because George McFly had a spine. Now that he had stood up to Biff in the parking lot, he was more proactive in his life. This reflected in his career, his writing his book, and being more involved and in love with his wife. And his kids were successful because their dad showed them how to be proactive and successful. Marty said that his dad never stood up to Biff, and Doc said, "Never?" That's why I thought that.
Number 2 suffered from sequel-itis. Crispins characterisation of George was an integral part of the adventure in #1. 2 & 3 were weaker without him in them.
He’s memorable in the first one but so weird and so awkward that he wasn’t missed …. I never thought of him as missing just relieved that his goofball was left out
Glover just went way over his head always antagonizing the script, plot, dialog & direction the writers & directors not only wants to go but had given deep thoughts of more than one can ever know. You RESPECT certain things like that. That kind of behavior is that type that will allow you to disappear in their movie once they reached their boiling point. You maybe needed with your acting skills but DO NOT go out of bounds with your ideas as this is THEIR movie, not yours. Also, NO ONE is non-expendable as Glover proved the ouch(!) way.
actually, the way crispin would move "out of shot, you say?" in the first movie. to me it was awesome, so believable. it was great. he, just like michael was born to be the character he portrayed in bttf1. and maybe bttf2 would have grossed far more if he would have been in it
I struggle with the concept that an actor thinks they know better than the genius writer, producer and director. Play the part your hired for. Its not up to actors to change the story as Crispin would have done given the chance. He talked his way out of a better career than he might have gone on to have.
Indeed, Crispin had issues with the "Money makes you happy" situation. Watching his interviews recently, I believe he said the McFly's were supposed to have a Maid or Maids at the end of the first movie
For the life of me I don't understand Claudia Wells decision - 1. How is not doing II going to help your mother? 2. She could have done 2 weeks of shooting and gone back to her mother 3. The money could have helped her mother 4. Not being in II would be depressing for her family when the movie was released... 5. Your mother should have insisted... 6. She was the perfect girlfriend for Marty. 7. The moment I noticed she was not in II I tuned out... 8. I had a crush on her 9. :( ! 10. History needed you Claudia
Loved the first one back in 1985.. saw bits and pieces of #2, almost all of it recently.. it’s just ok. If it had been #uno, I doubt any more would’ve come. Will see #3 someday.
crispin earned his notoriety from movie 1, they should have paid him for 2 and 3. backend points comparable to the sales numbers of 1 to get to his number. if 2 flopped, no big bucks for crispin. this episode robbed us of a master actor and tarnished him for life. who knows what he would have gone on to accomplish, but he was effectively blackballed. so hes eccentric. deal with it. hes a genius.
It was probably ego that led him to turn down the role. I really enjoyed BTTF2 - it was THE film I had to see. And, actually, the first film I saw twice at the cinema when I was young. :)
Crispin did Friday the 13th part 4 the year before BTTF. I remember seeing BTTF before I saw FT13th. He’s definitely a unique dude. Lol I heard he’s a little loopy currently.
Not only that. From 1984-87 he did that, BTF, Teachers, At Close Range, and River’s Edge. All off kilter characters and quirky performances. He was never the conventional movie star.
it is funny to me knowing that it was possible that the announcement of a 3rd movie in theaters harmed the winnings of the 2nd because when I saw these as a kid I also was like "Another? what's the next one gonna be about?" I didn't like the idea of a 3rd one and when I saw it I disliked it a lot even till this day, I have nostalgia for it but I consider it the weakest and at the same time most harming if we talk about continuity.
Maybe it wasn't Stoltz and Glover who were the problem. Maybe the problem was Zemeckis? He got rid of three actors, if you include the girl that was playing Stoltz' girlfriend. Recall how they used Glover's face to make a mask for the actor they replaced him with? That led to a lawsuit that Glover won. Shady Zemeckis, if you ask me.
Shady is an understatement. The entire back to the Future Trilogy is literally a warning about how 9/11 was planned in advance and Robert knew about it.
Something about that rubin and ed movie you mentioned reminded me of this awful movie called The Van. It had something to do with a cat and the guy in it had a fantasy about wearing super tall hightops.
I tend to believe Crispin as he has been incredibly forthcoming and frank in every interview he has ever done regarding the film. The final BTTF ending is sort of a compromise as Crispin wanted Biff in the scene versus the way it was originally written with servants and a much fancier house. Crispin didnt care for the whole "tennis clothes and racket man of leisure" look but it was his end of the compromise. Hollywood and media people are vile and propagandist liars by nature. When Crispin says they offered hin half of what Biff and Lorraine were getting i believe him. I also believe him that they never bumped up the scale for him or that he begged to come back during filming. He is a method actor and that can be weird or a pain in the ass, but look at his performance here or in "Rivers Edge" and you can see the results
Interesting the same guy who is didn't like the money equals happiness message (which was not the message anyway) is the same guy who demanded the same salary as main star for the sequel. Classic woke Holly-liberal 😄
Always thought Glover’s hair was an odd choice for the 50s.Have you seen the RU-vid video that is based on the Back to the Future video game and gives a good idea for what Back to the Future 4 would look like?
If they can recast Jennifer without transform Shue, why do they need so much effort to transform Jeffrey Weissman, the audience knew it was a different actor anyway.
Most of the stuff regarding Glover on set and his unruly demands is a he said she said situation. Personally I’m far more inclined to believe Glover over the likes of Bob Gale. Gale was being sued for legitimate reasons, it was completely in his interest to paint Glover as an unprofessional and impossible person to work with. Clearly he’s not that hard to work with considering Zemeckis hired him later on and he’s continued to have a successful career as an actor. The fact that the cast don’t have any unkind words regarding Glover says a lot too. Plus his eccentricity is why you hired him in the first place. Glover is the only person in the world who would have gave that particular performance and it’s what makes the character so memorable. Kind of Glovers M.O, he”ll make some strange artistic choices but by all accounts (excluding Gale) he”s a very professional actor. Gale on the other hand, not even in the business, just trying to live off of the past ironically.
Zemeckis and Gale claim that Stoltz acted too serious for a film that was meant to be comedic in tone, although Stoltz (the rare times he's discussed BTTF) claimed once that Zemeckis never told him to do it in a comedic way. That said, there's some credence to the statement they've made about Stoltz having issues with the script, as Lea Thompson backed that part up.
That would've been pretty cool to see present day and how things were getting effected. I guess there was too much going on already. Fun to think about though.
What I'm about to say doesn't have anything to do with his acting abilities. But i find Glover to be hypocritical and disingenuous in this situation, because he claimed the first movie was propaganda about having money=happiness, but then demands more money for the sequel. But it was wrong for the studio to use his likeness without permission.
Parts 2 and 3 always seemed rushed and slapped together without much thought to the story line or quality. The producers just seemed to want to cash in on the success of the original movie and quickly. They should have got the actors pay and conditions right and stepped back before rushing into sequels.
While I think Part 2 and 3 are okay, I do kinda wonder how 2 and 3 would have went had they decided to leave Part 1's ending as a silly cliffhanger joke, and just has 2 and 3 just be separate adventure sequel stories (kinda like the sequels to Indiana Jones, where there isn't much continuity it's just Jones on a different quest). I feel like they could have done so much more if they had gone in that direction. Christopher Lloyd once said he would have liked to have done a BTTF film set in Ancient Rome or medieval times. Imagine THAT as a BTTF sequel!
I think crispin is brilliant, his whacky acting is so original but I think I would get a little bit bored with his obsessive ideas about capitalism and such , I mean do you really want to be a writer on an impossible storyline and hear some guy harping on about how you can’t end it with materialism
