Crispin Glover's Back To The Future Lawsuit That Changed Everything
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 сер 2024
- Crispin Glover speaks on his face being used against his will as prosthetics on another actor in Back To The Future 2, and his lawsuit that stopped Robert Zemeckis and anybody else from ever being able to do that again.
The lawsuit was his density.
Perfectly said
Underrated comment.
So you would work for free then.Have someone take your personal rights and violate them.I don’t think so!
@@SarahWells777 he was gonna get a 7 figure(low 7 figures, probably $1-$1.5M), to do a small appearance in the 2nd film. How does that qualify as free? He asked for $5M(from what I've gathered), and simply wasn't an important enough character in the 2nd movie to warrant that cost. He didn't get paid because he was greedy, and is an actor that's notorious for being hard to work with
@@SarahWells777 Crispin Glover gave them permission to take molds of his face. He was paid a bit over $250k for them. Exactly how is he a victim here? He wanted to block their productions until he got the $5 mill paycheck that Michael J Fox was offered for his bit part in the sequels. I think you have your information wrong, Pumpkin!!
Darth Vader came down from Planet Vulcan and told him to sue
Let’s keep this brain melting stuff to ourselves ok
It was his lawyers...Darth Vader & Sons!
😂😂😂😂😂 I'm IM YOUR DENSITY I MEAN YOUR DESTINY
For a man who acts for the love of the art, Crispin sure does take some crap bits for a payday.
Yep, that's his attorney, Darth Vader and Sons. Lol.. He took action for humanities sake, and his rightful business. There are several topics going on here. He wasn't playing.
He was said to be extremely difficult to work with. It was his right to sue though.
He reminds me of my anime loving fringe/cringe nerdo roommate - hand mannerisms, over acting, desperate laugh, the whole shabang
In the industry that just means you have strong morals and principles and won't be an easy puppet. That's literally all it means. Why do you think all the real famous actors and actresses all vote the same, all promote the same government propaganda? Because they think like a hive mind? No, because they are told to or they are out of work. That's why when they DON'T "play ball" they all of a sudden stop getting roles in big movies.
^ It happened to Vince Vaughn for example. He was a major star then all of a sudden he's nowhere to be found. Same with Brendan Fraser, although he's sort of making a comeback perhaps with his latest role.
Do you remember when he got thrown out of Letterman during the commercial break because he was too wild. He was kind of threatening Dave and he did a high kick.
It doesn't matter if he's an asshole or not. The lawsuit was justified and set an important precedent to Hollywood not to exploit an actors image without recompense.
Two things can be true. He had every right to sue, and he was an SOB to work with.
Except he was paid $250k for his role and molds. And he can't just hold the production hostage until he gets the $5 million he demanded for the sequels. Crispin was just money hungry. Had he actually taken a reasonable pay for his role he would have definitely ended up with more roles with bigger paydays. Not saying he did terribly, but he could have been an A-lister if he hadn't taken this bad advice.
Yeah, I suspect they knew they would probably get sued for using those molds but figured it was worth it just so they wouldn't have to work with him. Btw, I think he only got like $800k in the lawsuit so they definitely made the right move.
Man looks like Aragorn son's of Arathorn the heir of Isildur
😂😂😂😂
King of gondor himself 😂
VIGGO MORTENSEN
never been a fan of Tolkein phonetics - feels like i'm choking on my tongue
No. He looks like a idiot that tried to take over a movie. He was way beyond his means. He F'd up so bad because he didn't like the rich family outcome. Idiot!
I agree with Crispin Glover. He had every reason to sue the company for using his image without his consent. I’m glad his lawsuit made it so nobody can do anything like that again without consent of some kind. It’s unethical and unfair to do that otherwise.
I disagree in part, He was paid for his role in the first movie, they owned the likness rights and any footage shot for that role as well as the molds they created for aging said character. Now if they credited him in the other role without permission or didnt claim in credits that some footage was from the original (used or archive) he has a case.
Disagree.
He was a pompos twat on set and no one liked him.
So when they dropped him from part 2, they used the molds over another actor as they owner the molds and character
Perfectly legal..
@@user-xi3mj3mx4jThat's great logic. There's a lot of assholes out there so I should be able to own them as slaves.
Hollywood? Unfair and unethical? Who woulda thought?
They still took his likeness. They played it off as if it WERE him. He wasn't even compensated. Whether he was an asshole is not actually relevant. He chose not to partake in the 2nd and 3rd film. The studio did not own the rights to his likeness forever. That would be very unethical and in my eyes illegal, just as the jury agreed and decided. I understand it feels like a grey area, but it's really not if u think about it. He only signed on for one movie, one role. He ethically chose not to participate in the subsequent films in the franchise. That is where his contract ended and where they chose to circumvent that by using his molds( from the original film), and therefore using his likeness without proper compensation or consent. That is my personal feelings on this though. Take it or leave it.
With this look he would've fit right into 1885
In a way, this relates greatly to issues of AI actors, deep fakes, and actors rights today.
Crispin was COMPLETELY ICONIC in the first movie, and it would have been NOWHERE NEAR so good without him😃😃😃😃❤️❤️❤️
So less of the disrespectful comments please....
@@colinluckens9591 That is right... He's proper and good with confrontations! Unlike the role he played in a veiled propaganda piece.
He is a major part of the original . Great work
He’s an interesting person, but I agree it shouldn’t have happened without his consent. Shouldn’t be any rules against making another actor look like him, but definitely not taking an actual impression of his face or splicing in scenes from the first movie.
I agree but also disagree, at first point he was hired to play a role, due to the fact they needed to age the "character" they needed the face molds. They owned the rights to the likeness of the character. Same as they owned the previous footage and could use it in any way they saw fit. Now if they try to credit him in the role in future projects he was not part of that is a different issue.
@@kmartcarol48 Now, they could make a product with real actors then make content indefinitely without the actors and claim they own the likeness. I would have agreed with you much more before technology made it possible to eliminate the actors yet reuse their likeness.
@@ProctorSilex Again I agree that this scenario was done wrong, What it comes down to is did they claim that he was in the movie or part of its production? Any "new" scenes of George in the future were not CG, so they should have been no issue recasting the role. With todays technology Yes I would say that an actor should have some rights not to be scanned and AI recreated to get around crediting them for work, otherwise you could CGI/Greenscreen entire movies of old footage. Its a different case as time goes on and should be fixed....old TV/movies actors were paid once and got no residual payments for future use, thats where you change the laws and rules.
@@ProctorSilex Second example, I think they shot BtF 2 & 3 at same time, we see Elizbeth Shue as Jennifer in both parts. So if they shot all her scenes for 2 as young/old jennifer she was paid for those scenes (gets left on porch in P2, she pops back in ending of P3) and short ending. Was she actually in P3? Technically No, her scenes were most likely filmed out of sequence to be used as P3 ending.
@@kmartcarol48 I think it was Lea Thompson that said in an interview back then something like "[so-and-so] is the actor they got to play Crispin." Maybe that's just how she saw things, but if that's how the producers/director approached the role of the actor, then they deserved to lose every penny. Then there's the whole deal with them operating a horribly unsafe set and the lawsuit they stepped into with that. Love the movies, but seems like the producers/director/stunt coordinator were crap to work with.
His original lawsuit set the groundwork for the rights actors and extras have been fighting for in regards to AI and body scans. Really really glad he did this.
Yeah. He made a great argument why studios should just AI out all roles instead of dealing with greedy actors who think they deserve $5 million for bit parts in a film sequel. These lawsuits lay down an even bigger ground work of why it isn't worth taking risks on making big films. Just let the work dry up.
@@tobybigham4196 what are you talking about? Most actors do NOT make millions of dollars. A lot are working actors who need to continue to work just like you and I. Come on. Acting is a job and not what you think it is. It's why a lot of actors continue to work until old age because it's actually really rare that actors make millions on their roles.
@@GeekyBoutiquey Look here Pumpkin. Your feigned outrage is adorable and all. But after Crispin heard that Michael J Fox got a deal for $5 million per sequel in the Back to the Future Franchise, Crispin demanded his $5 million or else. And now you are more informed, let us see what you do with this new information.....
Lou, get me a milk…chocolate
my density
@@brysonlozano7are you being pacific?
Faaaaar out I had no idea they did him dirty like that if no agreement can be struck they have to change the actor stealing his face is very messed up
They screwed Eric Stoltz the movie was 80% done when MJF was brought in. Thats show biz.
Disagree.
He was a pompos twat on set and no one liked him.
So when they dropped him from part 2, they used the molds over another actor as they owner the molds and character
Perfectly legal.
@@thekraemer1757No they did not screw him.
They never wanted him.
They wanted MJF.
But he was working on Family ties and was not available.
But they keept on trying to persuade him while using Eric to film if he said no.
Film deadlines and all that.
But Eric Stoltz did not work out and on a text screening for producers they did not like him, and his portrayal.
So when MJF decided he could do it they went with their ORIGINAL CHOICE.
Nothing dirty at all.
@@user-xi3mj3mx4jMJF never declined or decided to do it. Universal struck a deal with the producers of Family Ties that he could film the movie after he was done filming the show for the day
@@user-xi3mj3mx4jContinued using him in hopes of getting who they really wanted 😂 yeah I'd say that's pretty much screwing that guy over. Bob Zemeckis is a royal tee wat
I always liked Crispin Glover. He’s quirky AF and that really appealed to me! 🤣 But they did some shady stuff to him. His poem to Steven Spielberg was also indicative of much. They derailed this man’s whole career. Still glad to see him interviewed.
Wait, what happened to him ?
Disagree.
He was a pompos twat on set and no one liked him.
Many actors have said he is a nightmare to work with.
So when they dropped him from part 2, they used the molds over another actor as they owner the molds and character
Perfectly legal.
@@user-xi3mj3mx4j Well that’s not completely true is it. Because Crispin Glover took Universal to court over the very issue about legality of using his likeness without prior agreement or consent in BTTF2.
Lawyers strongly advised Universal to settle with Crispin before the case went to court to avoid losing the case and they did settle. So that was a victory for Crispin, otherwise Universal should not have backed down. ‘Legal’ is a technicality.
Anyway of course by all means disagree but it doesn’t change a single thing I said in my comment. I like Crispin Glover.
Maybe look into the shady side of Spielberg for perspective on what really constitutes a bad person.
I agree… in his own way, Crispin was brilliant!!!
There are deeper things he's trying to...When all y'all "judges" get done. Look into this. MORE. AND QUIT EATING AND REGURGITATING GOSSIP. GAIN SOME DISCERNMENT, JESUS!
This guy was wronged by the creators of BTTF and then slandered by them. I can't imagine the amount of damage they did you his career. Crispin was spectacular in BTTF. His part wasn't the cool part, but his acting was the best in my opinion.
I love his part in final chapter.
“Where’s the corkscrew?”
Imo his part is by far the coolest part, he is the character with the true arc
Peiple should see this before saying Crispin is petty, jealous, etc ... Jodie Foster didn't care when Julianne Moore played clarice in Hannibal. They didnt make moore foster. They made an unknown actor crispin for bttf2 and it fooled me until the i ternet age came about.
Jodi Foster wasnt worried about a nobody. Crispin was. Lawsuit was right on though...
Exactly. It's more about the deception than anything - and it fooled me too until years later. And due to the proliferation of AI, Crispin was ahead of his time with his lawsuit - can you imagine if he lost his landmark case?
@@AJR-zg2py It was all about the money. Crispin wanted $5 mil for the sequels, and decided he would hold his character hostage until his demands were met. He is nothing more than another greedy actor.
The next big battle is happening over AI and digitally showing actors likeness in film. It seems that any production trying to do that would probably fall under the same rules, but it's interesting to see how far we've come in such a short amount of time. You can bet without the Crispin Glover lawsuit this would have totally run amok today with AI.
Good on him
Greedy.
@@hobomike6935 For wanting a slight raise? Besides. It still didn’t give them the right to stick another actor in there with Crispin’s face.
@@hobomike6935he was offered less than half of what all the other actors were offered in the second one.
Better less than half than $0
Take what you can get when you can get it with eagerness and gratefulness. Your talent and skills will eventually earn you more than you can ever ask for, if you really do have skill and talent
@@hobomike6935I think you live in a dream world. In any job, bot just artistic ones, if you accept a huge pay cut "with eagerness and gratefulness", your boss 100% will do it again because thwy think "hey, they didn't even quit! Nice, so I can just mistreat them ans fuck them over as much as I want without repercussions 😁". That's what labour laws are for and if there's not yet a law applying to your situation, you should sue, not just for yourself, but for future workers that might have the same problem and could have a legal basis then. Him refusing that paycut was not greedy but simply him standing up for himself. And you should do that too and not just accept crap from your bosses "with eagerness and gratefulness".
Crispin looks like Christian Bale here
This isn't Christian Bale?
@@bfboobie no it's Crispin Glover
@@billtooke6642 the guy from back to the future?
@@billtooke6642 Crispin Bale
Maybe he should sue 😂😂
Of course Crispin is Proud of the lawsuit!! He got free money that he didn't earn! And we all know Crispin is just in it for the money!
Agreed. I'm glad he did the lawsuit. That added more to the guild that protects performing artists rights
Disagree.
He was a pompos twat on set and no one liked him.
So when they dropped him from part 2, they used the molds over another actor as they owner the molds and character
Perfectly legal.
@@user-xi3mj3mx4j it was actually not legal in any way. His lawsuit proved just that. He may have been an ass and came off as an eccentric jerk of a person, but he deserved fair compensation and the right to not participate in the 2nd film in that franchise. They crossed the line (ethically and legally), and he single handedly stop something like this from ever happening again. I say, good for him for standing up for his own ethics and for those that may have been unknowingly conveyed and uncompensated for a role they chose not to partake in. You see, for Glover, he was in complete disagreement as to what the story was conveying and therefore he should not have been "passed off" as if it were actually him. I feel his lawsuit was valid and the jury agreed as well. Just my opinion though. Take it or leave it for other's to decide.
He could've been in the second movie but apparently he was notoriously difficult to work with and insisted on doing things his way instead of Zemekis's way.
Hi I'm selling a bridge for scrap in NYC and you look just gullible enough!
@8daysafreakit's definitely true about Glover. On the Netflix series "The Movies That Made Us" they go in depth about the difficulties the crew faced working with him on BTTF.
@@Mr.Boom_513 I’ll watch it but can you sprinkle some insight here?
I hear ya but I think he turned George McFly into an exceptional character. He added another layer of quirk to the whole movie. I loved his scenes and wanted more. His role is also what made BTTF a classic, that the sequels were not.
Hollywood puts up with all kinds of characters actors and their idiosyncrasies like him and tempers - see Jake Gyllenhall, Christian Bale😅 so not sure why he was any different? Maybe this bad characterisation also had something odd to do with Steven Spielberg?? (See Crispin’s strange poem) It’s also a well-known tactic used to ruin reputations.
I think Crispin was before his time as they would have loved and appreciated him much more now in this era especially with social media.
You made the movie too, Crispin .
I still watch the re runs to see you're character 😅
Honestly he's great in the movie. His energy is so interesting compared to the rest of the movie's big theme-park Hollywood style. In a weird way his weirdness anchors the movie in a larger reality.
@@the.seagull.35 He brought the Awkward energy that fleshed out George McFly quite nicely. But he definitely was not worth the $5 mil he demanded for the sequels.
Shallow as a raindrop, or fathoms deep... This righteous gentleman had eyes to see and ears to hear. No slack in his act. HUMANITY❤
Nice work McFly 🎉
Hollywood studios were a big machine in the 20th century especially. Many, many people got chewed up and spit out by the system.
These days its more democratic. A lot of outsiders, indie filmmakers.
This man fit in with the second group and not the first, I can't blame him for that. Not everyone on Earth needs to be Chris Pratt, its ok for people to be Crispin Glover.
Because of his lawsuit, his career took a dump
He really didn't do himself many favors in hollywood to be fair.
Would have made a cool riddler in the Nolan universe
It didn't change everything. It changed that specific situation.
Now they can do it even easier with CGI..without the lawsuit…it would have been happening like crazy before they would have stopped it.
So it’s basically what they are striking about right now? The right to your appearance
Seems a bit more complex than that. I agree that has rights to his appearance, but they used molds to age the "character" for what was maybe 10 minutes of background scenes that did nothing to the story. Now if this was like the 3 stooges/ little rascals era shorts that they were paid for what was ment to be a single viewing then years later they are rerun and they get zero residual payment, yes then I would say he had a case. They needed to reshoot a few 1955 scenes and appeared as grandpa in 2015 (these were not critical to the movie but were comic relief of a future tech).
Ol Spielberg was irate about that one 👍🏻
You know he was a big part of the blacklist that ruined Crispin career prospects. Spielberg is a powerful man (even at the time), with many connections. Cripsin abosolutely did the right thing.
@@jupiterapollo4985 Indeed
Also the heat came down on Bob Gale for the lawsuit, his career was never the same after that.
Spielberg also blacklists Holocaust researchers that stray from popular narratives.
He’s a different character off camera…..🎥
He won the battle, lost the war.
Really, if you think about it, what they did to him is the same thing KFC does to this day with the Colonel, dressing people up to emulate him and sell their product. On its own that seems innocent enough, but when you realize how much he hated the company and spent his last years basically advertising how shit they were, it's actually pretty fucking sinister because they're dressing people up as him and then having them say things the real Colonel would never have said and support things he wouldn't support.
It's pretty sickening if you think about it.
I wish I was friends with Crispin
‘There’s two types of people in this town. Those that sue, and those that work…which do you want to be?’ Barry Diller
I wonder if he had been in part 2 and 3 if George would have played a much bigger role in the sequels do you think?
I am sure he would have. He did seem to be the main focus story-wise in the first one. Too bad we'll never know
no
I think his role would have been about the same as Lea Thompson's
He would've been Seamus in part 3, possibly in prison in 1985b
He refused to be in the sequel. So they used his face. He sued. The end
Watch the movie “the Congress”, Crispín was way ahead of the ball on this one lol
Did crispin dirty
Good for him
Good for him! 👏👏
David and Goliath
Disagree.
He was a pompos twat on set and no one liked him.
So when they dropped him from part 2, they used the molds over another actor as they owner the molds and character
Perfectly legal.
@@user-xi3mj3mx4j perfectly legal yet they agreed to settle and it changed the industry so they cant fuk over other artists the same way. His case sets an even more important precedence with the introduction of ai now . Twat or not. They knew what he was like. And before you say something is perfectly legal, you would actually have to know what their contracts say first. Anyways, good for him! And good for all actors who follow
Buford Tanen looks great 👍 😅
My most important questions are- Is that microphone a Neumann? If so, which one?
River's edge. Watch this.
Dude looks like Bruce Glover
Straight out of Dead Man.
I think he had every right to sue and obviously had a good case. They made tons of money from back to the future no reason anyone shouldn’t have gotten paid.
Anyone else just hear Jordon Peterson?
You should be proud.
Well done, CG.
If I was famous I'd also be trying to protect my likeness from being brought back and used through AI and whatever other technology that may be developed in the future.
He left to change that oil
Happens all the time
An Actor banks on his looks.
So to be able to set up rules, laws that prevent this from happening without the actors consent is a good thing.
I feel sorry for the actor at the end of Return of the Jedi who got his likeness removed and young Anakin put in.
He was in the movie and now he’s not. That’s sad cause to be able to put it in a resume and casting directors now may not know and think he is lying.
All of this could have been avoided if he didn’t act so entitled to get paid the same amount of $ that Michael j Fox received, he couldn’t agree on an amount which is disappointing because the first movie made him famous and was a hit abs he could have just been the kind of actor to have been grateful for this exposure and continue the sequels but he was apparently very difficult to work with. That is already disappointing that he was troublesome to work with as I love his talent as George Mcfly and yeah I guess it’s just a shame it went the way it did in the end.
Was he always a mouth breather? I remember him having great vocal control.
I don’t think ANYONE watched Back to the Future because of him…🤦🏻
I DID
@@barryrichman2874 🤦🏻😂
Bruh all movies, music entertainment are propaganda. To shape how they like
Can you imagine what it was like to have filmed this whole movie with stoltz and glover almost to the end dealing with their issues then deciding to refilm it with fox near the end of production? Its a wonder the movie turned out to be so successful. But I agree glover had every right to sue since it was done without his consent.
Almost like what they think might happen with AI. Take actors an plug them into the background or replace someone's face with another.
They should of re-shot the scenes without him
That wasn't him. He explains here that it's a different actor.
... should HAVE....not should OF....
😂 They did!
American gods❤
Big time movies aren't really his bag. I wouldn't want him back either if he called my movie "propaganda" just because he didn't like the ending. It's not your movie, McFly, Helloooooo!😅
You're just one of thousands of crew members.
So he basically had to wait 10 years for $600,000. Not only that, he upset big names in Hollywood and you don’t do that in that business.
That was messed up. They didnt want to pay him so they just dressed up a guy like him.
Someone in another comment said that he was asking for the same amount of money as Michael j Fox.
@RealHomeRecording ya that's actually probably true. Still u shouldn't be able to steal somebody's likeness without their consent and paying them something.
See what a cigar'll do?
Thankfully hollywood is disappearing finally... their evil deeds will NOT go unpunished
This guy played George McFly in the movie, right? Nowadays we got CGI and digital actors (-> Star Wars, Leia Organa). How did his lawsuit end and what are todays laws regarding CGI/digital actors?
I want to hear that George laugh again.
He is right. He is also crazy, but he is right.
Well im pretty sure a profucer can have you written out. Of a script on a sequel but i think Crispin and his work
They are trying to do it again now with ai
Well A.i. is gonna change all that. Lol
One of the main reasons why there is a writers and actors strike
No it didn’t they still can’t use their likeness with out being paid. That’s why he sued them.
@@IronPsyde fuck those writers. Most of em get paid well over 100k a year and they bitching while we can't pay our bills. I hope they NEVER get their fucking jobs back. Greed is a powerful drug
@@lscales6131 incorrect..... sorta. It's greatly depending on the contracts made between the actors and the studios.
@@bustedaimbotgaming1763 of course it depends on the contract I was saying specifically to this. They did not have that right and that’s why he sued them. Also my other point is AI doesn’t circumvent the likeness rule so it won’t replace them.
Great actor that should have been in many roles. I love BTTF but that is some seriously degenerate actions by the franchise
His performance in Charlie’s Angels was superb
Grendel has mellowed.
Cray cray
This is so funny, I didn't even realize they had a guy with his face prosthetics running around on the next ones. Lmao
A great actor. Watch him in hot tub time machine.
He looks great with a beard
His beard isn't like a beard.. it's like hair!
and then Hollywood recently wanted to do something similar with AI to use actor's likeness in films w/o compensation
Wait until he finds out about AI. Lol!
Guess it paid off. Crispin net worth 6 million
M J Fox 65 million
Yeah, but would you rather be MJF or this guy??
@@jeffreyval9665 whoever is happier n at peace
@@ceevee7825 you think MJ Fox is happy with how fcked up he is??
They stole his fas ffs.....he absolutely should have sued.
*face
So what you are saying is they forced him to take a mold? And of course Crispin was the reason why audience goers even went to see the movie?
You realize he was paid $250k for those molds. And in hindsight, the studio should have casted someone who isn't greedy and hard to work with! Did you know that Crispin asked for $5mil to do the sequels with very little screen time. He thought he could hold the character hostage until the studios met his outrageous salary. That should be illegal. But we live in the Upsidedown.
You are my density!
Crispin Glover is just a character created and played by Zach Galifianakis
He was so good in all three movies. 🎉
Was it informative enough to make him be a decent enough human to work with that people would actually want to hire him?
Huh that sucks they stole his face pretty rotten
Gosh he looks more and more like his dad every day.
You know his role wasn’t really all that pivotal in the film. He should’ve just taken the paycheck and become part of history. Instead he’s a footnote.
You joking HAVE YOU SEEN BTTF1????
He's completely f******** INTEGRAL to the movie....
If you're talking about Part2 ABSOLUTELY NOT - HE HAD TO TAKE A STAND, both for HIM and for ACTORS OF THE FUTURE...
@@colinluckens9591 puhLEASE 🤣
Don't you have to ask to use someone's music in movie? Just sayin.
I'm glad the studio went ahead with it, but I agree with Glover - they used his likeness without permission.
I'm not sure what cost the studio more, simply hiring Glover or the other actor + lawsuit...?
Close your eyes and u can hear Jordan Peterson
Goat
I'm with Crispin,they made him and Jeffrey both look grotesque in one fail swoop.Its weird.
He acts like a victim here, lol. By all accounts, he would not take direction in the first film, alter written lines, and was just an all-around difficult person to work with. That's the REAL reason he wasn't invited back for any sequels. In the series "The Movies That Made Us", the episode about Back to the Future goes in depth about the difficulties and delays the crew had to deal with when it came to Glover.
it was still wrong to use his likeness lmao
Yeesh. George McFly is looking a little rough around the edges
Based Crispin Glover.
Is he Danny Glover's son?
Sure, they're identical.
@jimbotron70 uncanny isn't it?