Difference between revisions of "Talk:Crispin Glover"
AgentTorange (talk | contribs) |
AgentTorange (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
V. The only convincing source there is the globe and mail one, and even the way that is presented it seems like it could be a misunderstanding. The author of that articlce, about 8 paragraphs earlier than the essay mention, asked Crispin to sign 3 books he authored, she describes his background to the reader, then how crispin has a bad reputation among hollywood casting directors beause of a Letterman appearance in 1987, then she asks him about casting down syndrome people in movies, then she asks him a question and his films, and he "explains" the sensibility of his films is similar to his books | V. The only convincing source there is the globe and mail one, and even the way that is presented it seems like it could be a misunderstanding. The author of that articlce, about 8 paragraphs earlier than the essay mention, asked Crispin to sign 3 books he authored, she describes his background to the reader, then how crispin has a bad reputation among hollywood casting directors beause of a Letterman appearance in 1987, then she asks him about casting down syndrome people in movies, then she asks him a question and his films, and he "explains" the sensibility of his films is similar to his books | ||
| − | < | + | <blockquote>The message of his film is similar to the "sensibility" of his books, he explains. "Most films are made by corporations that take away anything that will produce a question. There's no dissent, and that seems absurd to me."</blockquote> |
there's one paragraph between that quote and the essay mention, in that paragrpah the author says crispin gets agitated trying to explain why he likes casting down syndrome people, then | there's one paragraph between that quote and the essay mention, in that paragrpah the author says crispin gets agitated trying to explain why he likes casting down syndrome people, then | ||
| − | < | + | <blockquote>In an essay he wrote about the film's subtext, he attacks the Hollywood fare that he thinks anesthetizes the culture. In particular, he bashes Steven Spielberg in a crude, pornographic manner. Glover is notorious for the lawsuit he brought against Spielberg, who used footage of the actor as George McFly from the first film for Back to the Future II after he turned down the part. Glover won.</blockquote> |
then | then | ||
| − | < | + | <blockquote>Does he have a vendetta against Spielberg? He shakes his head. "I don't want to comment about what I write. It stands on its own," he says, choosing to concentrate on his raw tuna.</blockquote> |
We don't know how she phrased the question, but his response, "I don't want to comment about what I write. It stands on its own" implies she asked him about what he "wrote" about spielberg, not "what about that essay you wrote supplementing the film calling spielberg a pedo?" | We don't know how she phrased the question, but his response, "I don't want to comment about what I write. It stands on its own" implies she asked him about what he "wrote" about spielberg, not "what about that essay you wrote supplementing the film calling spielberg a pedo?" | ||
Revision as of 06:45, 6 December 2022
The formatting will be taken care of, but it would be nice with a good source for the statement, as Spielberg is a living person.☺ Terje (talk) 10:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)---
Contents
Pretty sure Crispy did not write this letter
i cannot find an original source for this paper[1], or even the paper in its entirety. It's not on Crispin's website, though its supposed to supplement his "What is It?" movie, which his whole website is focused on (i even checked some of his personal site's earliest archives). I cant find any mainstream mentions of the letter, and most of the alt articles covering it, are just copy pastes of one article. This blogger i found, who is a die hard Crispin fan, tells s story here[2] about how he got this incredible chance to attend a q&a with glover, and how glover was begging for weird questions, and well, this letter never crossed that fan's mind soo... I mean he literally doesn't mention it at all. I dont think crispin glover wrote this letter.
When you scan the search results you get for like "Crispin Glover Spielberg essay" all the summaries and headlines (that aren't NPC alt sites) look like they could be about the type of person who would publish this type of letter, but crispin it seems realistically, exhibits in his art both eccentricity and cowardess. No way a guy like that would ever have the balls to publish something like this.
and for what small sliver its worth, Crispin's Wikipedia makes no mention of the letter, and ctrl+f for "spielberg" turns up 0. The wiki discusses the glover movie "what is it," which the letter (of the same name) supposedly supplements. This movie is like theh thing that put glover on the map it looks like, so if a controversial essay was part of that paradigm, I feel like even wikipedia would at least mention it. AgentTorange (talk) {my key} 23:46, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Spielberg's adopted-daughter accused him of sexual abuse im pretty sure though, but she's like more fucked up than glover even AgentTorange (talk) {my key} 23:56, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
"Obsessed" with Czechoslovakia
Ok according to the sub-line of this guardian article, Crispin is obsessed with the Czech Republic, which, iirc from reading about George Nader (NOT the dead actor]), has like the most lenient kid fucker laws any civilised country.
K. so i havent read passed that sub-line yet, so he could just be obsessed with czechoslovokia cuz he was born there or something. But thats a weird thing to be obsessed with. Czech women are also babes, so i mean to a pedo, the childen are also probably ultra-fuckable... or is that the Netherlands i'm thinking of? AgentTorange (talk) {my key} 05:18, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Links
- https://web.archive.org/web/20201112043016/https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/they-call-him-mr-creepy/article4120235/
- https://web.archive.org/web/20140812035019/http://torontoist.com/2005/08/back_to_crispin/
- https://web.archive.org/web/20110830201709/http://thecrispincorner.com/essay.html
- mentions have come up again around 2017 or so - https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7c1xbk/a_2003_essay_by_actor_crispin_glover_suggests/
-- Sunvalley (talk) 11:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Still Not Convinced
I.thecrispincorner looks like its just a fansite, and the essay posted there, supposedly in full, is exactly what all the copy paste alt sites described as an excerpt or snippet,
II.squawker is not a reliable source,
III. the reddit post just sources the squuawker article
IV.The torontoist article is written two days before the globe and mail one, and the guy in the torontoist one is clearly just like a upcoming events person, who makes a vague mention of th letter, Could be he gave the idea of the letter to the globe and maill girl
V. The only convincing source there is the globe and mail one, and even the way that is presented it seems like it could be a misunderstanding. The author of that articlce, about 8 paragraphs earlier than the essay mention, asked Crispin to sign 3 books he authored, she describes his background to the reader, then how crispin has a bad reputation among hollywood casting directors beause of a Letterman appearance in 1987, then she asks him about casting down syndrome people in movies, then she asks him a question and his films, and he "explains" the sensibility of his films is similar to his books
The message of his film is similar to the "sensibility" of his books, he explains. "Most films are made by corporations that take away anything that will produce a question. There's no dissent, and that seems absurd to me."
there's one paragraph between that quote and the essay mention, in that paragrpah the author says crispin gets agitated trying to explain why he likes casting down syndrome people, then
In an essay he wrote about the film's subtext, he attacks the Hollywood fare that he thinks anesthetizes the culture. In particular, he bashes Steven Spielberg in a crude, pornographic manner. Glover is notorious for the lawsuit he brought against Spielberg, who used footage of the actor as George McFly from the first film for Back to the Future II after he turned down the part. Glover won.
then
Does he have a vendetta against Spielberg? He shakes his head. "I don't want to comment about what I write. It stands on its own," he says, choosing to concentrate on his raw tuna.
We don't know how she phrased the question, but his response, "I don't want to comment about what I write. It stands on its own" implies she asked him about what he "wrote" about spielberg, not "what about that essay you wrote supplementing the film calling spielberg a pedo?"
They had just finished discussing his books, he could have easily thought she was talking about something in one of those, he was also agitated when she asked the question, as she had just described two paragraphs earlier about him describing downs people
I really think he just didn't realise what she was asking him about there.
Plus, this still doesn't explain why his own personal website (crispinglover.com), which is all about the movie, has never featured the article in any archive i can find? AgentTorange (talk) {my key} 06:36, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
