Amazing. The crazy tone and inflection of his voice, all his "speeded-out" mannerisms, his (dull one moment emblazened another) eyes. Wow. All of it. He is amazing in this movie, and the major reason I keep coming back to this movie.
shareYou mean the way he acts all the time?
This movie is unintentionally hilarious.
*beep* you Kevin, wasting pigs is radical!
[deleted]
I'm very sorry but I must disagree with all of you on this one. I'm an actor and went to film school and what he is doing in this movie would be laughed at and frowned upon by many professionals with extensive training. This performance wouldn't even get him in 5th place in a monologue competition. He has a lot of cliche hand movement going on, his facial expressions are over emphasized, etc. I just don't believe him, no matter how hard I try. Sean Penn in Fast Times ARH came close to this guy but even he was contained and didn't go over the top in his body, etc. Come to think of it he would have been ideal for this part. Clover isn't in his voice(a vocal term used for actors who are in their throats) and well he reminded me of either Bill & Ted or Wayne's World... So, I'm proud to say that for me Keanu is solid in this film as opposed to Clover's overacting style. The scene with the detective and with his parents are quite intense. I felt he was realistically reacting to all the tension. You know you can feel it in your gut. It's a viceral feeling that is so gripping it tightens you up inside. You forget to breath. Thats what great acting moments should make you feel. Unfortunately, Clover doesn't do that for me. Maybe for you, but for me it is a pathetic attempt at a crucial role that in my opion was miscast. Perhaps the director chose him for his Back TT Future success. Notice how he is not featured on the box though... Now, I can appreciate and acknowledge all the work he put into developing his character but he is to comedic for a serious dramatic role. Just look at the films: Spun or Requiem For A Dream or Boogie Nights or even James Franco in City By The Sea, they don't overdo it to much. I just think he focused a bit too much on the physical aspect of the character vs. the honesty of his circumstances. I wonder what the director was thinking when he cast him. Blows my mind. He would have fared better in Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas. Riv's Edge could have had so much more impact. I watched this last night with my acting buddy and we just couldn't stop laughing it was so bad(Clover). But hey, you know, everyone has favorites, so if you guys liked him, then good, thats fine. The story is so strong that it keeps you hooked in till the end. I love the way the shots flow especially at the beginning. I would love to see a remake though with a solid cast.
shareWhatever.
shareGlover.
shareSeeing as how someone already pointed out your misspelling of Glover's name, I wanted to add that...Spun was *beep* *beep* compared to Requiem for a Dream or Boogie Nights. By the way, a lot of today's most talented actors (Johnny Depp, Jodie Foster) never went to drama school (while Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman flunked out), so shut the *beep* up about extensive training and monologue competitions and shove that ego of yours up your ass. If he sucked so much ass in this movie, why don't you try and outdo him? I'm sure you're a much better actor.
shareTHANK YOU
shareI went to acting school, and have been in a ton of theatre, and this guy was playing a "tweaker" (meth addict who can be up and down and fidgeting), so comparing him to a stoner (a slacker with no motivation, like Sean Penn's "Fast Times" character) is so off base. When someone is high on meth, they're exactly like Crispin Glover was. I hung around some meth-addicts years ago, and they would get high and stay up for days, and then crash and sleep. They would talk about useless stuff, just like Hopper's and Glover's characters and their eyes would be blazing with intensity. So he really did a good job in this and it was overlooked.
shareI respectfully disagree with your post. Crispin's performance was, for me, the perfect foil for Keanu's character. I always felt that the genius in this movie was the tension created by this character (not the presence of the dead girl...the film is entirely about the reactions to the presence of the dead girl.) We are voyeurs to a surreal situation involving teenagers (who happen to be living in quite a surreal time, the 1980s) who have no idea who they are and where they fit in the world, doing what they need to do to mentally and emotionally cope with this situation. To be young in America is to be an individual with limited control, usually living a reactionary existence. His character is not ment to be "believable" -- nor the situation for that matter. The entire movie is a glimpse of a world that has fallen off balance. It's a pity that Mr. Glover does not get more roles to showcase his craft.
Film school = Cookie cutter Actors/Directors who make sequels, comic book movies and remakes. Personally I have more respect for actors that take chances and dont follow the (non-existent) rules of acting. Why dont you tell us what youand your acting buddies have been in so we can laugh at.. er.. critique your performance.
share[deleted]
"I'm very sorry but I must disagree with all of you on this one. I'm an actor and went to film school and what he is doing in this movie would be laughed at and frowned upon by many professionals with extensive training. This performance wouldn't even get him in 5th place in a monologue competition. He has a lot of cliche hand movement going on, his facial expressions are over emphasized, etc. I just don't believe him, no matter how hard I try. Sean Penn in Fast Times ARH came close to this guy but even he was contained and didn't go over the top in his body, etc. Come to think of it he would have been ideal for this part. Clover isn't in his voice(a vocal term used for actors who are in their throats) and well he reminded me of either Bill & Ted or Wayne's World... So, I'm proud to say that for me Keanu is solid in this film as opposed to Clover's overacting style. The scene with the detective and with his parents are quite intense. I felt he was realistically reacting to all the tension. You know you can feel it in your gut. It's a viceral feeling that is so gripping it tightens you up inside. You forget to breath. Thats what great acting moments should make you feel. Unfortunately, Clover doesn't do that for me. Maybe for you, but for me it is a pathetic attempt at a crucial role that in my opion was miscast. Perhaps the director chose him for his Back TT Future success. Notice how he is not featured on the box though... Now, I can appreciate and acknowledge all the work he put into developing his character but he is to comedic for a serious dramatic role. Just look at the films: Spun or Requiem For A Dream or Boogie Nights or even James Franco in City By The Sea, they don't overdo it to much. I just think he focused a bit too much on the physical aspect of the character vs. the honesty of his circumstances. I wonder what the director was thinking when he cast him. Blows my mind. He would have fared better in Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas. Riv's Edge could have had so much more impact. I watched this last night with my acting buddy and we just couldn't stop laughing it was so bad(Clover). But hey, you know, everyone has favorites, so if you guys liked him, then good, thats fine. The story is so strong that it keeps you hooked in till the end. I love the way the shots flow especially at the beginning. I would love to see a remake though with a solid cast"
I realize I am responding to an old old post but I must take exception to some of the things you've written.
I respect the fact that you are an actor and went film school, but what is that worth? I'm not a physicist. Yet I believe in gravity.
I saw Rivers Edge when it came out 20 years ago and was captivated by Glovers performance. I thought Reeves was great also. This film was not a soup du jour in 1987. It was an oddball, from start to finish. Hopper was great, but he was in the process of resurrecting his career. And his performance in Rivers Edge was not that much of a stretch for his from him performance in Rumblefish.
Glover was giving us a fresh, new type of psychotic.
Sure, Sean Penn played a drugged out misanthrope in Fast Times. But it was contained. He became a heroic figure.
Layne stands out and endures as a wigged out, pill popping freak. These people exist. But it takes a lot of guts to portray one because it permanently typecasts you as nut job for the rest of your career.
Glover, for better or worse, lived up to the stereotype.
Wait, so is he a
meth-head,
pill-popper,
or just a weed-smoker?
So many theories and opinions for an over-the-top performance.
Notice how he is not featured on the box though...
And let me guess, you were about 20 when you wrote this, and like everyone of your generation, you think you are more educated than everyone else which means you know more than everyone else
share
where you referring to me or another post becuase i now dam well i am not more educated and my post was just an opinion. i get confuzed easily
This is the quintessential Crispin Glover movie. Well, this and Back to the Future that is. Sometimes I think they write movies around his real life quirky persona, not that I know the guy, but I did see him karate chop Letterman in the head once.
That chicken vindaloo beast was some messed up sh**.
This is the quintessential Crispin Glover movie. Well, this and Back to the Future that is. Sometimes I think they write movies around his real life quirky persona, not that I know the guy, but I did see him karate chop Letterman in the head once.
And not even just from a stoner approach, but a Valley Boy/80s angle. All the characters have that patter of looooong, drawn-out speech patterns and accentuating on the dullest of words that you'd associate with Valley Boys/Girls from the 1980s. George McFly was more frenetic and manic, while Layne was stuck in this slow-motion stoner/valley mode. The best illustration is that this takes place in Northern California, so the characterizations were pretty accurate.
shareFor people complaining about GLOVER's overacting, you obviously missed, or just didn't understand, one scene that defines Layne and his personality. Layne, John, and Matt are riding in his car just after seeing the body, and Layne suddenly casts himself as the hero of his own movie. "This is like some story...", "I feel like Chuck Norris", etc. So basically, Crispin Glover is playing a character that's overacting. The running theme of the film was, partly, the teen's lack of reaction to the murder. But they DO all react. They're all jaded and stoned, but they DO react in their own ways. Layne chose to become the self-appointed action star because that was his way of reacting to the situation. He obviously wasn't prepared for the REALITY of the situation.
There are occasional breaks in his obsession with playing the hero, and it's in these moments that you see the true Layne. Prior to actually SEEING the body, he doesn't really go on any rants or monologues, he's just kind of a normal dope-head teenager. Well... as normal as dope-head teens CAN be. And then after John dies, his "movie" is over, and that chilling, whiney scream he let's out after he sees John's body is the REAL Layne, and that literally gave me chills, so I'd say it was damn good acting on Crispin Glover's part.
I thought Keanu Reeves was really great in his role as well. Possibly his best role.
That Letterman thing was classic! Ever since I saw that, I've kind of found respect for his acting style. But he didn't karate chop Dave,he slightly aimed a kick at his head and thats when Dave had enough.
Regardless of what a few people here have said, I think Crispin Glovers performance was excellent and it really made me feel kind of excited about what I was watching.
***Was anyone else kind od disturbed by the frequent shhowing of the dead body close up. It gave me the chills***
[deleted]
Heres the video of the Lettermen deal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALapHYNSmoA
Apparently he was in character for his "Rubin and Ed" movie.
I thought Crispin was amazing in this movie actually. I don't think he was overacting as that was what his character was supposed to be like. And I also love how he looked in this movie, it might even be my favorite look of his, and that's saying a lot as I am in complete love with him.
"Isn't this a strange conversation for men who aren't crazy?" - Renfield
[deleted]
Crispin is my favorite actor working today.
I can't say I am an expert on what is "good acting" and what is "bad acting." All I know is that Crispin makes me laugh really really hard. He's the only actor I know of that can often make me laugh without even saying anything. But in this one, he's got so many funny lines, and some of the funniest ones of his career. He's just funny. To me, someone who can make me laugh like no other person on Earth, when he's in a film, has to be in the category of "great actor," but like lots of stuff, it all depends on how you're defining the terms you are using.
I've seen almost every film Crispin has appeared in. This is my favorite. This has the most laughs in it of all of them.
As if Dennis Hopper's performance isn't reason enough to see this movie over and over again. It's incredible.
Keanu Reeves, well, I think he really is a bad actor, but in this film he's simply perfectly cast and even he is awesome.
There's a bunch of other folks in this film that put in stellar performances, but I don't know of anything else truly remarkable that any of them ever did.
A lot of credit goes to the director for this one. This is probably my favorite movie ever.
Performance... or OVERperformance, everyone here is praising the acting by Glover in this film, but i just dont get it. Even if was TRYING to act all strung out on drugs. I have never seem anyone in real life ACT the way he acted... or again OVERacted. Is there a school in New York that teaches acters how to Underact?
share[deleted]
Hey you STUB DICK!
shareI've never watched a more annoying actor than Glover in this movie. He made Keanu "Plank" Reeves look like Brando.
I wanted to punch the screen throughout his performance. What crap!
I think he is the best performer in the entire film..
shareI really enjoy Crispin Glover's "overacting." That's pretty much exactly what's so funny about him.
shareYeah..Layne's the character that perfectly portrays the kind of people who does lots of talking but getting nothing done in the end, and Crispin Glover plays it so well..he is the most interesting person in River's Edge..haha..
share[deleted]
I see..what kind of pills do they usually take..? Must've been the side effects..
shareI believe that, in Crispin's case, there is a reference to "speed" somewhere in the film if you listen close, if I remember correctly. "Speed" generally refers to amphetamines, so I believe Crispin's pills were amphetamines of some kind. That is why he "crashes" (I'm referring to when he suddenly falls asleep in the middle of driving his car).
But, whether he played a speed freak very well, or very poorly, it wouldn't matter to me, because for whatever reason he made me laugh really, really hard.
Well..I believe he is the most interesting and entertaining person in the movie and because of his acting, I an almost remember every single thing he said. I watch this film three or four times now and and I believe he is the reason..
shareI really enjoy Crispin Glover's "overacting." That's pretty much exactly what's so funny about him.