Quote:
Originally posted by jdmc218
Not a good way to start off though..... |
Omg that gif!
Anyway, I rewatched "Glitter" last night and again I found it, although certainly not wonderful, somewhat entertaining and kind of intriguing. It sure did not deserve the hate it received. M's acting was fairly well—and the least of the movie's problems. It's not even the flat script (or the supposed lack thereof) I think. To me, the two worst things about the movie are the male lead actor and, above all, the editing.
Max Beesley's acting is so fake. Even compared to the rather one-dimensionally written character of Billie Frank (what kind of name is that btw?), he makes his role seem petty, and there's literally NO chemistry between him and Mariah.
But even with him and the material that they had they could have made a much better film out of it. Unfortunately it's so badly edited that the movie's weaknesses are perfectly emphasized. The first half of the movie is cut so fast that it makes the story seem way more artificial than it actually is, and the scenes are so short that the characters simply become puppets in a play. Plus, they keep interfering with the songs and a wonderful ballad like "Lead The Way" is cut down to 30 seconds and put between two scenes.
I know there is absolutely no use in still crying about it but everytime I watch "Glitter" I can't help but feel that with some rather simple and small changes the movie could have turned out so much better. And I keep wondering how that movie came into being. Many of the people who were involved were not necessarily high-profile (at least not back then) and I wonder why the movie wasn't made with slightly more acclaimed filmmakers.
I don't know how you like Merry Christmas II You more than Einstein, but slay otherwise!!
