Glitter (2001) User Reviews (341)

As bad as they say, and then some

[mentalcritic · 1/10 · 28 December 2004]

In my perverse desire to see every film in the bottom 100, I thought I could not go far wrong with a rental of this classic POS. Mariah Carey's first and so far only feature film is an example of how the combined MPAA and RIAA attempts to shovel garbage at us are starting to backfire. Sales of Mariah's recordings, once one of the highlights of an otherwise dreary RIAA mainstream catalogue, have slumped. It's all because of this film. Don't let the blind Mariah fans fool you - it is just as bad as critics say, and deserving of its bottom 100 status.

Where to begin when pulling apart this cinematic abortion? For me, the first major problem was the cinematography. If the viewer is not clued in on the fact that Vondie Curtis-Hall has only directed television before this film as it starts, the flat, Days-Of-Our-Lives-style shots will soon make it clear enough. Directors who put one or two actors, three tops, in a 2.35:1 frame are a dime a dozen. On the other hand, directors who cannot even differentiate these actors' spacing from the camera truly stand out, and not in a good way.

The story has been described as being syrupy enough to kill anyone who suffers from diabetes (or doesn't), and I am not going to contest that. It's a variation upon the classic rags to riches theme, specifically tailored towards Mariah. Mariah essentially plays herself in the guise of a young vocalist who starts singing backup for a considerably less talented vocalist. As she crosses the paths of more people, eventually said people twig to the fact that she can vocalise with the best of them. One DJ eventually picks her up, manages her through a record deal, and promises her that one day she *will* play in Madison Square Garden, or something along those lines.

This kind of story has been done before, with such real-life examples as the Jacksons providing source material for one excellent miniseries of the theme. The problem here is that we've heard this story a million times before. Another significant problem is that while Mariah has a voice many would kill for, there is absolutely nothing that stands out, even slightly about her material. As an old girlfriend of mine once said, the longer it takes the RIAA to twig to the fact that being female doesn't mandate wanting to hear this formulaic ballad crap, the more business they are going to lose to independents who support bands like Opera IX. I think the fact that Mariah's last album disappeared without trace in spite of having millions of dollars spent on its promotion proves her right.

Mariah's story is also incredibly bland, to say the least. So her junkie mother gave her up when she was young. Oh boo hoo. It happens, and you're probably better off for it, get over it already. The previously-mentioned Jacksons could run rings around the likes of Mariah Carey for sob stories, and their reluctance to deal with the media at large is a telling thing. So in the end, we are simply left with another example of the mainstream trying to seem alternative, and failing.

I gave Glitter a one out of ten. I don't think I am being too harsh. I think it is so amazingly bad that it becomes comedic, at least on the first viewing. I suspect that repeated viewings will simply become boring.

Worse than you've heard

[[e-mail] · 1/10 · 11 August 2003]

I don't know how many of you have ACTUALLY seen this movie but I recently rented it out of morbid curiousty and a sadistic love of BAD cinema (and of course making fun of it)... and I did give it an honest chance. I really did, and no less than 3 minutes into the movie I was convinced it was going to be a bomb... there's too much to complain about here, from the faux artistic shots and film techniques meant to give the film some false "class", to the insane gaping void of chemistry between the main lovebirds, to the comic relief that is not funny and is unnecesary since there was no drama or romance, to the numerous long, long shots of things that either didn't matter or didn't need to be shown for the 700th time... I kid you not this is a really awful movie... only the most inept movie fan or an insanely die hard Mariah Carey fan could ignore the gaping holes in plot, directions, style, and acting that Glitter presents. However if you enjoy watching movies and going all MST3K on them, then by all means rip on this one. It deserves all the insults you can muster.

Scary star vehicle

[GroovyDoom · 2/10 · 5 May 2005]

Even fans of bad movies will have a tough time with "Glitter", which commits a number of gross sins while it is on your screen. Unlike the similarly-panned "Showgirls", "Glitter" doesn't go far enough over the top to be of any interest, and it takes itself way too seriously. "Showgirls" made me feel giddy while I was watching it. "Glitter" made me feel as if I had been poisoned.

What an unfortunate mis-step for star Mariah Carey, who gets sucked up into the vacuum of this movie like a dust bunny under the Hoover. It's not that Mariah is terrible, exactly. She doesn't seem like much of an actress, and she definitely doesn't have much screen presence. But the real problem is that she doesn't really do much except smile, sing, and look pretty. She simply exists. Perhaps since "Glitter" is touted as a semi-autobiographical film like "Purple Rain", the producers thought being Mariah Carey would be enough to carry the film. Her role is shallow and one-dimensional, despite the fact that the script tries to give her some depth by piling on the age-old "wayward childhood" cliché. The problem is we've seen all of this so often that it's very silly.

It only gets worse as the movie progresses. After Mariah's character, Billie, grows up, she meets an obnoxious club DJ who, much to our horror, turns out to be the movie's other main character. Carey and her costar, Max Beesley, have next to zero screen chemistry, but for some reasons she falls in love with him.

The director throws in a bunch of gimmicky techniques, like speeding up the film, as well as a hilariously awful cut that goes from Mariah's face to fireworks exploding. There is also a laugh-out-loud moment where the actress who plays the young Billie Frank joins her mother onstage and when she opens her mouth to sing, it is Mariah Carey's voice that comes out of her--pitched up until she sounds a little like Minnie Mouse. No wonder Mariah collapsed after this was released.

There are some absurd and awful moments in the film that have nothing to do with Mariah, most notably her two obnoxious friends who are directed as complete caricatures and seem to be intended for some sort of comic relief (there's plenty of that in other places, all of it unintentional).

Beesley is supposed to be a big-time club DJ, yet he plays more like a kid at a high-school dance. The role is all wrong for him. For some inexplicable reason, the film is set in the early 80s, yet more often than not it looks suspiciously like the early 00's (especially the furniture). The dialog is unmemorable and nobody has any real acting to do in this film, except for one or two "emotional" moments. The drama is uninvolving, and it doesn't really spiral out of control until the conclusion of the movie, where it soars so far into the absurd that we finally get some good "bad movie" stuff (a big fight, a beating, a murder, a campy moment of triumph onstage). It's too little, too late though.

The one thing that "Glitter" manages to carry off is a cliché but somewhat engaging scene where Billie finally meets up her long-lost mother. Unfortunately, it is the final scene of the movie, and the camera sails right up into the sky just when we get to the one moment in the film that works.

A 40 Million Dollar High School Play

[ccarhart · 5/10 · 8 July 2010]

So bad it's fabulous. This movie bombed big-time when it opened, I saw it in the theater with an audience of 5 other people and have watched it several times since. So much bad press at the time! There was a rumor that it was originally supposed to be set in the 80's, but that part was cut out, only the wacky costumes remained. That would explain the presence of Ann Magnusona as a press agent for the record company. Mariah is sincerely likable and sings beautifully. The same cannot be said for poor Padma Lakshima. Sort of an R&B version of "A Star Is Born", you will find yourself laughing in all the wrong places. Every cliché in the book and then some. There is a fashion photo shoot with silver body paint, and an evening dress that goes from stage to farm in one day. A classic rags to riches tale that seems to have been written by a teenager.

CC

not so bad

[mcrodas · 4/10 · 27 February 2003]

True, this is no cinematic marvel, but this movie does not deserve to be number 13 of the bottom 100 movies as commented on by IMDB audience. Not even in the bottom 100 at all. I'm a guy, and no big Mariah Carey fan, but this movie is not so bad, ok for any Mariah Carey fan.

De-fanged "A Star is Born"

[moonspinner55 · 4/10 · 9 July 2007]

"Glitter" might have been a camp classic if the story wasn't so dull and downbeat. It's yet another rewrite of "A Star Is Born", here turned into a vehicle for pop star Mariah Carey and apparently patterned after her own rise to the top (audiences weren't fooled, however, by the updated, late-night-movie clichés). Carey's funky/erotic music is driving (and her performance as blazing new talent Billie Frank is adequate), but the script for "Glitter" seems left over from the 1950s. Didn't the writers realize that times have changed and that Billie didn't have to be such a diva-doormat? Actresses of a lot higher caliber than Mariah Carey have fallen into this trap--they just don't want to see themselves on the screen acting bitchy and tough, so they end up playing the simp. "Glitter" features some rich cinematography (nice shots of the Big Apple), but it is too soft to make an impression--even as an unintended comedy. *1/2 from ****

It's no wonder that even Carey herself considers 'Glitter' her biggest regret

[TheLittleSongbird · 2/10 · 17 July 2016]

Seeing 'Glitter' with an open mind, despite its notoriously awful reputation, it is not quite as horrendous to be down there with the worst films of all time, but the problems 'Glitter' has are plentiful and are significant enough to consider it a very bad film still.

The good news is that Mariah Carey does sound absolutely incredible, always have loved her voice with its beautiful tone, emotional connection and uniquely wide range. Also Terrence Howard is quite good and steals scenes.

However, Carey's enviable skills as a singer does not translate in her skills as an actress, it was really strange that an artist with such a huge vocal range (five octaves!) is the complete antithesis in her very one-note and often expressionless acting here, which is devoid of any joy, surprise, sincerity or emotion. The ability to connect emotionally with her songs also doesn't translate in the acting, she looks stiff and bored throughout here.

Unfortunately, the songs here do nothing for her vocal talents either. She sings them very well indeed, but there are far more memorable and emotionally powerful songs from her out there that also display her unique vocal gifts much more. They're not awful, just bland. The rest of the acting is also poor, with Max Beesley being equally lousy and not sounding sure what accent to pull off, while with the characters Carey's is shallow, one-dimensional and very difficult to relate to (which is a huge dividend considering the type of story it is) and the rest are annoying caricatures, a couple even irrelevant to the story.

Even for a film set in the 80s, 'Glitter' does much less than glitter and looks firmly stuck in the 80s. It looks gaudy and too much of the camera work is too gimmicky and amateurish. The structurally wafer-thin script, with clumsy attempts at being hip, embarrassingly unfunny humour and "poignant" moments that come over as emotionally manipulative, sounds even older than that and like an awkwardly written soap-opera rejected at first draft (and should have stayed there).

'Glitter' has very little story, it's very thin and aimless, and padded by the bland and uninspiredly choreographed songs shot like a series of out of date music videos and subplots that come out of nowhere and go very little further than that (i.e. the reappearance of the cat or the reunion with her mother). It starts tedious and loses even more drive as it plods on, and throughout like Carey's performance there's no joy, no emotion and no substance. The direction is decidedly inept.

Overall, not that horrendous but it is no wonder that Carey herself regrets being involved in this. 2/10 Bethany Cox

so bad it goes past good and comes back to bad again

[claudemercure · 1/10 · 28 February 2002]

I rented Glitter because I'd read it was destined to become a 'so bad it's good' classic, but I was disappointed. This is no Showgirls. What makes Glitter a bad movie is that it's a bland, soulless procession of clichés, exactly like Mariah Carey's songs. And that just makes it boring-bad instead of spectacularly bad. And though Mariah is plenty vacuous in the starring role, she doesn't reach the heights of strenuously bad acting that Elizabeth Berkeley does in Showgirls. The only element of this movie that satisfies my so-bad-it's-good criteria is the character of Mariah's boyfriend. Here you have the whitest man on Earth, saying 'hip' things like "I'm a'ight" and "when you got no food in yo crib". If only the movie had contained more cringe-worthy gems like those!

To Be Honest: This is a Review of the 1st 1/2-Couldn't Bear Another Minute!

[Tony-Kiss-Castillo · 2/10 · 16 January 2022]

CURIUOSITY! ...Said to Myself Mariah Carey!?!?!? Hmmmm ..... I wonder if she can act???

So ...Can You GUESS??? Probably pretty easy to imagine...HUH!?!? O. K.... Now, take Your Imagination DOWN a few notches... And just MAYBE You have guessed it more or less for what it is! ...Or in this case.... What it is NOT!

Probably MY BAD! Usually, I avoid bad movies like the PLAGUE! Well... The EXCEPTION PROVES the RULE! The very BEST I can say about this FILM?????? Well.... Some of the MUSICAL NUMBERS were.... NOT SO BAD! And ...as is the Case with almost EVERY rather bloated Budget Hollywood production... ALL Those standard PRODUCTION VALUES.... You know... Cimemaphotography, editing, sets, costumes, recording and sound engineering etc..... as expected... were all.... Well.... ACCEPTABLE!

The storyline, however, was utterly inane. Deciding not to submit myself to anymore CRUEL + UNUSUAL Punishment... I just had to pull the plug about 1/2 way thru! SORRY!

Need I say anymore??? O. K.... I thought You would agree!

FYI... This REVIEW has like 700 or 800 Characters! Much more than 150 MINIMUM.... RIGHT!?!?!?

Mariah Carey cannot be excused from this wreckage....

[CTS-1 · 1/10 · 14 February 2003]

...because, as her vanity project, she undoubtedly had the final yea or nay on what went into this mess. The inexplicable glitter strip (note: watch for continuity errors in its location)? The longest-lived cat ever? Telepathic songwriting? The most unsympathetic cast of characters since "A Clockwork Orange?" Ms. Carey knew, or should have known.

Mariah's acting is, well.... zombified. Her screen presence would actually be explained by her being under the influence of some medication designed to help with her later well known breakdown. Ms. Carey proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that bad over-acting makes for more entertaining badfilm than bad under-acting, which just leaves the viewer wondering why the movie was made. I couldn't tell for sure whether the rest of the cast's tepid-to-annoying performances were due to their own bad acting or from trying to perform across from the lifeless Ms. Carey; after 45 minutes, I couldn't care either. A well-deserved 1.

Here for it in 2020

[paulandreas-221-358928 · 10/10 · 2 April 2020]

Glitter must surely be at cult classic status any day now. The bad rep it got at the time doesn't stand the test of time. Re-watch and you'll see what I mean. Mariah is good in this and so is the soundtrack.

flawed....but let's be honest, there are MUCH WORSE FILMS

[franklinajohnson · 6/10 · 2 April 2008]

Okay, so it's been 6 1/2 years since this film has come out and it has still been considered one of the worst films of all time, but lets be honest, it is not terrible. Not great but not terrible. I think the greatest flaw in the film that there has not been that was not enough time dedicated to explaining certain aspects of Billie's emotions. There should have been more about her father and how that reflected her relationship with Dice. But when it comes to plot, it is fairly predictable, but there is a reason why there are so many films that share this plot line about fame: A Star Is Born, Dreamgirls etc., it is a part of fame. The main problem is the script, without a good script, the true potential for acting is limited. Now when it comes to the acting, I'll admit it is not great but no means it is terrible. Terrible acting is Jessica Simpson in "The Dukes of Hazzard" and "Blonde Ambition." I think it is time for people to stop treating this film as if it is the worst film to grace the screen, there are far worse films and this film, while not the greatest, should get the benefit of a doubt.

Are you sure there's no way to vote ZERO?

[Meat_Trademark · 1/10 · 13 June 2002]

Okay, without swear words...

This movies bites everything bad really hard.

Don't get me wrong. Even if a movie is BAD, I can still often get a kick out of it. Some bad films are so bad they're fun: Roadhouse, Kingdom of the Spiders ("starring" William Shatner), Orgy of the Dead, Cool as Ice, Battlefield Earth... This one's just plain bad. I'm not sure if I can EVER forgive myself for having watched it. I swear, my eyes and ears began bleeding about twenty minutes into it. Still, I waited for something so bad it was funny. It didn't happen. Just plain bad. No, not "just plain bad," but really bad. Really, really bad. I truly can't say how bad it was on this post without resorting to, and making up new, swear words.

That said, I was unfortunate enough to stumble upon some show on MTV about celebrities' homes during a segment about Pariah Careless herself. Let's just say that I used to think she was the Devil. Now I know that there are worse, more pretentious, and just all-around truly more terrible and terrifying things than the Devil. She's straight out of H P Lovecraft's Cthulhu mythos. A slimy many-tentacled thing waiting to devour humankind's happiness to further its own demented, sickening Ends.

And if you think I'm being flippant or sarcastic, let me set the record straight: I am not religious, but I fear I may be in mortal danger for having exposed her as the the Evil Lurking Thing that she is. I pray to unknown benevolent gods that I never hear the wet, poison tentacle-claws scratching their way in through my door. I hope my death will be quick and painless when the Mariah-thing comes to reap my soul.

By the way, I really didn't like this movie at all.

Not so bad it's good, just bad.

[dave13-1 · 2/10 · 3 September 2016]

Some bad movies, such as Showgirls or Mommie Dearest, become camp classics over time as people come to forgive their shortcomings, and just groove on their excesses. That a movie as famously bad as Glitter has not entered this realm of camp, even after fifteen years, is telling. It tells us that Glitter commits a higher sin than being bad. It is boring. And derivative. And staggeringly incompetent. It was assembled by c-list writers and a TV director, none of whom had much idea how to gain a viewer's attention, and less idea how to hold it. Scene composition is flat and dull, evoking memories of bad holiday TV movies, while failing to establish intimacy with the characters or goings on, even in close up. Early scenes feature a hazy or gauzy look, no doubt to recall Hollywood's golden age, but that simply succeeds in making the movie look trite and derivative, rather than classic. It also makes it look as if the set decorator forgot to dust. The club scenes feature a color palette straight out of Blade Runner, just not as cheery. Every creative element in Glitter has the look of something borrowed from another (better) movie. And the less said about the bizarre, almost random editing choices the better. Every scene transition is another wtf moment.

Story and script construction are uniformly terrible. Scenes begin, stuff happens, scenes end... and NOTHING carries over. There is no continuing thread here of any kind - no overall character arc, no central theme, no ongoing visual motifs outside of the movie's hilariously inaccurate 80's fashion sense. Everything that happens seems utterly pointless, just a string of clichés recycled from old movies in which the chorus girl gets her big break. Glitter's brain-dead script gives none of its performers, not even once by accident, anything original or clever to say, nor any awareness of the storyline's utter inanity, making it increasingly difficult for the viewer to connect with the drama. And then we come to the Razzie-winning central 'performance'. La Carey could have been replaced by a Miss Piggy doll and the central role would have had more animation. Mariah's singular expression of vague incomprehension never changes, not even when gangster Terrence Howard grabs her face! To be fair she is not Glitter's only zombie marionette. Outside of Ann Magnusson's over-the-top pr woman, no actor in Glitter's 100 minute running time seems committed to being in any way memorable. A cynical person might suggest that they did this so that they could keep Glitter off their resumes without fear of contradiction. The result is a movie that defies any viewer to keep paying attention to it. You find yourself wanting to make a salad or do your taxes while the movie is playing, anything so that the time spent watching it is not a total waste.

This brings us to the music. Hollywood seems to have forgotten that the most important element in any musical is music, despite the fact that the word is right there in the name of the genre. Grease turns into a pretty bad movie whenever the singing stops and The Bodyguard is only marginally better. Both were huge hits however, and the fact that their soundtracks went multi-platinum was not a coincidence. Purple Rain features some downright cringe inducing 'acting' by Prince and Appolonia, but redeems itself time and time again with great musical performances. Viewers will put up with so-so filler in a musical as long as the songs entertain and remain in the mind after the credits roll. Glitter, unfortunately, features Mariah's worst ever (and worst selling) album at its core. Not only are the musical sequences not entertaining on their own, but they also make it hard for the viewer to swallow the idea that fictional Mariah would become a superstar on the strength of them, since actual established star Mariah could not manage to peddle them in real life. Thus, the fictional Mariah fails to engage as a performer, the actual Mariah fails to cross over into Hollywood despite having great singing talent and only having to play a person with singing talent, and even the spectacle of these failures fails to entertain on the basic level of a train wreck.

Glitter simply cannot provide an adequate reason to exist. Mariah's musical ability has already been showcased in a long succession of music videos, to better effect, and so we don't need Glitter for that. Rags to riches musical biographies have been done to death, so we hardly need another. The Girl in the Gold Boots told substantially the same story to drive-in goers fifty years ago! Heck, 42nd Street wore out this clichéd genre in 1933. If Glitter's only purpose was to act as a 100 minute commercial for its own soundtrack, as the Pokemon cartoons are simply ads for Pokemon toys, it fails there too, since it makes these crummy songs even less palatable in context than they would be standing on their own. So why does Glitter still exist? Was it financed by someone with a grudge against Mariah Carey, and she never caught on that she was being pranked until after its release? As a practical joke played on a gullible and vain pop diva, Glitter is pure malevolent genius. If, however, we were meant to have taken it seriously, then it's just a really, thoroughly worthless movie.

Poll question: Which pop diva embarrassed herself worst? JLo in Gigli, Jessica in The Dukes of Hazzard, Britney in Crossroads, Clarkson in From Justin to Kelly or Mariah in this piece of drek? I vote Mariah in a close race.

Piling on...

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 7 December 2009]

There is an American Football term called "Piling on". It's a penalty where the opposing team stops the runner and after the play is blown dead, opposing players keep jumping on the guy with ball--a definite no-no. Well, to me, this film conjures up this term, as when the film came out, reviewers seemed to come out of the woodwork to say how terrible the film was. In fact, they took great delight in talking about how bad the film was--shortly after release it was already legendary--perhaps made more so by Mariah Carey's nervous breakdown. Many speculated that this film led to this. Well, while I'd never say this is a good film, it certainly wasn't as bad as they said and it seemed that people were just piling on poor Mariah. Now I am NOT a fan of her music--up until this film, I barely ever heard any of it, but I felt bad for her because of all the hubbub.

As I said, the film isn't good but it isn't terrible. The biggest problems were with the script--which was essentially A STAR IS BORN. The film had already been made too many times by the time Barbra Streisand did it a few decades ago--now, the story is so old and has been done so many times that it just seemed like a giant cliché. In many ways, also, Mariah's character seemed a bit like a battered woman and it felt frustrating that she kept holding on to a guy who was an obvious jerk--making her character seem a bit pathetic. Additionally, the film suffered, at least for me, with a severe case of "music video-itis". In other words, there were so many musical numbers, at times it seemed more like a bunch of music videos strung together with a bare plot--not a real film. Of course, there have been much worse examples of this type of film--such as Paul McCartney's GIVE MY REGARDS TO BROAD STREET--which had significantly less plot than GLITTER (yes, it is possible).

But, on the positive side, Ms. Carey sure can sing and was absolutely beautiful--in fact, stunning. Also, her acting (which took a lot of abuse) wasn't that bad, either. In fact, had this film gone over a bit better, I could have seen her going on to other acting projects and improving her craft. Now, however, I don't think there's a chance in a billion! So, my overall verdict is that this is an okay film at best. However, it did not deserve all the attention the Razzies gave it--it's not really a movie that is enjoyably bad...just a bit dull and very predictable. However, if you adore her music, you could do a lot worse than see this film.

Poor Mariah. After this film tanked, all she had was her immense fortune and jet-set life.

More Like "Litter"

[shsoh · 1/10 · 14 February 2003]

Spoiler Alert Ok. I finally picked up the courage to rent this this video for just 2 bucks. But what a money this was! This movie seems to be made for a 10 hr television series but was edited to become a telemovie instead. But what a piece of low class crap this is. Mariah Carey gives her worst performance ever in movie histroy - same expression for joy, pain, rejection etc. The worst scenes as follows:

1. Mariah was told that she had a contract, entered a room and then the celebration begins! Amazing!

2. The boyfriend was murdered and then she sang a song during her concert. - more than an expression of freedom from her relationship than in remembrance for the dead. I was rolling with laughter here....

3. The DJs appear to accept any demo tapes even prior to sampling them? This being done at the risk of offending the party crowds! Ridiculous!

4. The film has the worst ending ever.... the way her mum looks at her appears that she knows "EVERYTHING" but was previously stangely left wandering in the streets in destitution!!! Daughter and mum hugged and cried. I cried too... for spending an hour plus of my life watching AND finishing the show.

O! How can I remove this guilt and embarrassment of my life!!!

Was it that bad? Really?

[TYANDSAHONA · 18 October 2004]

Okay, for the record, this was a lousy film. But did it deserve the sort of bombastic universal panning it received? It was not nearly in the league of such absolute bombs as Gigli, Black Dog or anything with Rutger Hauer. It was a formulaic, wish-fulfillment movie worthy of being a Lifetime Special or an ABC Movie of the Week. It sucked, but it wasn't the sort of movie that scars one for life. After all the jokes and hype I was disappointed when I saw this movie on cable this weekend. I was expecting Ishtar. To me, this points up a problem with how our culture reviews movies. Every so often critics, (who are cynical bastards anyway) seem to pick out a movie to practice witty cruelty upon as a sort of mental exercise. Poor Glitter, and poor Mariah, who had a nervous breakdown over how this movie was received by the critical establishment!

Not As Bad As All That

[LeonardKniffel · 3/10 · 30 October 2014]

Essentially a bizarre makeover of "A Star Is Born," this star vehicle for vocally gifted Mariah Carey is one most panned films of the 21st century. For 13 years I avoided it for that reason, but when I finally watched it, I was surprised to find myself in the very small camp that found the movie entertaining, although certainly not wonderful. The script is rather dull, and it keeps interfering with the songs. I found myself saying out loud to the director, "Will you let her finish a song before you cut to more insipid dialog!" There is some really nice music going on during the movie--not just Carey, but Stevie Wonder and Luther Vandross and others thrown in for good measure. And Terrence Howard steals every scene he is in as the villain.

A Typical Film to Promote Mariah Carey as an Actress

[claudio_carvalho · 4/10 · 11 August 2003]

A simple girl Billie Frank (Mariah Carey), abandoned by her alcoholic mother, meets a DJ, falls in love with him and becomes a star. Certainly there will be a superficial turning plot and a happy end. Actually it is a shallow and ridiculous plot, only to promote Mariah Carey as an actress. Her performance is something that deserves to be commented. In the past, Mariah Carey had a beautiful face. Get the VHS 'The First Vision', and you will see a gorgeous woman with brunet curled hair, natural eyebrows, nose and cheeks. Now, this female version of Michael Jackson is pathetic, with blond straight hair, thin nose and eyebrows and cheeks with silicone. Her acting is ridiculous, blinking all the time. When she is happy, she blinks. When she is sad, she blinks. When she is in love, she blinks. The number of times she blinks along this flick could be a reason for a funny game: 'Guess how many times she will blink in such a period of the movie?' And even singing, she exaggerates with her 'uhs... uhs..' (as usual). The DJ Julian Dice (Max Beesley) looks like a clone of Mark Wahlberg. Maybe fans of Mariah Carey may like this movie, but I am not his fan. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Glitter, o Brilho de uma Estrela" ("Glitter, the Bright of a Star")

A Disgrace.

[dirk nowitzki · 1/10 · 9 September 2002]

This movie is truly awful. Mariah Carey is the worst "actress" ever to appear in a movie since time began and should be banned from the film industry for all-time. In addition, the rest of the so-called "cast" is equally as deserving of that honor, in particular "Dice" and Billie's two sidekicks who shall remain nameless in their utter shame at having appeared in this garbarge. "Glitter" is pointless. Having set through the entire thing, I am only left to wonder what the people responsible for this film hoped to accomplish, and if they succeeded, how low the movie industry has come. I am a worse person for having seen this movie. From the vapid emotional range of Ms. Carey to the one-dimensional paper cut-outs that served as the supporting cast, "Glitter" is a train wreck from beginning to end. I beg you not to watch this movie, unless your sole purpose in doing so is to relentlessly mock it, as was mine. Thank you.

Quite simply the worst film I have ever seen bar none!!

[tsw004 · 1/10 · 18 August 2002]

I have to first explain I only saw this film as I happened to be in when my best friends' girlfriend (a devout Carey fan) decided to rent this film out. To say this film is bad doesn't do it justice, this film is a criminal waste of time and money when you think of all the great scripts and creative writers out there who can't get a break. How anyone had the audacity to commission this crock of pap is beyond me. Carey simply can't act, she is truly awful in this film as are most of the rest of the cast. The 'story' is a semi autobiographical account of the leading lady's life, which is always a sign of a weak plot but this just takes the biscuit! After forty-five minutes I started reading the newspaper, after fifty I couldn't care less if the video chewed itself up! My best friends' girlfriend a confirmed Carey fanatic confessed that even she thought this film was utterly dire and I can't repeat what she said about it for fear of inducing and multi-million pound libel case! Anyone who says this film is even vaguely watchable is either a blind Carey fanatic or just plain stupid. 0 out of 10, and believe me if I could give a minus rating I would.

A VERY UNDERRATED FILM.

[khat-datty · 8/10 · 3 September 2002]

I personally feel that Ms Carey took a bad rap for this film. "Glitter" really isn't as bad as the critic's wrote in their reviews. Sure this movie was not of the caliber of an Oscar nominated film, but it was fairly well acted, and entertaining. I honestly feel had Jennifer Lopez been in the starring role as opposed to Mariah Carey, no one would have had a problem with the film. I gives kudos to the cast and crew of this film. A grossly underrated film.

K-DIDDY 2002

Flawed, but nowhere near "that bad." I actually like it!

[I_Ailurophile · 6/10 · 14 March 2023]

Sometimes it's not enough to read about cinematic infamy, and you just have to see it for yourself. Take for example 'Ishtar,' 'North,' 2019's 'Cats' - or 2001's 'Glitter.' It's been well established that this came at a bad time in Mariah Carey's life, and she has rather distanced herself from it. The feature and the accompanying soundtrack album were also released at an unfortunate moment that all but ensured it would go unseen and unheard by just about anyone; did this ever really have a chance? Could it really be that bad? After all, the premise quite recalls any of a long, long list of other films about young protagonists trying to make it big in one region of show business or another; what happened here to earn such significant derision? Now that I've watched this for myself, I'm not sure I can rightly say. I think the picture struggles with various issues over the course of these 105 minutes, matters that distinctly hold it back. I'm also genuinely surprised, however, to find myself thinking that the reevaluation it's had in recent years is actually much closer to the full truth than the common description in the past 22 years as "one of the worst movies ever made." It is not, after all, "that bad."

The opening sequence is a little heavy-handed as it tugs on the heartstrings with exposition, but I can forgive this; mind you, I could forgive it more easily if that heavy-handedness weren't echoed later on. More concerning are early embellishments of unnecessary visual effects, and snappy editing, that quickly raise a skeptical eyebrow. The pacing of scenes and plot development is just ever so slightly too zesty (by, let's say, fifteen percent), coming across as peculiarly unnatural - rendering no few and possibly too many moments with a sense of inauthenticity, not least of all the first solidification of the romantic element at about the one-third mark. Sometimes it feels as though this is trying too hard to be extra "hip" and "street," especially when it comes to select instances of costume design and Vondie Curtis Hall's direction; this is especially strange since, in the more mindful examples that grow more prominent as the length draws on, it all looks fantastic (and likewise for the lovely hair and makeup). This feeds into another, larger problem: the feature actually has plenty of substance, including not just the core premise but also themes of creative control, shady deals, management machinations, the business side of the music industry, mixing business and pleasure, and more. That substance is treated unevenly, ranging from right on target, to so-so, to insufficient, and this goes double for whenever 'Glitter' tries to be flashy and stylish (and excessively so). This is so unfortunate, because I see the beating heart that the project possesses. I just don't always feel it, and sometimes it has a hard time shining through.

I know the acting was a source of considerable disdain upon release, but very honestly, I don't see anything wrong with the cast's contributions; above all, I'm rather inclined to think that Carey actually handles the lead role quite well, with commendable controlled range and poise. Her performance is hardly revelatory, but by no means do I think it's deserving of all the disparagement it's received, and I'd quite like to see more of what she's capable of as an actor. Some of the songs herein are better than others, or used more judiciously than others, but there are some classic songs on the soundtrack, and above all there's no disputing what an incredible voice Carey has. The production design and art direction are swell, and even if I don't agree with all the decisions made in terms of cinematography, direction, or especially editing, I think this is well made from a technical standpoint.

I think what it comes down to is that 'Glitter' has difficulty finding focus, or striking the appropriate tone, as it shifts from one story beat or mood to another. I don't see any singular flaw so critical as to severely dampen the viewing experience; rather, there's a regrettable accumulation of imperfections over time, almost from the start and nearly to the end. It's not Wholly Wrong, but it's also never Quite Right. Among other things, I'm inclined to think that if Kate Lanier had left out one or two elements from the screenplay then the end result would have been tightened, and the drama and weight of the story would have subsequently landed with more success. With all this having been said, no one is more astonished than I am that I earnestly enjoy this. I think it's a good movie. It's a movie with definite faults, and I readily recognize where improvements could have been made, but I also recognize the sincerity and care with which it was crafted. There are other pictures in this same niche genre that are more noteworthy and admirable, but whether you're a big fan of Mariah Carey or someone else involved, or just an avid cinephile, I actually believe this is worth watching.

Sometimes popular opinion is exactly on point. 'From Justin to Kelly' is abominable; 'Showgirls' is tawdry and flummoxing; Baz Luhrmann's 'Moulin Rouge!' is spectacular. Sometimes popular opinion is wrong-headed - and I think 'Glitter' is an example of the latter. It's nothing for which one needs to go out of their way, and as a matter of personal preference I won't begrudge anyone who engages honestly and ends up more emphatically critical. But if one has the opportunity to watch this, and to give it a real chance, then I'm glad to say that as far as I'm concerned it is much better than most anyone has given it credit for in the past two decades. Watch with both mindful expectations and an open mind, but do watch.

"Glitter" : All These Years Later

[happipuppi13 · 2/10 · 16 May 2022]

First, let me start by confessing something I freely admit. I am 100% a fan of Mariah Carey....as a singer. It's almost like what the girls in the '60s probably had when they looked at the Beatles. Whenever she's on TV or I listen to her music,I just naturally feel good.

However, when it comes to "Glitter", yes I, like most,was really let down. I wont even go into the plot since it's a moot point at this time. Not even 100 years will change or make this film any better. Even though I'm a fan, I'm not so one sided in thought that I'd just accept it.

This film was a mistake from the beginning. Although the soundtrack is good and it's 2 singles "Never Too Far" & "Loverboy" were great choices. Whe a movie fails, so goes it's soundtrack.

I heard about this film going into production back in 1998.

Now, when a film this simple, takes nearly 4 years to make, that's the very first warning sign that it's not going to work. Not to mention some publicized production problems I read about.

To clear up one muisconception by the way, the film's release date was Septemeber 21st, 2001...not 9/11. Althogh some feel that would have been fitting.

Mariah herself stated on Oprah that she just wasn't good at saying "no" during the dizzying pace of her career in the 90's. I'm sure this was just something she contractually said "yes" too and moved on.

Then,as happens with all "super-stars" (I hate that term) the low came after 11 years of riding high. There wasn't anything wrong with her music, she'd just been working too hard, too long and that's what led to this embarrassing moment and the one in 2002 on Total Request Live aka TRL.

She has of course rebounded from all this,her song,"We Belong Together" spent 14 weeks at #1 in 2005 and given her 2 otrher hit singles. The CD "Emancipation of Mimi", sold millions. She now does what "she" wants at her own pace and certainly has the market cornered on Christmas,

As far as I'm concerned you at least deservea review that isn't filled with venom. Loved you in "Tennessee" and "Precious" though.

But ... Keep on singing. (END)

Really is that bad...

[The_Limey · 27 April 2003]

Simple rule, if you are going to make a movie vehicle for a non-actor, surround them with some good actors, so if they turn out to have all the acting ability of a tin of tuna, you still have some hope of making the movie just bad, rather than bowel clenchingly awful.

This rule is ignored, the result is a piece of dross, that was so bad Mariah had a nervous breakdown when she watched it, so bad that Virgin executives gave her $15 million as long as they would never have to watch it again, so bad, well you get the point.

If you want a storyline, easy, mom is black, dad is white. Mom doesn't want her, dad doesn't want her. She wants to be a star, black and white guys fight over her. Lots of tradgedy. Lots of singing, lots of walking around in tight dresses. Everything ends up OK.

I can think of nothing that would recomend this. If you are a fan of Mariah, she isn't photographed that well, there are no big stand out tunes. If you aren't, then, you are looking at a movie which everyone involved with is obviously embarrased about.