Sparkle (2012)

Sadly Over-hyped

Don't Believe the Hype

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

I did not expect to like this movie, but I really loved it. The original movie was a favorite of mine, but the rewrites really made the story more realistic. Not all black families lived in the ghetto in the sixties and most black men were not and are not drug dealers.Satin was a more believable character as a jealous comedian. Even the domestic violence portrayed the real issue behind the violence, insecurity, not sadism as the first movie implied and it showed how women get caught up in love and belonging, not the money. Whitney Houston's character was defined in this movie and the church setting provided an opportunity for Whitney to do her thing.The original movie was made during the period of blaxploitation, and without the caricatures, it is doubtful that the movie would have been made. At that time black people were simply happy to see someone who looked like them on the big screen. There were actual human beings in the remake and I think I even liked the songs better.Don't believe the critics. This was really a great movie.

I'm one of those people who are hard on remakes, especially if I enjoyed the original. I'm being very kind in giving this movie a 2. It was quite terrible.This is a remake that really isn't a remake, it just steals things from the original and throws them into a new film loosely based on Sparkle. I actually wish they had done a true remake, because at least the script would have been good if nothing else.Nobody can play Sister the way Lonette McKee can; she owns the role, and her performance can not be duplicated nor even closely matched. Lonette was about 22 when she played Sister, Carmen Ejogo is about 38; she is just too old to play Sister! Lonette managed to be alluring and charismatic as Sister without being trashy. It felt like Carmen was trying too hard to act like a sexy naughty girl, and Lonette simply oozed that type of aura. She had one of the most gorgeous faces and figures that I have ever seen in the 1976 Sparkle; Carmen doesn't have that. Also, Lonette's speaking voice and cadence really added a layer to the role that was missing from this version.I first saw the original in about 1996, I was maybe 15 or 16, and have been hooked ever since. I'm biased, but I can still say that even if I had not seen the original; I would not like the semi-remake.The acting is awful. Jordin Sparks can't act. Irene Cara's Sparkle seemed so naturally sweet, and Jordin's Sparkle just came off as phony; like acting.How on earth do you go from Philip Michael Thomas as Stix to Derek Luke? The same can be said for Satin and Levi, how do you go from Tony King to Mike Epps, and from Dorian Harewood to Omari Hardwick? The biggest difference between the films is that the remake has no gut, no core, no soul. Where is the heartbreaking drama? Where is the power?A 1976 film about the music industry is bound to be better than a modern one. There are some subjects that just don't pan out very well in more modern times, such as the music industry and the modeling industry.There was a time when movies about The Temptations or The Ronettes would be a surefire hit, but that time has passed. These types of movies tend to come off as phony nowadays. That's not saying a good one can't be made, but it apparently is a very hard thing to pull off.

The worse thing about this movie is that they fall in line with everything else that Hollywood does today and that's piggyback off of the truly great movie makers of yesterday. Zero talent in regards to coming up with your own ideas and concepts so you use one from the past, change a few things and in the end you create an extremely poor version of a great classic. Not only does the story completely change from what we know, but not one of the characters holds a candle to any of the originals. For a story placed in the 60's much of what they did change does not even seem to match up with the times. The only reason this movie gets a three from me is for the new songs in the end being semi-decent songs even though they also did not fit with the times and simply because I like many of the actors. I'm just sorry they all agreed to such a poor rendition of this timeless classic. This movie was so drastically changed from the original it should have never been considered a remake, but I gather that was done simply to ride the coat tails of a truly great story.

First let me start by saying if you ever see a movie directed by Salim Akil, or a movie written by Mara Brock Akil, or a movie produced by either of these two clowns, think very hard as to whether your hard earned and much valued money should go toward the junk they call movie magic. These two jokers have duped the movie going public with the most transparent, poorly written, poorly produced and directed trite I've viewed in years. To say I disliked this attempt at a movie is to be too kind, it stinks!! Now the good...I actually liked the acting, Jordin Sparks showed promise, as did the entire cast including Whitney. The music was decent, not great but decent and it helped you make it through the drudgery of this terrible and predictable so called movie. The bottom line on this piece of junk is that it is so bad I've already forgotten about it....enough said, skip this one and watch out for Salim Akil and Mara Brock Akil who are trying to pass themselves off as directors, producers, and writers, they are frauds and I personally hope I never hear their names again.