Better Late Then Never

Best movie ever!

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Gloria (1999): Dir: Sidney Lumet / Cast: Sharon Stone, Jeremy Northam, George C. Scott, Cathy Moriarty, Bonnie Bedelia: It is a burning question as to why Sidney Lumet would remake the John Cassevette film for which he starred his wife Gena Rowlands? Plot regards a prostitute who takes a boy under her care. Sharon Stone spent three years in prison to cover her boyfriend's ass. He operates a mob in search of a disc that he killed a family to obtain but a boy survives. Feeling betrayed Stone protects the boy and steals the disc. Typical and predictable with way too much that we have seen before. A subway scene does nothing more than have Stone pursue the boy, and a scene involving her sister is not followed up. Directed by Sidney Lumet applies his skill but he is not creating the art he established with Network or Dog Day Afternoon. Stone is surprisingly good and handles humour effectively. She has seen the inside of a jail cell and the result of her sacrifice but now she slowly becomes a woman with responsibilities. Jeremy Northam plays the stereotypical villain. George C. Scott appears briefly and Cathy Moriarty is featured as Stone's sister who never seems to be used effectively. Regardless of one's thoughts on the Cassevetes film, this pointless remake does little to inspire interest outside stone's obvious sex appeal. Its themes cannot distract the fact that this is an unnecessary remake. Score: 3 ½ / 10

It would seem there is more to Gloria than meets the eye; this is in fact a remake of a film from 1980 and one that was directed by John Cassavettes. Interesting even more, then that upon discovering this was a remake shortly after I had seen it, and genuinely disliked it myself, that I would have new ammunition to use against this picture. If a film is made in the contemporary era of post 1960, why bother to remake it unless the idea was so brilliant and the initial execution was so poor. I haven't seen the original but from my own mind and other people's writing, it seems it was good idea, executed well; so why redo it? In 1980s Hollywood, the buddy genre it would seem enjoyed a strong series of successions. In 1999, are we still entertained by wise-cracking buddy formulas? The Rush Hour films say 'no, we are not'. But Gloria goes ahead anyway and by the time the credits have begun to run, what could have been set up, presented and told in about forty minutes has taken an hour and a half. Such is the nature of the film, Gloria (Stone) runs around the city with kid Nicky (Figueroa), for just about the entire runtime; getting into mis-adventures; scraps and situations oh, and the kid does a whole load of annoying moaning in-between. Gloria is a film that outstays its welcome pretty sharpish; the idea for the film is pair together a gangster's moll and a kid whose family was on the wrong end of the gangster's she's connected to and have them ride around the city for a day or two as we watch them; that's it.It seems strange Gloria and Nicky would even hang around for as long as they do. Gloria has to be in Miami for a parole hearing in a couple of days but they stick around anyway despite being able to go whenever they please after Gloria cashes in some stolen jewellery. During the course of the film, Gloria and Nicky should've learnt a few harsh lessons about life; they should've been able to know a new something or two about themselves: Gloria merely picks up on the importance of friends; something she's probably never had before given her role in society and the life she had chosen. Likewise; Nicky is only seven and is thus too young to learn any serious, valuable lessons about life – all he comes away with is a deceased family and a new mother figure. But that's all he needs; that's all he cares about: someone to help him along; someone to cook and clean for him; someone to tuck him in at night hence why the scenes where they share beds and talk about love are just disturbing since Gloria has adopted that motherly role.But the harshest lessons in life occur for Gloria in the film's set up; ironically the films best part. The idea of a seven year old and a gangster's moll trying to survive the gangsters gets old after about ten minutes so everything before then is quite fun. There's a good shootout at an apartment after a Hispanic family fall foul of the gangsters and that taboo of child killings is toyed with somewhat (albeit off screen) but the scene emphasises Hollywood's inability to branch out: of course the victims are Hispanic; they couldn't be white, American, could they? Also, there are extensive readings into the 80s buddy movie and how the formula of white guy/black guy works and revolves around one another. There is Lethal Weapon, Die Hard, 48 Hrs. and the rest: here, Gloria (white) adopts the 'white' role and the seven year old is the binary opposite: non-white, male, a child, etc. But Gloria learns in the elevator coming down that she has wasted her life; she has just paid the price for being a submissive bimbo/moll the instance after she is thrown out of her own apartment by the man who 'loves' her. She has been in jail for too long and now what was once hers is now someone else's.Initially, Gloria might have saved the child just to antagonise the guy who has taken everything from her. There is that fear of harm coming to the child but initially, I feel that is vacant. And so, what follows is a series of pranks and situations that are not interesting; not scripted well and are just rather bland. The kid moans a lot: "I'm hungry; I'm thirsty; I'm tired; I need the toilet." and that gets very repetitive – was it done for laughs? I hope not. Secondly, the film's buddy partnership however quaint does not work either: bad acting, bad script and too many scenes that feel they should be heart warming but are just duds. Especially disappointing considering the 'motherly' role that is very much present. In between all this, Gloria gets the chance to dish out some bad advice for the scamp. After receiving good advice from his own father, Gloria fills up Nicky's head with things like: "Life is a dream, it only lasts a minute" and "When you grow up, you're gonna make lots of love, drink and gamble." Has that elevator ride down in the first fifteen minutes not taught her anything? How sad.Gloria's best bit is a car chase but that is disappointing in its own right in the sense it is a complete rip-off of 1954's Seven Samurai; the Kurosawa classic. The editing and pacing of the two cars involved is like-for-like meaning Gloria's best bit is actually a copy of something else; again, how sad. By the time Gloria has made up and changed her mind in the penultimate scene and you see them walk off into the sunset (so to speak), you may have your head in your hands – anti-climatic and too dull to be anything special, Gloria is one to avoid.

GLORIA / (1999) *Starring: Sharon Stone, Jeremy Northam, Jean-Luke Figueroa, George C. Scott, and Bonnie Bedelia Directed by Sidney Lumet. Written by Steven Antin. Running time: 108 minutes. Rated R (for strong language, violence, and brief nudity). "Gloria" is a movie of such horrible proportions it is tough explaining in words the incredible ineffectiveness it presents on screen. The movie is robbed of almost all good qualities. There is no substance, style, or creativity here. It's all flat, contrived, and boring. The scenes consist of nothing but talking heads. "Gloria" is easily one of the year's worst movies and undoubtedly will place on many critics list of least liked productions. The film's opening is extremely week. We meet the title character, who is supposedly our hero, as she is being released from a hardened prison on parole. As she cusses at security guards walking out dressed as a cheap prostitute, this woman's attitude and condition of living make us sick. The second part of the first act has a family killed at gunshot by a gang led by a man named Kevin (Jeremy Northam), who murders these people because they withhold a computer disk containing information that could put every member in prison. Before the family's demise, however, the man of the house gives the valuable disk to his son, Nicky. A good movie usually begins with the introduction of its main character after the development. After the first act setup, the characters' morals and intentions should be clear. "Gloria" takes none of these preparations. The audience never becomes accustomed to any of the characters--thus we could not care less about what happens to them. This is especially true for the Nicky character, who is only a plot device. He has no interest, intelligence, important lines, or memorable scenes.The story's conflict revolves around Gloria adopting Nicky after Kevin threatens to kill both of them in order to recover the secret disk. Throughout the plot, the characters chase each other like a cat and mouse, with several key events leading the film's direction in the wrong way. The conflict's introduction with some proper material is good--although begins a little straight forward and seems jump started. The movie contains good structure throughout. The film features dialogue that is so straight forward and non descriptive, and the subtext is so blandly dumb, it is literally unbelievable. The conversations have no impact or meaning. They are just there, contributing nothing to the story. When Gloria exchanges consultation with Nicky, she talks to him like an object. This is exactly why the two characters share no charisma. The performances are wooden and uninspiring. What is Sharon Stone doing in this picture? Movies like these are way under her league. None of the characters are believable or interesting. Compare the young actor Jean-Luke Figueroa with the much more talented Haley Joel Osment from "The Sixth Sense." There is no emotional context here, nor is there any depth, energy, or involvement. The picture does not take any of the characters, situations, or actions seriously. I never once believed a character's life was at stake. Not much happens in the film, creating struggle for the advertisers and producers. Anyone like well-known Sharon Stone may draw some audiences in, but before long word of mouth should sink good old "Gloria" faster than the Titanic.Brought to you by Columbia Pictures.

Yeah, I realize what it says under the director's credit. But there is no way in hell that I'm gonna believe that the man that gave us "Network", "Dog Day Afternoon", "Running On Empty", and his own quartet of NYPD dramas ("Serpico", "Prince of the City", "Q&A", and "Night Falls on Manhattan") is even associated with this. This is quite possibly the worst mainstream film of '99, in the cozy company of "Bats", "Virus", "She's All That", and (gasp!) "The Haunting", just to name a few.Where to begin? The script for starters. How the writer managed to completely foul up the original source material is beyond me. Much of everything that comes out of Sharon Stone's mouth is unintentionally funny, especially in one scene where she tells her young companion, "I'm trying to teach you a philosophy of life here!" after telling him opportunities in his future (these include going to a race track, lovemaking, and "chasing a skinny blonde girl with big boobs.")And while on the subject of Stone, it's roles like this that manage to solidify the claim that maybe, just maybe, her brilliant turn in "Casino" was a fluke. Please Sharon, say it ain't so!Like other users have mentioned, the film's only saving grace is the car chase. But there's a lot of tedium to get through until the chase scene comes. Then again, why bother?Avoid. I can't stress this enough.