Footloose: Review By moviegeek

Loosen up!
  • OVERALL
    2.5
    WORTHY
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
Footloose is about two generations of extremely unlikable people. There's the unreasonable, conservative parents who have set legal boundaries in their small town opposing seemingly harmless things. Then we have the bratty, disrespectful kids who are stuck in the longest phase of teenage rebellion known to mankind. Their 3-year war against the laws and their parents is what fuels the movie. This new remake is lively, sure. But the majority of the experience is sour and unpleasant.

If you haven't seen the 1984 original, this next paragraph is for you. For those who are familiar with the original, nothing in the plot has changed. A city kid, Ren (Kenny Wormald), moves to the small town of Bomont. While there, he finds out that dancing and loud music have been banned after an accident that took the lives of several local kids. Reverend Shaw (Dennis Quaid) is the ringlea--excuse me--most avid supporter of these laws and doesn't take a liking to Ren. Oh, and he has a daughter, a snot-nosed rebel.

Who do we side with? That question seemed so obvious to answer in the original. We rooted for the teens to have a chance to cut loose and dance; to have a chance to just be kids! Twenty-seven years later, in a near-identical remake, I can't answer that question. I want to side with the kids, but they're such loathsome people. They're disrespectful to every adult, reckless in nature, and behave on constant highs of rage. The adults trying to legislate good behavior aren't much better. They are stubborn and heartless, with exception to the Reverend (whose character gets enough screen time to be fleshed out).

The toe-tapping energy in all of the dance sequences was engaging. Even though this remake is set in the present day, I was glad to see that the dancing styles weren't overly modernized. The choreography matches what one would imagine a small-town dance party would contain. That relates to another good thing about Footloose, both the new and the old editions. The reason the dancing scenes are so engaging isn't because of how cool the moves are. Instead, the good music selection, vivid cinematography, and the energy of the cast make the dancing come alive and become fun, rather than just being a show or a spectacle.

I know for certain I didn't like this new Footloose. But that raised a very strange question. What the hoo-hah did I like about the first one? This remake is a near-parallel to what was in the original. What gives? Was it just more fresh the first time around? Did the original work in the more classic way it was made? Was I just wrong? Well since I never mind seeing a good thing twice; and because this new remake is as "classically-made" as the original; and since, of course, I'm never wrong, it must be something else.

Here's where this new Footloose misses the mark: it's all about the conflict and not about the situation. The original Footloose had a sort of goofy liveliness to its setup. There was a situation, and there were certain conflicts that spun out from that. Towards the end of the original, the Reverend walks out to find the townspeople burning books. It's then that he realizes that the situation has gotten out of hand, tying all of the loose conflicts together. Here's a town that got out of control with their "protective" legislature.

Twenty-seven years later, we don't have a modern take on the situation. We have a replica. I actually liked that they didn't modernize it. But instead of working like the original by lightly treading on the conflicts throughout and supporting the entirety with a general situation, it stomps through with a lead foot. Calculated situation after calculated setup arise, but Footloose never seems to really move anywhere. It gets stuck in the marsh of today's filmmaking and storytelling. Where a central conflict isn't enough. Where stray problems need to be highlighted to keep an audience engaged.

Footloose is alive in step but dead in storytelling. It doesn't seem to realize that the premise and the dancing are enough to carry the movie. Bogged down with overwrought contention and stuffed with unlikable leads, Footloose never sold me on anything but the dancing. Remakes should never be made unless there's a new take on the old story. This 2011 update is such a carbon copy that it rarely takes the time to stop trying to fit in all of the pieces and just cut loose.

Do you like this review?

Comments (29)

  1. Nicholaus XX

    @moviegeek -- Ah, all right. No problem.

    1 year agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  2. moviegeek

    @XxNickTheFilmCriticXx I guess I didn't think it was necessary because I was talking mainly about the characters. The acting took a backseat. But I appreciate the constructive criticism.

    1 year agoby @moviegeekFlag

  3. Nicholaus XX

    @dan1 -- That's the truth, lol.

    1 year agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  4. Nicholaus XX

    @moviegeek -- Really good review, but I wished you explored others factors, such as acting.

    1 year agoby @XxNickTheFilmCriticXxFlag

  5. Corey W.

    @moviegeek I discovered my dancing skills.

    2 years agoby @coreyFlag

  6. moviegeek

    @corey Well your grading scale has nothing to do with that :P I just didn't like the movie and you did :P When we both like or dislike a movie we'll match up more I'm sure. Dancing.... would have loved to have seen that..

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  7. Corey W.

    Glad to see you back in action @moviegeek. I wish we both liked it the same, though. With my new grading scale, I thought we'd be seeing eye-to-eye much more often. Well, since I have nothing smartass to say I'll just comment on @ghostman: I wasn't singing. Just dancing! haha. Glad you two are bringing the wonderful tales behind my reviews here though. :)

    2 years agoby @coreyFlag

  8. moviegeek

    @mattbierwagen Hmmm... ya think? :P

    @ROFLitschristian thank you. Yea.. the acting wasn't that bad. I mean, there's not much to be asked of in the roles either though.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  9. ROFLitschristian

    Great review @moviegeek. I think what it is is that identity theft slows the movie down. If the movie's a picture perfect copy of the original then that probably takes away from some of the excitement the original brought... Or maybe the acting was bad, I don't know. :)

    2 years agoby @ROFLitschristianFlag

  10. Worth5Bucks

    @moviegeek great review man, i really need to start reviewing again

    2 years agoby @mattbierwagenFlag

  11. moviegeek

    @moviefreak97@slysnide@thedude-abides Thanks for the feedback guys.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  12. Dan

    Nasty kids, overbearing adults. Sounds like today's society.

    2 years agoby @dan1Flag

  13. slysnide

    Your first paragraph pretty much nailed my issues with these films on the head @moviegeek. Granted I didn't see either of them, but that is mostly why.

    2 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  14. thedude-abides

    Excellent review, @moviegeek. "I want to side with the kids, but they're such loathsome people." Funny how art imitates life, lol (I say that tongue in cheek). The last line of your review says it all. Great job once again.

    2 years agoby @thedude-abidesFlag

  15. MovieFreak97

    Sounds like everything you didn't like about this one is what I didn't like about the original and felt the remake improved. Ah well, good review all the same man :)

    2 years agoby @moviefreak97Flag

  16. moviegeek

    @skywise well I didnt want to imply I was loOking for some deep storyLine or something. I just noticed differences in the storytelling between the two films. And yea, psycho was remade pretty much frame by frame if I remember right.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  17. skywise

    @moviegeek awesome review. I have always felt that if you dont have something new to bring to the table then there is no need for a remake. Kind of like the Gus Van Sant version of Psycho. But then again, i never really got into the original but if i were going to watch this it wouldnt be for its deep storyline.

    2 years agoby @skywiseFlag

  18. Georgia DiPirro

    @moviegeek You keep that Quality ~ it's golden!

    2 years agoby @Georgia-DiPirroFlag

  19. moviegeek

    @moviewiz001 Thanks, bro.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  20. MovieWiz001

    @moviegeek aww, sorry for the loss of hype. Great perspective, btw.

    2 years agoby @moviewiz001Flag

  21. moviegeek

    @Georgia-DiPirro I appreciate your feedback :) I try not to beat around the bush.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  22. Georgia DiPirro

    @moviegeek Wow, another tell it like it is review ... We may share different views, but I adore your blunt honesty. Good Review.

    2 years agoby @Georgia-DiPirroFlag

  23. moviegeek

    @ghostman I remember he said that in his Thing review.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  24. Ghostman

    @moviegeek that, and I think he took a date with him to see it too.

    2 years agoby @ghostmanFlag

  25. moviegeek

    @ghostman bwahaha I'm sure he's glad we all remember that.

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  26. Ghostman

    Well @corey enjoyed it so much he said he was singing and dancing the whole day..put him in a good mood i guess :D

    2 years agoby @ghostmanFlag

  27. moviegeek

    @ghostman sadly I was hoping to like it :(

    2 years agoby @moviegeekFlag

  28. Ghostman

    This sounds a lot of what i thought this movie would turn out to be :)

    2 years agoby @ghostmanFlag