Wordiezett So much average

Nonureva Really Surprised!

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

TheLittleSongbird Despite being an enormous hit at the time, the original 'Footloose' is somewhat of a love it/hate it film.To me, it wasn't a great film, did have issues with the story, some of the script and one dance sequence (the one in the abandoned warehouse). However, the immense appeal is definitely understandable and the original 'Footloose' still stands up as an enjoyable film for the soundtrack, dancing/choreography and the casting.While there are definitely worse remakes out there ('Psycho' and 'The Wicker Man'), 'Footloose' (2011) is still, like a fair few remakes, rather pointless.It's not all awful. The best thing about is Miles Teller, a great and instantly appealing performance that is every bit as good as Chris Penn's in the original, the only actor in the film to have that distinction. Some of the dancing is dazzlingly good, especially Willard learning how to dance. Plus the production values are beautiful.However, while the soundtrack was unforgettable and toe-tapping in the original they are forgettable here, the more contemporary and country arrangements robbing them of their catchiness and charm. The songs themselves are not bad at all, far from it, but how they're arranged are very much so. There are some great moments with the dancing, but too much of the dancing lacks the finger-snapping quality and energy of the original's choreography.'Footloose' further suffers from being too faithful, with a lot of the same material but with little to none of the nostalgic charm and fun. Nothing is done also to improve on the daftness, ridiculousness and schmaltz of the story from the original, instead those problems are actually amplified here, with lots of cheese and overwrought emotion, and hurt even further by pacing that feels like one is riding on the back of a snail.Miles Teller aside, though Ray McKinnon and Kim Dickens are also quite good but aren't in it enough, the cast just don't cut it, and neither does the very uninspired direction. Kenny Wormald is an incredible dancer but a lousy actor, a bland presence throughout and he is never sure whether to overact or underplay because the performance is a mess of both. Julianne Hough is beautiful, but doesn't have the confidence, vulnerability or charm to match.Andie McDowell feels out of place and, with the lack of engagement with her material, looks completely cost. Dennis Quaid gives a limp and sometimes over-compensated performance, and constantly looks ill at ease. There is little chemistry between the two of them as well, the dignity and gentle touch from the original's chemistry between the two characters is missed, replaced with a sense of being condemned throughout.Overall, there's worse out there but there was really not needed and the execution on its own merits is severely wanting. 3/10 Bethany Cox

adonis98-743-186503 Most of the reviews here are negative and i totally understand it it's a Remake of a classic 80's movie but that doesn't mean it's bad. You have Dennis Quaid, Andie MacDowell, Miles Teller, Juliane Hough and Kenny Wormaid. The movie was actually produced by MTV and unlike it's music and other movies that were garbage on that time back in 2011 this one isn't the cast did a good job and even tho i liked Chris Penn more than Miles Teller this one is a remake a goddamn reboot you can't recreate the same thing 100% just like the Original did the 2006 Omen tried that and it was well? pointless. If you ask me the best Remake that stayed away from the Original is still Robocop but like i said give it a chance you might like it much better the 2nd time.

Aprianto Nursetiawan It's enjoyable, though if you never watched the original and intend to watch both movie, watch this one first, so you won't be biased and saying this movie is not as good. Well in my opinion this is not as good as the original, but I might be biased, and to be honest it's not that bad to deserve less than 5 stars, even if you don't particularly like music or dance, or can't dance, at all.Both movie contain 98% same plot, just switched the time a bit and different minor plot, so you won't be missing a lot, it's just feel this kind of in a slower pace, but any other things are good, choice of actors is nice, not the best acting, but still, music is good too, most are new music of course, that's the purpose of this movie anyway, but they are all fits perfectly, and the classics are still here.I think this remake, in context of it, is good, although some people argue that this movie is pointless since it has the same storyline, but a remake doesn't always have to be a reboot. Still this is a good one to revive a classic to be enjoyed by current generation teenager.

TinyDanseur27 I was pretty disappointed with this version of Footloose. What makes Footloose such an enjoyable movie/musical is the music. Aside from a brief incorporation of the title song in the beginning, and a couple of the songs used as background music throughout the movie, this movie neglected its musical roots altogether! What a waste...There were some fun dance scenes but I found myself unable to enjoy them fully because of the blatant display of Julianne Hough's sexuality. I have some words to say to the costume designer. To be fair, her character was supposed to look and act like a slut. Still, I found that the powers at be went overboard with that depiction in this version.Kenny Wormald was a likable protagonist, Ren. His sidekick, Willard, played by Miles Teller was utterly preposterous however. I felt sorry for people who live in small towns in Georgia. Willard did not do much to convey a positive view of their lifestyle and culture.If you like dancing, you might find this movie enjoyable for the dance scenes. Other than that, I wouldn't recommend it.