Yes, the original film was like a lot of 80s movies--campy, silly and sometimes just about the music—but this remake should have been forgotten. While the writers kept quite a few original lines and the director kept some iconic scenes, something was lost in translation. That loss cannot be blamed on any one part of the film but rather the disgraceful whole.

There some changes that I enjoyed. The opening scene, though storyline changed a bit, had more of an impact behind the impetus of the town's laws. The dancing was top notch by today's standards though a little raunchy a time or two. Kenny Wormald did justice to Kevin Bacon's dance in the warehouse, changing it just enough to make it his own. Julianna Hough kept up with him every step of the way during the dance scenes. Even the at the end, it was refreshing in this day of girl-power to see the football team told by a teammate to "man-up" and ask the girls to dance.

That said, the rest of the film is an empty cardboard parody, lacking any sense of poignancy that endeared the original to a generation. The soundtrack fell below the standard set in 1984, though they sort of kept Whitney Houston's original "Let's Hear it for the Boy" when Willard learns to dance (a highlight in both films). Also, they changed Beamis Mill (which I believe dealt with concrete) to a cotton gin mill, very poor taste.

The characters are hollow and thanks to the deletion of several key scenes, the actors are not given a chance to redeem themselves and give us characters we can empathize with.

Kenny Wormald was a great choice for the dancing scenes. It's impeccable and when when he dances you can feel his passion come through the screen. His acting, however, was limited to cockiness and poker face. Kenny seemed to struggle to find the balance in that sweet spot between underacting and overacting. Two scenes that clearly show this is when his aunt asked him why the dance was important and when he stands before the town counsel. Both times lack passion, conviction and inflection. He could very well have been reading the nutrition panel on the side of a bag of bread. The closest I came to identifying with him was when his Uncle talked about him taking care of his mom. Kenny could not seem to remember he was supposed to be a rebel with a cause and not just another rebellious teenager.

Julianna Hough is gorgeous and confident. Confidence like hers can hinder a performance when you are supposed to be playing a wild child who is acting out because of insecurity. I am trying to give her the benefit of the doubt as key scenes were not in the film that would have brought depth to her character. You miss out on the deep reasons behind the hurt and vulnerability that Lori Singer pulled off wonderfully. For example, the scene about types of music in the original between Ariel and Shaw went a long way to deepen the dynamics of father-daughter relationship, and helped build each character's journey in the minds and hearts of the audience. Or the scene with the music box, showed the vulnerability of Ariel as she shared who she really is with Ren, brave and yet fearful of rejection for her real self. Those scenes might have saved Hough's performance. Instead, her version of Ariel came across as an angry brat who looked good dancing.

Dennis Quaid looked ill-at-ease throughout the entire movie, and even when he's angry he looks like he might lose his breakfast. Again, I am trying to give his performance the benefit of the doubt as they cut several key character-development scenes which would have shown how he grew throughout the course of the film. For example, the book-burning scene in the original is a major turning point for this character. John Lithgow's heart (original) could be seen in that scene when he sees what he's done. It's a point of no return when he had to really think about what he'd done and why and how he will proceed. Had they kept that scene, he would have reason, he would have believability. Now, instead, Shaw comes across as another fumbling close-minded dad/leader who had no clue about real life until his wife and daughter school him, along with a very brief talk with Ren.

Andie MacDowell didn't have much chance with the majority of Vi's scenes cut. That said, had been included them it would not have mattered. Only once during this film did she remind me of the quiet strength and dignity that Dianne Wiest brought to the role (town meeting). Her few scenes with Dennis Quaid are almost belittling and instead of the gentle correction of Vi quietly convicting Shaw Andie's Vi seemed to constantly condemn him.

Miles Teller as Willard is probably the most enjoyable of the entire cast. I know some out there have decried his performance, but I think he took the role and made it his own while retaining the child-like naiveté that was Willard. He was a little on the over-sexed teen side of things in this film (which got old), but otherwise, he was fun to watch.

The flaws are many in this film. I would give this film 2 out of 5 stars simply for the dancing, The tag line is "Cut Loose" and they stripped away any of the sentimentality that would have made this a fun film to watch over and over again.

They removed what made Footloose so foot loose. They simply cut too loose.

I enjoy bad movies, and enjoy bad remakes even more. So when the opportunity to get advanced passes to the atrocious looking remake of Footloose came, I pounced on them just out of the sheer will to see what kind of monstrosity Craig Brewer and company came up with. The film had gone through a number of changes, and had plenty of room to improve on the original. Sadly, I do not think there was ever any hope for it.

After a horrific accident takes the lives of five high school seniors, the town of Bomont, Tennessee outlaws a number of activities for the teenage populace including dancing. Enter Ren McCormack (Kenny Wormald), a city kid and distinct outsider to the close knit Bomont townspeople. He is confused by the bans, and after making a few new friends, sets out to get them abolished.

While the nostalgia factor may cloud the memories of some people, the original Footloose is really nothing more than a fun diversion packed alongside an absolutely infectious soundtrack that is still great even today. It is a fairly silly film really, but with the help of Kevin Bacon's 1984-era charm and charisma, the film remains a wildly enjoyable film. Yet somehow, in remaking the film for an audience in 2011, it seems like the filmmakers missed more than a few steps along the way.

Now I will be the first to admit that this new remake does have a handful of fun scenes and astonishing dance choreography. The trailers do a good job of showing off just how great some of the dance moves are from this new cast, but what it does not let on too much is that most of these scenes come when they are replicating scenes from the original film. I basked in the glory of hearing Kenny Loggins blasting, while watching the various pairs of feet dancing to the beat. And seeing Willard (Miles Teller) learning how to dance is one of the highlights of the film, much like it is the original film. A key dance sequence late in the film is also significantly better than I could have ever predicted.

But that is where the enjoyment ends.

The rest of the film that surrounds these scenes is dull and lifeless, moving at a snail's pace and just going through the motions. There is very little fun to be had, and should someone venture into the film without having seen the original, they may wonder why anyone wanted to remake it in the first place. Instead of trying to improve and make the plot line less ludicrous, the filmmakers left the entire crux of the film the exact same. They merely changed a few character traits around, shuffled in some racy dialogue, and took out the tractors and added in school buses. They sucked out all the fun, and what is left seems like a mere project that was cranked out with little to no thought for what audiences may actually perceive to be enjoyable.

Worse yet, the soundtrack is a totally forgettable affair. While it is the crucial element of the original film, it feels like a largely laughable affair here. I was originally intrigued at the idea of the film containing all the original songs, albeit covered by new artists. But somehow, all of the catchiness of the original tunes seems to have been stripped from these new ones. Instead, we are left with versions that have a country twang or overtly urban feel to them, and absolutely no reason to want to listen to these new versions ever again. I would be lying if I did not think the most memorable tracks in the film were the two original ones that somehow were deemed okay to fit into the film. I would register a guess that this is the influence of Brewer, who is best known for Hustle & Flow and Black Snake Moan. He has a distinctly Southern taste to his body of work, and practically forces it on this film. But in forcing this ideology, alongside two completely different genres of music, he crushes the film into submission, leaving many scenes an absolute mess.

The acting in the film is even more disappointing. Dennis Quaid looks embarrassed in every scene he is in, overacting as much as he possibly can to forget that he is in the film. Andie McDowell looks like she wandered in off the wrong set, and just decided to stick around as a background character. Wormald is a poor substitute for Bacon, and is an even worse lead for a major motion picture. I realize he is a dancer first and foremost, but leaving him to carry this film was an awful decision. He looks frightened and confused for the majority of the film, and quivers through most of his lines. He lacks Ren's charm, and is never believable when he rebels against authority. You want to believe in this character, but all you will do is laugh at how staggeringly bad Wormald's performance is. Julianne Hough, the female lead, at least attempts to act. She comes close to a breakthrough in more than one instance, but she comes off a bit too amateur for her own good. She makes a great dance partner for Wormald, but for what little shred of chemistry she has, it is made totally moot when he opens his mouth.

What redeems the film from being the awful travesty it should be is Teller's performance as Willard. The moment he walks on-screen, he has an energy to him that is simply unmatchable. He is the single best thing about the film, embodying the innocence, spirit and fun of Chris Penn's original performance. If you venture into this remake, see it for him and ignore the rest. You may find some remotely enjoyable experience buried in there somewhere.

4/10.

What was the point? The director just went through and removed all the good stuff from the first movie. The original is based on events which took place in Elmore City, OK and yes, they banned dancing. It's hard for today's teens to fathom how religious the 80s were, which might be why they can't grasp a movie like this. You can't make a modern remake of this movie because today's kids aren't suffocating under this type of extreme religiosity. In the original, the ban is on dancing, including a teen prom. The kids are only being reasonable to protest this. In this remake, the ban is on "lewd and lascivious dancing" which the teens think they have a right to perform in the streets.

In the original, Ren is an old soul. After his father dies, Ren and his mother must shack with his uncle, moving Ren from Chicago to a tiny town where dancing is banned. Instead of making things more difficult for his mother, Ren tries to fit in and treats everyone politely and respectfully, which results in him being bullied by the small towners. He even tolerates this and tries to play by their rules, never once pointing out the obvious insults a typical obnoxious city teen would have for the rural folks.

In this remake, Ren is instead that typical bratty teen, thinking an accident of birth makes him better than everyone, and greeting practically the entire town with the insult that they are hicks. Despite this, the town isn't even that small and is actually multicultural, and the kids dance to hip hop! The only issue the kids face is that their parents don't want them bumping and grinding too suggestively to it! Yeah, that's Ren's issue. His parents are dead, but that's his issue. Even the judge in this town had long hair as a teen, and Ren's uncle reminds him of this, to justify Ren blasting the town with noise pollution.

In the original, Ren must struggle to please an unreasonable uncle who blames him for things he didn't do, while this uncle has Ren's back before even asking him if he's guilty. Ren basically has no real struggles to speak of, yet he does a lot of whining anyway. We are supposed to sympathize enough over the loss of his parents to support him humping his girlfriend openly in the streets. The uncle thinks his little girls (and all little girls) should be exposed to this. Ren even declares to the adults that "as kids, its our job to do stupid things", yet he doesn't expand on what the jobs of adults might be.

Ariel's father protests not so much because he's a pastor, but because he maintains some shred of hope that his daughter is still a virgin, but when she informs her father that she's not, and Ren informs her father that his daughter is a slut, the pastor gives up and accepts that he will be a grandfather soon. Ren's revelation that Ariel is already hot for his bod means she should be allowed to dance lewd and become a teen mother.

In the original, the pastor and Ren finally bond because the pastor lost his son and Ren lost his father. Ren cleverly uses Bible verses to make his point at the town meeting, because it is the only way to convince a highly religious town that bases all of their rules on the Bible. He does this because he is a wise, respectful young man who isn't paranoid of a little studying. In the remake "sir, your daughter is already a slut" is the extent of Ren's argument to the pastor, yet it is (apparently) oddly persuasive.

This movie is just laughably bad, so much so that even people who can't quite explain why it's laughably bad still know that it is.

I love the original and was really excited to see this remake. I was very disappointed. They copied the original, just added cell phones and CD's and a few modern dance moves. Same soundtrack, just a hint modernized, I'm pretty sure even some of the lines were exactly the same. There was nothing creative or original about this movie.

You know that feeling where you see an actor/actress in a certain role and then you see them in another movie and it's like they were told to keep the same character but the film's setting is so completely different and all you can think is 'no, this is wrong, this just doesn't work'. It's exactly what I thought while watching this film but instead of the character(s) being wrong it felt like the whole movie was wrong.

I would have even accepted it if the only thing they kept was the basic concept and redesigned the rest from scratch. But they played it too safe and ended up with a copy instead of a fresh film.

That said if you've never seen the original Footloose it's alright.

The original Footloose was a little film with a debatable script and a little budget. But contrary to all expectations was quite successful across the globe and became with time a cult movie and that thanks to the infectious music, dance routines quite impressive for the time, but most of all to a brilliant casting, believable and very suitable to their roles. Same thing that happened to Dirty Dancing. So take the original cast, the music and the novelty of the dance routines away from the equation and what is left is a very forgettable film with very unmemorable music, very ordinary dance routine and with a cast that makes you miss the old one every step of the way. Who was the guy playing the main role? I can't even remember his face that much mediocre he was and what about the leading lady, with no depth what so ever, painfully bad actors both with no chemistry between them. Do we need to equal the tension between the unassuming sex appeal of Kevin Bacon in that role and the irresistibly attractive vulnerability brought to the role by Lori Singer? Was it a not intentional carrier suicide taking up roles that are so vividly embedded in people memories? Was it? Well, I feel I need to mention, the countryman friend role, that in the original was so adorably played by Chris Penn, the guy who played the same part is such a poor takeoff, a caricature and his girlfriend…a bubbly full of energy Sara Jessica Parker against a very dull actress there to fill space and nothing more. Even the original father and mother role (the preacher and his wife) were far more engaging at the point that you could see their point of view and sympathize, the original roles were played by John Lithgow and Dianne Weist, (believable even as a loving couple) in this new version played by Dennis Quaid and Andy MacDowell , that I usually really like, here they fell flat unable to be convincing in their role as troubled preacher and over concern but very tender and caring father and as the effectual moderator, sweet but strong mother as it was in the original. I'm sorry but would this film be an original it could be only regarded as a mediocre film, being a remake of a little delightful cult film is a very sorry version, terrible, not recommended unless you watch it on television and want something boring to doze off.

I don't understand why we need to remake great movies. this movie sucks. Stay with the original. I was disappointed in the music. I am happy that a few of the original songs were in it. one song was changed and sang different. That was horrible. The songs and dance scenes needed to be the way it was in the original movie. I understand that it is a 2011 version of the movie but I think too many things were changed. I am not knocking the actors in any way. they are great actors and amazing dancers. I am just not a fan of the movie it self. the actors are amazingly talented. I am just not a big fan of remakes. The movie had too many changes.

I was a teen when the original movie came out, and I also live near Lehi, Utah where it was filmed which made me think fondly of the movie whenever I drove by the Lehi Roller Mills. (Today it is a sprawling metropolis, resembling little of the sleepy little town like in the movie.) When I heard another pointless remake was coming out, I decided to give it the Redbox treatment instead of completely boycotting it.

After watching it with my wife who had never seen the original, I was able to say, "Not so bad, but pointless as a remake." Most of the original music (which I still love) was recycled into something recognizable but not lovable. The scenes played out nearly identical to the original but with different actors. The whole way through it, I had the feeling that the director was watching the original on a hand-held device, then turned to the actors and said, "I have an idea for this next scene." If I recall correctly, even the dialog where it wasn't modernized with MP3 players (instead of cassette players) and cell phones (instead of...what the heck did we have?) was word for word.

Usually remakes are for big block busters where today's technology and special effects can outshine the feeble attempts of the past and make a great story better by sucking the audience in. This movie had none of that, and in summary, became another pointless Hollywood rehash for quick cash. The only improvement I could acknowledge was a sub-plot that explained Ren's actions a little better, but it was still not an excuse to remake a classic.

My advice: watch the original. It's much better.

This remake of the timeless, Kevin Bacon starring classic doesn't even make you want to tap your foot or even dance to the beat. No, it might make you want to get up and leave instead of get up and dance.

A fantastic director, Craig Brewer made some of the most gritty and beautifully made dramas that involve a main character, played by an African American, that has some sort of inner conflict, as well as conflict with everyday life. A great example of this is his movie "Hustle and Flow" which holds a 7.4 rating on IMDb and an 84% on rottentomatoes.com. Another great film of his is the somewhat well known movie "Black Snake Moan." Again, it involves an African American with an inner conflict and outer conflict in a gritty, edgy, dramatic setting.

But, what about Footloose? Why was it so bad?

Brewer's worst film, in my opinion, didn't work for me. Specifically, his attempts at making a remake of the 80's dance flick just didn't make me want to get up and dance. It was boring, unreal, and just didn't work for me.

But, what else could have made me give this movie a 2 out of 10?

Brewer tried to branch out and failed miserably. He wasn't himself doing this film and didn't show any parallels from his gritty dramas to this family-friendly, "funny" flick. The only thing I was laughing at was the fact that it was a terrible film. In no way, shape, or form would it make me want to watch the original film (if I had seen this before the original). Non-believable acting, terrible dancing scenes, and trying to be 50's-esque and integrate modern day conveniences, this movie just doesn't bust a move for me.

So, simply put, I'll put this in pros and cons.

Pros: >Dennis Quaid did a pretty good job in the film. His acting was sub-par, but not fantastic. >Ren and Ariel were pretty good, in the dancing scenes. It was nice to see actual dancers playing dancers. >The setting was nice and very simplistic, yet somewhat believable.

Cons: >The acting was not believable in the least bit. The dancing, however, was somewhat good. >Not like the original at all. Too much going on. >Dennis Quaid, although doing a pretty good job acting, was not the right guy to play the reverend. >Dancing was a bit too flamboyant. >The only good parts of the film were the fight scenes and the credits. >Ren did not look, at all, like Kevin Bacon and did not act like him at all.

For all you fans of this movie and look at my other reviews, please do not judge the book by its cover. Yes, it might seem that I like horror movies and the fact that I think that every film, except for horror and comedy films are crap, I do not think that. And, don't take into account that I am a guy therefore I think all dance flicks are terrible. I am open to ALL films and this one just wasn't in the cut for me.

So, all in all, the remake of Footloose is, quite possibly, Brewer's worst film. I hope that Brewer will learn to stay away from dance flicks and lean more towards gritty dramas that involve an African American lead role.

In 1984 Kevin Bacon starred in Footloose. It was not a great movie, but it was a fun movie that started a nice career. Now there is the remake. Remakes have a bad habit of tearing a treasured movie down and making a terrible movie in it's place. This is so true of this version of Footloose. It starts with all the bad remakes of 80's songs--why not just use the original artists rather than a terrible singer trying to sing. Like we need some bad singer remake Bonnie Tyler or Kenny Loggins. Next Julianne Hough may be able to dance and sing, but she was the absolute wrong choice for the lead actress. She is not an actress and her money may get her some roles, but she is one of those bad actresses that became popular in another genre that quickly disappears. My biggest disappointment is Dennis Quaid. What is happening with him? I was a big Quaid fan, but he is now making bad movies. He needs to reevaluate his decisions and either take roles for a man his age that have substance or retire from film.

The only real reason to pay any attention at all to the new Footloose is to watch the music video for the terrific Big and Rich song "Fake ID." Other than that, there is little appeal in the film, as it shamelessly recycles almost every scene, event, and line from its original counterpart, and the ones it doesn't, it modifies for an audience that is questionably existent. If there's anything the film made me do, it made me seriously contemplate what a "remake" actually is and what their inherent goal is. To make the original material better? Make the story more current? Give it a stronger, more contemporary feel and look? If those questions were considered during the making of the Footloose remake, they weren't considered for very long. This is a stale, unimaginably boring picture, with its first real problem being it is trying to make an immensely dated story of music and dancing banishment current and relatable to teenagers of the present. In a time where vulgar rap by artists named "Chief Keef," "Juicy J," and "Wiz Khalifa" can be found on the iPods of teens in schools and they can get away with it, I highly doubt teens will be able to resonate with playing Kenny Loggins or Quiet Riot a bit too loud.

The original Footloose at least had the benefit of being a film with a contemporary issue to its time and the appeal of its lead, Kevin Bacon. Granted watching it now is like dusting off a C-grade vinyl that barely functions, it at least had the ability to give the student body a voice and a personality as they tried to keep their freedom to play rock music (please say this out loud) alive and well. The new Footloose, however, is like that guy randomly wearing acid-washed jeans in public in 2013; random, out of place, and questionable beyond belief.

The story hasn't changed at all; we center our sites on the small town of Bomont, Georgia, that has been musically silenced since reverend Shaw Moore (Dennis Quaid) pressured the city council to ban music and dancing after loud music "resulted" in the deaths of five teenagers driving late at night. I say "resulted" because the cause of death was more of teenage stupidity. The pop music blaring on the radio at the time had little effect.

Ten years after this horrendous legislation, Bostonian teenager Ren McCormack (Kenny Wormald) waltzes into town and experiences a culture shock when he realizes that, hey, not only do people who live in other towns have different lifestyles than himself, but music is frowned upon in this tight-nit community. However, that doesn't stop Moore's rebellious daughter Ariel (Julianne Hough), who can often be found batting her bubbly blue eyes and shaking her bouncy backside in no mans land areas deep in the outskirts of town along with dozens of other teens.

Right off the bat, Moore isn't fond of the way Ren behaves. His attitude is smarmy and purposefully instigating, and the thought that he is a teen with something to say unnerves him greatly. The remainder of the film amplifies this conflict between them, as well as trying to make a bold statement that teenagers are supposed to be reckless, dumb, and the driving force behind many mistakes.

This conflict between Ren and "the man" leads all the way to the city council, where Ren tries to use Bible verses to sway the entire council (including Moore) to allow music and public dancing to be etched back in Bomont's society. He states that people in biblical times danced for God and Jesus, leaping and ecstatically celebrating them with the art of movement. Okay. I'm sure when Ariel is gyrating and shaking her blue-jean short-shorts in front of every guy in a vacant field she definitely has our lord and savior in mind. Same with Ren; I'm sure when he got down in the crowded saloon for line dancing or when him and several others fight the gang of bullies during a school dance at the end of the film, they all had God and Jesus in their hearts and minds. You couldn't fool a maroon with your logic.

Director Craig Brewer (Black Snake Moan and Hustle and Flow - two films that wouldn't even be on the same shelf as Footloose in ANY category, list, arrangement, etc) doesn't even offer any pleasing attributes to this film stylistically, albeit some good choreography. Other than maybe a few good scenes involving a large production number and several dozen dancers, the film's redone music, contemporary atmosphere, updated production, and caricature-driven cast seems like an act of indolence, if anything. I had a hard time admiring the original Footloose, but credited it for being something of a time-staple, even if it doesn't hold up well in present time. It's hard to credit the new Footloose at all, since its very existence is perplexing.

Starring: Kenny Wormald, Julianne Hough, Andie MacDowell, and Dennis Quaid. Directed by: Craig Brewer.

The 80s version had more energy and focus. This remake was a bit lacking in impact. The story is similar to the original but here the obstacles felt contrived especially the confrontations with the trashy boyfriend. Dennis Quaid and Andie Macdowell looked like they would rather be elsewhere.

The group dancing and modern street style dancing isn't well choreographed and isn't exciting. Too much was done as a group and not enough emotionally interesting pairings.

The casting was hit and miss. Kenny Wormald isn't handsome enough for the lead even though he is a good dancer. Julianna Hough is very lovely though her dancing wan't showcased well. It couldn't have amounted to more than a few minutes.

Overall not a must see.

I had such high hopes for this movie. I was excited by the beginning, tragic explanation of what happened to make the townsfolk think it was a good idea to create a string of very strict laws. That's where the excitement ended. Aside from a few entertaining scenes, i.e. Willard learning how to dance with a bunch of cute little girls, it was one confused "Seriously!?!" moment after another.

In trying to stay true the the original, they made it laughably bad. If you're going to do a remake, make it original so it isn't compared so closely to the original. I heard the exact same lines, said with less feeling and horribly off timing. I saw great scenes replaced with ridiculous substitutions, like riding a tractor 20 feet to the buses they were about to race. I was devastated to hear how the songs from the original soundtrack had been thrown into a blender and murdered mercilessly, like "I Need a Hero" being made into an ultra-slow ballad.

And the dancing... come on people. The story is supposed to be about regular teenagers dancing to their music their way. Have you ever been to a dance club to see how teenagers dance? Have you ever seen a bunch of kids dancing their asses off with the music coming from car speakers at a park in New York? I have. The drive-in scene was close, but as far as I'm concerned, Wormald used way too many Broadway moves for these scenes to be believable.

As for the acting, I think Hough did slightly better than Singer, but Wormald was not nearly so memorable as Kevin Bacon was, especially when he was speaking to the town council. However, Miles Teller did do an excellent job of playing the slightly goofy, lovable Willard. Dennis Quaid was definitely not the right choice to play a preacher, but I loved Ray McKinnon and Kim Dickens as Ren's aunt and uncle. They were great.

Bottom Line - If they hadn't tried so hard to stick to the original, if they hadn't butchered the original music so thoroughly, and if they hadn't cast dancers as actors, it would have been much, much better.

Full disclosure time: I saw the original 1984 version at the now-defunct Cinema 8 multiplex at the also-now defunct Bon Marche Mall (the buildings have been renovated into other places) and I remember enjoying it very much at the one time I watched it in its entirety. I had also bought the soundtrack LP album beforehand and had highly enjoyed that several times as a teenager. Then there were also videos of several of its hits like Deniece Williams' "Let's Hear It for the Boy", Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out for a Hero", and Kenny Loggins' title song which consisted mainly of clips of Kevin Bacon's (or his dance double's) movements. So it was with all that in mind that I saw this remake with an open head. The verdict: I still had a good time though my excitement factor wasn't as overwhelming perhaps because of my fond memories of the original and some of the changes didn't seem necessary. Still, having the actor Miles Teller playing the same role done by Chris Penn nearly 30 years before in learning to dance and enjoying himself as a result was still a highlight in both versions. And former "Dancing with the Stars" pro Julianne Hough shows some chops in reenacting the Lori Singer role. And while Kenny Wormald won't make you forget Bacon in his iconic role, he's not too bad either. And the same goes for Dennis Quaid playing the John Lithgow part. So on that note, this version of Footloose is recommended.

Have you seen it? No? There is likely a very good reason for that...it stinks.

Like nearly ALL the endless remakes and reboots that have been plaguing movie goers for the past decade or so....all this is, is a heartless version of the original.

It has no heart.

It has no soul.

It is a retelling of a film that we all love and cherish...and it adds nothing to the story. It improves nothing but the special effects--which held up very well over time--and in some cases belittles the fans of the original...particularly in the fact that they remade the movie at all, without adding anything clever to it.

Like so many other remakes it is a hallow shell of the original.

Last night, me and my siblings were surfing around Netflix looking for something to watch. We found the 2011 remake of Footloose and thought, "Eh, what the heck?" So we watched it.

Biggest mistake ever.

This movie is not only a pointless remake of a hallowed cinematic classic, it's just boring as a stand-alone movie. The film offered no redeeming qualities - none whatsoever. Even the dance sequences left me groaning and begging for the original (After completing the film, I went to YouTube and purged the old one out of me by watching the dance scenes from the original).

In particular, Kenny Wormald as Ren was singularly a bad choice. His performance left me wishing for Kevin Bacon (who, ironically, recently appeared on the Tonight Show for a comedic reprisal of his Footloose role). At one point, my father walked by and commented, "He looks like a ventriloquist dummy!"

Julianne Hough was also terrible as Ariel. She lacked the flirty, fun, mystery revolving around the original character. Her performance was dry, and her emotions were faked.

One of the worst parts about this movie was Dennis Quaid as the pastor. His performance left me literally crying in agony. I have never seen such a terrible reprisal of a role. He was dry, stereotypical, and lacked all the emotion of John Lithgow's original character.

Probably one of this film's only redeeming qualities was Willard, played by Miles Teller. In his surprisingly endearing performance, Miles Teller puts forth at least a decent acting effort.

Not much else good can be said about this film update. If you get the itch for a good dance movie, this is NOT the one for you. Better to find and watch the classic original and not bother

Pro: They added a slightly more emotional back story and had more finality to said issues. Ariel was played by an attractive woman rather that a tall 12 year old boy in a bad wig. The character of Willard could really dance, rather than learn to simply shake his hands and chest bump, and the learning to dance sequence was amusingly horrendous rather too embarrassing to watch. They actually managed to cast someone who makes Sarah Jessica Parker look attractive by comparison. The people Ren lives with are loving and supportive rather than judgmental. The dancing was overall quite impressive.

Con: The acting was absolutely terrible. Even the professional actors seemed to be asleep at the switch. They kept in far too many of the original lines to save it from being compared to the original, but none of the lines kept were said in a believable way. The whole point of a remake is to improve on it, not take memorable parts and ruin it. Im fine with adding new music despite the wonderful original soundtrack, but they at times played songs in the wrong places, and almost all of the remixes were terrible. The only one that didn't make me want to hit mute was "Almost Paradise" because it took out the 80s cliché sound the original had. Also, they kept in that horrid maroon tux.

I already talked about the musical in my original review so I will not talk about it here or at least try not to or say stuff that I forgot. But seriously, I think I am the only one who agrees with Roger Ebert that the first one was bad, but the remake is bad also. But the difference is, I hate the remake even more. This might be the worst remake of all time and you will not understand the reasoning for this so I will try to explain to my very best.

ITS THE SAME MOVIE. ONLY DONE WORST.

I know a remake is suppose to be faithful to the original, but the first movie I wasn't a fan of and a lot of people weren't a fan of back then. So it would be best if they fixed these errors from the first movie and make the remake superior. BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! We have to have the same movie that feels like you have been assaulted and the movie actual gave me physical pain from watching it.

What scenes are still there but done worse? The Tractor Scene is replaced with Driving Race Cars, The smacking and assault of Ariel scenes are more cringe worthy to watch, the drug scene is absolutely worse in all ways, the town hall scene is word for word. You get the point? THEY WERE TOO FAITHFUL!

The songs are worse. Footloose is now a horrible country song ruined by Blake Shelton making the finale very hard to watch... and that's all I remember still.

The casting is OK for the most part. But they got the worst person to play the Reverend, DENNIS FREAKING QUAID. UGH I HATE HIM SO MUCH. WHY?! He always has the same >:I face on every single movie he is in. Why couldn't you gave the Reverend to some newcomer instead of this guy!? But enough of that.

I mean, I have never seen such a horrible remake in my life. They changed nothing. NOTHING! But it still made money because of a cult following. Do we want more remakes of bad films to come because of this? Like a Flashdance Remake, A Magical Mystery Tour Remake? Then please! I can't stop you. But I can only warn people about this.

To quote Roger Ebert: "...The film's message is: A bad movie, if faithfully remade, will produce another bad movie."

Amen.

22/100 D-

This movie sucked big time! They remixed all of the songs from the original for no reason and it sucked so bad! I almost wanted to throw up after seeing it. The dancing is just so embarrassing and it basically craps all over the original. I'm so appalled that this movie has a rating higher than a one. It sucks so bad it should of been rated the worst remake in the history of remakes! I would much rather see somebody suffering a horrible death than ever watch this film again. I feel embarrassed to be called a human being because this film shows how stupid we all are! We let this happen and now there's no hope. If aliens come down from space and see this movie they will probably look at us as if we are the dumbest living thing on the planet! This movie is the reason an apocalypse should happen! Overall the film sucks so bad I rated it a -1,000,000,000,000 out of 10 because it is the absolute worst movie ever made!

The previews looked terrible but I wanted to like it and thought maybe it would be fun fluff. Nope. The original, '80s version wasn't rocket science but it was fun and sweet with great music and was loved by kids and adults. My mom played the soundtrack all the time. The premise of the original was taken with a grain of salt. In the remake they try to focus on the premise by getting all dramatic and emotional which just makes the fact that dancing is outlawed outrageous and comical. Not to mention, why would they outlaw dancing for drinking and driving? That's rather far fetched. In the original both Ren and Ariel had problems...but they seemed to deal with them like any other teen, with trademark angst, so, you could identify with them and like them. In the remake they have therapy kind of anger and issues that I could not identify with and the script failed to make the characters sympathetic, so, I didn't care about them. Ren was more just angry and a bit of a jerk (though, lesser in the sense that they added much bigger jerks to this film, I suppose in an attempt to make him more likable, though, that failed), and Ariel was also angry, reckless, slutty, bratty, and made her best friend angry...what is to like about that? In the original, Kevin Bacon was cute and charming and a leader. In this one Ren is kind of dorky, has a weird Boston accent that comes in and out, brooding, and everyone in the film is angry, rebellious and breaking the law of dancing so there is no real reason for Ren to even be in this film other than to add to the mix. He doesn't stand out in anyway, he just seems like some random face in the crowd trying to get through school so he can grow up to be an angry adult who works as a mechanic or something.

In the original there was a great pop soundtrack which worked and held the film together and made it fun. In this one there is country, hip hop and rock? None of it holds together as one working piece, kind of jumps you around, and doesn't give you any sense of the film. I mean, pick a freakin' theme. Just one.

In the original it was just a bunch of kids who liked to dance. In this film apparently everyone in a small Southern town is a professional dancer and likes to create synchronized line dancing to '80s songs. In the original you felt for their plight because the rules put upon them were ridiculous and Ariel was reckless because she felt pent up by the rules. In this version they were doing the exact same things that got them into trouble in the first place. There was no change, it was just illegal so they weren't really pent up and acting out. Anywhere in America it is illegal for minors to drink but minors get together in field parties and house parties, anyway. And, realistically, you could get a ticket for playing your music too loud and disturbing the peace. It just depends on the cop. Also, of course if a father sees his daughter behaving in a slutty manner with some new boy he's not going to want her to see him and will probably ground her. So, the point of this films is void. In the original the point was the rules were ridiculous and the parents were over the top. In this film they're mostly just being parents.

Also, Ren vandalized the placer where he works?? Not only is he an idiot but clearly he likes to 'cause trouble. He seems more like someone who is going to end up in jail than someone who is going to be a hero and make a difference in a town.

Clearly this is just a film where someone was trying to profit off the 'Step Up' success and use an old, popular brand to try to draw a crowd. Why not just let the film survive on its own rather than trying to meld some weird country and hip hop world together. It just seemed forced, calculated, ridiculous and unrealistic. If most of the film seems ridiculous and unrealistic you lose the point in watching it. I really get the sense that the writers don't have much point of reference of the world other than living in Los Angeles and watched a bunch of episodes of 'Gossip Girl' so they could understand the teen plight and how they interact, then thew a country hillbilly meets Boston spin on it. Considering, in a lot of small towns the kids are still fairly innocent and polite, it would have been easy to stick to the original film rather than try to make this an 'updated' film where all kids are angry, bratty and doing pretty much everything to make a parents cringe. Why would anyone like, admire or want to be those kids?

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.

I watched this yesterday. I am a huge fan of the original.

They cast Kenny Wormald as Ren. High school student really 27 but looks 35. Then they cast Julianne Hough as Ariel. High school student really 27 has so many wrinkles she looks 40.

Dennis Quaid and Andie MacDowell their parts were so boring you almost don't even notice them in the movie.

The acting is really bad Julianne Hough is the worst everything seems forced from her her and Kenny wormald just don't have anything between them nothing you don't even feel like they connect at all. I did finish this movie what a waste of my time.

Rent the original instead!

I would assume the director of this movie has never visited a country town before.This movie is such an insult to the original,it's hard to know where to begin.So let's just sum it up,a group of stripper/ho's pretend to be from a strict country town.The worst and UGLYIST (rusty)actors and actress mess up not only the movie but also the music and the whole point of the movie. The original footloose was the 1st movie that the soundtrack was recorded just for that movie.I know it is suppose to be a future version but the story line is completely lost.I feel for those folks who paid $20 at the theaters,I paid $5 on cable and I want my money back.

I just finished watching that remake of Footloose. What a crap movie. The acting was horrible and they messed up the soundtrack, made it all country boo hiss lame! I love country music but it didn't belong in that movie! Horrible waste of time! I can't believe how bad the acting was. The lead couldn't act her way out of a paper bag! The story at the beginning is what drew me in but as the movie went further on, so did any good that this movie could have brought. Terrible and what a waste of time! They fell far from the original script. I can't say anything good about the actors because they were all so misplaced in the movie. The actor that played the reverend was so unwatchable and so unconvincing! He should have never been cast as that role.

I found the remake of Footloose thoroughly enjoyable. Granted, I wasn't around when the original was released and don't have the attachment to it of teens of that time, but I appreciated this movie. It may not have had the best acting as the original or carried the same weight, but it was a feel-good movie that put a smile on a my face. It had amazing dance sequences and great music that left me dancing out of the theater. Kenny Wormald and Julianne Hough brought a certain airy feeling to the film that was missing from the original, and their chemistry-- especially on the dance floor--was palpable. I think that it was a perfect movie for my generation who didn't grow up watching the original.

I have not seen the original so I'm basing my opinion on just this film, and it was awful. First Julianna Hough and Kenny Wormald are horrible actors. Yes, they can dance, but giving them speaking parts equals bad idea. Second, a movie about dancing should have a great sound trak and this one was terrible. The only good song was Footloose, which of course is from the original. There's also some kind of rap/dance song in which Hough looks like a slut. I mean, she is supposed to play a high school girl, and she is wiggling all over these guys very suggestively, it's just gross and inappropriate for a movie aimed at teens. Lastly, the plot is nonexistent. It's about a town that has banned dancing. Can anyone say snooze fest.

FINAL VERDICT: Not worth anyone's time.