My bruises have bruises. I'm blaming the cheerleading. Review writing is a whole lot less dangerous....
My bruises have bruises. I'm blaming the cheerleading. Review writing is a whole lot less dangerous.
Member since:08.07.2001
Reviews:593
Members who trust:255
Centre Stage: Turn It Up is a sequel in the loosest sense of the word. Though it shares a name with the quite successful 2000 film Centre Stage, as with the follow ups to the cheerleader flick Bring It On, similarities to the original are limited. There's a new cast, a new setting, a new story line. In other words, it's a completely new film, but they hope that by linking it in name at least to the first film, you might be more likely to see it. That's not necessarily true for me as I will watch any dancing film that gets released, but it did raise my expectations somewhat since I was such a fan of the original. This is a film only review of what was a straight-to-DVD release in the UK. The DVD can currently be bought on Amazon for £7.98 but I would expect the price to fall pretty quickly to below £5.
The first Centre Stage film was set at the American Ballet Academy, a fictitious school in New York City. It followed a group of friends who had just joined the academy during the highs and lows of their dance training and the effects it had on their personal lives. In Turn It Up, we meet Kate Parker, a teenager whose heart is set on joining the ABA, despite not having had any formal dance training for many years. She has been improving her technique by taping and scrutinising televised performances, which is rather far-fetched to say the least, and not only because
I know no one in the dance field who actually likes watching a production on TV - it is NOTHING like watching a live show. So, Kate leaves Detroit to audition for the ABA...and fails to get in. At this point the original film and this sequel start to become stories in their own right, because although she stays in NYC, Kate never sets foot in the ABA again.
The only two characters from the original movie who crop up again in this sequel are the director of the academy, Jonathan Reeves, and one of its former stars, Cooper Nielson. How does this work, since Kate never becomes a student at the Academy? Well, as is the cliché with so many dancing films, she has a 'special' friend with whom things subsequently get complicated...and handily he didn't fail his audition. This provides an interesting angle for the film - they want to keep the ABA in it somehow, so rather than just following Kate with her struggles to keep dancing, they also track Tommy during some of his day to day dealings with the Academy. The contrast between the bright shiny studios Tommy gets to dance in, and the dark, sticky-floored clubs Kate is stuck with is clear, but the two continue their relationship with little in the way of jealousy for the other's life.
The story is not all that original, and predictable in parts - after all, say the words 'Open Audition' and isn't the first thing that pops into your mind the opportunity for an underling finally to get her chance to show the world what she can do? That said, I did enjoy the film, more than I had thought I would for a sequel. Kate and Tommy are played by talented dancers and average actors, which is better than the other way around, as I hate it when they blatantly cut to a stunt double for the tricky footwork. They are attractive without being the Hollywood idea of beauty, and again, there is a clear difference between dark and sometimes brooding Kate, and the chirpy, blond thing that was Jody Sawyer, the female lead in the first film.
One thing is dislike in the world of movies is dark films. I don't mean horror films (though I'm not a huge fan) but literally those movies where lots of the scenes are shot in dark places, as when you're watching them on a laptop, you either have to adjust the screen angle or keep fiddling with the colour settings. This is unfortunately one of those films, and they keep switching from day time shots to night club ones, which annoyed me a little and made me wonder whether the dim lighting might have something to do with the quality of the dance moves.
For dancing fans, this movie will not disappoint as it contains a decent amount of technique, mainly ballet but with some hip-hop/jazz thrown in too. Rather strangely though, Kate and Tommy are good, but not jaw-droppingly amazing. Sure, they're better than I ever was, but then I never auditioned for the Royal Ballet School. It interests me when films show audition scenes and the person the judges choose is not any better, in my opinion, than the others they show. I understand why they might be limited in terms of finding a cast who can dance and act convincingly, but I never quite get why they don't make up the extras with people whose technique is not as good, so you do at least see why the ones who get chosen get chosen. In the original Centre Stage I loved the final performance which went on for some time, but had me hooked. There is no similar number here, as though there is a final performance it is shorter and less-inspired than in the first movie.
There is a formula for dance films, and this does follow it rather. Think Save The Last Dance, A Time For Dancing, that hideously awful The Company, the original Centre Stage and so on. You need a couple of leads (usually boy/girl, but best friends will do). You need a struggle that only those with true dedication can overcome (think inter-racial relationships, a devastating terminal illness, even a weight problem). You often need some kind of loss that inspired you to dance in the first place, or keep dancing now (the death of a parent is always a good one). You preferably need a troubled romantic relationship or two, and it will invariably involve people from different social or economic backgrounds. Most of the time you need someone who doesn't understand the passion their loved one has for dancing, but will probably come around at some point when they finally see what the dancer is capable of. This film has all of these elements, but is not as cheesy as it could have been, despite the emphasis on pursuing your goals, never giving up and so on. The storyline itself is not outstanding (or original), but the dancing makes up for this, and overall leaves you with a very watchable film if you like this sort of thing. At an hour and a half, it is a good length, and well worth part of an evening when it next pops up on TV.
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
Production Year: 2004 - Drama - Director: Nick Cassavetes - Original Language: English - Classification: 15 years and over, 12 years and over - Starring: Rachel McAdams, Ryan Gosling, Gena Rowlands