"No son of mine is going to tap dance for a living!" "When I tap, I feel I can do anything!" "You're mad! MAD! People just don't TAP that way!" "But don't you SEE? Tapping isn't just about steel-tipped shoes, it's about LIFE!" "This is our chance to DO something! This is our chance to make a difference!" "I love you!" "I love you, too!" "People just aren't ready for your kind of tap!" "I don't care! I'll show them. I'll show them all!"
Okay, so I'm making these lines up. (It's amazing how quickly they come to you, once you let them.) But if these particular lines don't appear in "Bootmen", I suspect it's due to an oversight. They might as well. And I remember an "I love you" line, which, in context - there's nothing wrong with the three words per se - may well be the most embarrassing thing Sophie Lee has ever been called upon to say.
Wanna hear a rich irony? Sean tries out his first-draft choreography on his performers, and one of them says (and I paraphrase), "Look - I know why this isn't working. It's just a collection of the same old tap routines that have been done a thousand times before. We're doing them funny hats, that's all." Sean sees the light and comes up with something NEW. He uses the SOUL of the steelworks to come up with a fresh, vibrant, STEELY kind of tap... I don't know why I'm being sarcastic; this is exactly what he should be doing. The irony is that "Bootmen" is exactly the same kind of let's-put-on-a-show movie that's been done a thousand times before. It's just a new kind of show. Granted, working class tap dancing may be fresh - although we aren't allowed to get a sense of its freshness - but none of this freshness or vigour seems to have infected the rest of the film.
About that comment (I'm not sure whether or not it's an actual line from the film) - "It's been done a thousand times before"... this is never a fair criticism by itself, any more than "It will be done a thousand times in the future" is. The trouble with "Bootmen" is that it's stale, in the way that some bread is stale. You don't have to research the history of a stale loaf of bread to tell that there's something wrong with it; nor do you have to look at other loaves of bread. The badness of stale bread is intrinsic to the loaf. If "Bootmen" had been the only let's-put-on-a-show film ever made, it would STILL be stale. Every bit as stale. (Or, to look at it from another angle, if "The Full Monty" and "In the Bleak Midwinter" and "Singin' in the Rain" and "Topsy-Turvy" had each had a dozen almost indistinguishable clones, they would still be every bit as fresh. But, alas, I was talking about "Bootmen"...)
Here's all you need to know... Every second of screen time falls into one of three categories: (1) the dance routines themselves, which are there for their own sake; (2) the backstage preparation; (3) all that personal relationships stuff, and my, isn't there a lot of it. -Actually, I need to subdivide (1) - there's (1a), the few minutes of actual performed dance at the end, and (1b), the impromptu dance routines that people break into at such naturalistic prompts as, "Show us what ya got". Now here's the rundown. (1b) is fun. (1a) less so. (2) is poorly done, but not actually painful. But as for (3) ... boy, do we have to cringe our way through (3).
Okay, so I'm making these lines up. (It's amazing how quickly they come to you, once you let them.) But if these particular lines don't appear in "Bootmen", I suspect it's due to an oversight. They might as well. And I remember an "I love you" line, which, in context - there's nothing wrong with the three words per se - may well be the most embarrassing thing Sophie Lee has ever been called upon to say.
Wanna hear a rich irony? Sean tries out his first-draft choreography on his performers, and one of them says (and I paraphrase), "Look - I know why this isn't working. It's just a collection of the same old tap routines that have been done a thousand times before. We're doing them funny hats, that's all." Sean sees the light and comes up with something NEW. He uses the SOUL of the steelworks to come up with a fresh, vibrant, STEELY kind of tap... I don't know why I'm being sarcastic; this is exactly what he should be doing. The irony is that "Bootmen" is exactly the same kind of let's-put-on-a-show movie that's been done a thousand times before. It's just a new kind of show. Granted, working class tap dancing may be fresh - although we aren't allowed to get a sense of its freshness - but none of this freshness or vigour seems to have infected the rest of the film.
About that comment (I'm not sure whether or not it's an actual line from the film) - "It's been done a thousand times before"... this is never a fair criticism by itself, any more than "It will be done a thousand times in the future" is. The trouble with "Bootmen" is that it's stale, in the way that some bread is stale. You don't have to research the history of a stale loaf of bread to tell that there's something wrong with it; nor do you have to look at other loaves of bread. The badness of stale bread is intrinsic to the loaf. If "Bootmen" had been the only let's-put-on-a-show film ever made, it would STILL be stale. Every bit as stale. (Or, to look at it from another angle, if "The Full Monty" and "In the Bleak Midwinter" and "Singin' in the Rain" and "Topsy-Turvy" had each had a dozen almost indistinguishable clones, they would still be every bit as fresh. But, alas, I was talking about "Bootmen"...)
Here's all you need to know... Every second of screen time falls into one of three categories: (1) the dance routines themselves, which are there for their own sake; (2) the backstage preparation; (3) all that personal relationships stuff, and my, isn't there a lot of it. -Actually, I need to subdivide (1) - there's (1a), the few minutes of actual performed dance at the end, and (1b), the impromptu dance routines that people break into at such naturalistic prompts as, "Show us what ya got". Now here's the rundown. (1b) is fun. (1a) less so. (2) is poorly done, but not actually painful. But as for (3) ... boy, do we have to cringe our way through (3).