Just when you thought it was safe to go back on the dance floor...

There's an old saying: It takes two to tango.


I'm not (just) bringing that up because the Step Up franchise is all about the dancing; I'm bringing it up because the Step Up franchise is, well... a franchise. And you really can't have a franchise with only one film.


Actually, I'm not even sure you can have a franchise with two films. Is there a threshold? How many instalments does it take before a series gets to call itself a franchise, anyway? (It Takes Four to Franchise?) There were eventually five films in the Step Up Universe, so the issue is completely moot in this context, but hey; something to think about...

In any event, the first sequel is always the moment where the film-makers need to start defining their product. What exactly makes a film identifiable as a Step Up movie? Is it about the further adventures of the same characters? (spoiler: no) Is it the same writer/director team? (not really) Is it an otherwise unrelated movie that happens to feature lots of dancing? (yes... but...)


In this specific instance, Step Up 2 The Streets follows a new generation of dancers who find themselves drawn together at the Maryland School for the Arts (the setting of the first film). Once again, the primary character is escaping from an impoverished and disadvantaged background (but this time she's female, so you can tell the difference) and once again there is a clash of dancing styles and ideas. And of course, everything culminates in a grand and genuinely spectacular dance sequence that brings everyone together and resolves all conflicts.

dancin' in the rain?

If I sound like I'm mocking the formula, it's only because these film are so formulaic. But then, that's exactly what makes them so reminiscent of the Busby Berkeley films of the 30s. Like the Step Up films, Busby Berkeley films were only tenuously connected to each other, they featured ultra-formulaic storylines that focussed on dancing against a background of social hardship, and they climaxed with increasingly over-the-top dance sequences. (Gold Diggers of 1933; Gold Diggers of 1935; Gold Diggers of 1937... you get the idea)


They were also very, very popular. 

Step Up 2 cost a very modest $17 million (about a tenth of the cost of many of the big action blockbusters around that time) and wound up making about $150 million at the box office. However formulaic the plots, however rudimentary the character development, films like these have always fulfilled a need, and there has always been a demand for them. There was a demand in 1933 and there's still a demand today - as long as they are well executed.

Someone's been studying their Bob Fosse...

Step Up 2 the Streets might not be the kind of film that wins Oscars, but it is the kind of film that delivers something positive to its audience. And of course it was the film that turned a popular and successful film (Step Up) into the an equally popular and successful franchise.


We will screen Step Up 2 the Streets at 7.30 on Thursday, the 27th of July at the Victoria Park Baptist Church.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Highly Fluffy Bunny Movie Marathon

The Last Ordinary Lady.

Ordinary Lady in Stereo (where available)

This is Thursday, So It Must Be Denmark.