This film had no chance. This is a remake of a chance of success, and the original story is dated. But this is a library owned by Paramount, so the study was to gain a considerable amount of money with very little financial investment. Translation? - Greed has surpassed creativity. Remakes are easy, because the recognition as one to save a huge amount of money marketing the film, and nostalgia is expected to bring people to the theater. But if you do, do it well.
The biggest problem in this film is the casting. Although Julianne Hough has been impressive, Kenny Wormald was an unfortunate fiasco. I think he has some serious potential as an actor, and he is certainly capable. But he was convicted in that role. It is a cool geek-guy clothes, and his lack of chemistry with Julianne Hough makes it impossible to believe that a girl like her would never find him attractive. And speaking of tough clothes, something went very wrong in the costume department. The costume took almost all the clothes of the original film. We are not in the 80's anymore, so if you go to school with your collar up today, you will probably take the ridicule. In addition, Kevin Bacon considered "cool" in the original story because of its city, anti-establishment attitude, which came as a shock to the small town. The only anti-establishment about this boy was his Boston accent.
I guess Kenny Wormald landed this role because of her experience in dance, but since there are only three choreographed dance sequences in the film, I think the old rule of cinema is here - it is easier to teach an actor to dance is to learn a dance act. And if they had to prioritize dance experience, in fact I think when Zac Efron dropped out, must have been employed Derek Hough and Julianne Hough have been reworked (obviously because his brother real life can not play his interest of love.) The male role is more important than the female lead, and Derek was an excellent choice. But that's neither here nor there.
And anticipate that, as a pick-on-Guy-new attack, which also notes that Dennis Quaid was another lamentable failure. Sure that this film needed star power to lend him some great studies of street credit, but Quaid just does not look like a preacher tense. It is a proven talent, but even the big players can not remove the bad part. Footwear must be set before starting to walk.
The other problem is that the story is very true to the original film. In fact, with the exception of using iPod, is a carbon copy. The purpose of the new version is to take a great history and modernization. Remember "The Thomas Crowne affair" with Pierce Brosnan? It is the great story itself, but is almost unrecognizable compared with the version of Steve McQueen. Without a new twist, it makes sense more creative and financial re-editing the original. I think Craig Brewer (director) that have significantly altered the original story, or at least change your clothes for the love of good., The child has led even the same car.