Staying Alive (1983) Review:

John Travolta's breakout role in Saturday Night Fever (1977) was a highlight not only for himself but for the decade it came from. During the 1970s, discos were very much the place to be during that time. And while the film itself had much of that to feature, the story of a regular young adult looking to make the most of their time enjoying life had interesting points to make. The story not only felt real but also understandable. Anyone trying to work from the ground up can relate to the struggle of making ends meet and trying to make something of yourself. That's what Tony Manero's story was all about that Travolta played. Weirdly enough, this sequel commits to furthering that story but only half way. It really doesn't make complete sense of everything which is unfortunate, but it is certainly not a terrible sequel.

Rhodes & Travolta

Directed by Sylvester Stallone, with a script co-written by him and Norman Wexler (from the first film), the story follows Tony Manero to Manhattan where he seeks to continue his passion for dancing on Broadway with support from his new main squeeze Jackie (Cynthia Rhodes). Although after one night seeing Jackie in rehearsal he comes across Laura (Finola Hughes) the lead dancer and decides to come on to her. Unfortunately, this leads to complications between his current relationship with Jackie and his passion for dancing. Aside from that, the narrative is kind of light. Unlike the first film which had lots of characters to play off of and add layers to Manero's life, now it feels almost empty. Not sure exactly what happened during the writing process but the film feels awfully long for such a short story.

It seems almost as though Stallone got too caught up in the production and visuals to bother actually helping to write a sequel that further developed the main character. First off, the only character to return from the first film outside of Tony is his mom played by Julie Bovasso. What happened to Stephanie (Karen Lynn Gorney), Annette (Donna Pescow) or any other part of his family? Part of the reason why the first film worked so well was that family dynamic and how they interacted with each other. Instead much of time is dedicated to confusing character motivations between Tony and Laura, or Tony and Jackie. These interactions don't make a lot of sense because all in all there's a lot of pivoting which makes the viewer disoriented in what the character's actually want.

This sadly leads to uneven character development, which is hard to watch since there are so few cast members this time that are of focus. However, this doesn't mean the actors involved are not credible. John Travolta still plays Tony like he did in the last film, still a goofball but quite talented when he's puts his mind to it. Cynthia Rhodes as Jackie is a kind person who deserves the most for herself. Even Finola Hughes is a good actress, but it's her character’s motivations which throw much of the story off. Rhodes would later star in Dirty Dancing (1987) and Hughes would go on to play in General Hospital. There's even a few shots of Kurtwood Smith poking around directing dancers on a stage, but he doesn't say anything.

"Hello, my name is Laura...."

Choreography however is probably the most perfected aspect about this film. More than likely this was Stallone's focus as well. No matter if it's the dance numbers on the stage with several extras or just one on one between main characters, the dance skills filmed are undeniable. Travolta not only maintains his skill but bulked up for it as well. Kudos to Dennon and Sayhber Rawles for their work as they would later help choreograph for Bugsy (1991). Cinematography also went well with that taken care of by Nick McLean. McLean would also shoot for City Heat (1984) and Short Circuit (1986). Even music was okay, while The Bee Gees were a main highlight before, the main singer to much of the songs is Frank Stallone (not surprised). Since this film was from the 80s, it's better than featuring disco music anyway as that fad was gone.

It's not as bad as critics called it, but it definitely lacks the kind of narrative that made the original so interesting to watch. Here, it's just the same character being sillier than before and trying to make it big, but nothing deeper than that. Stallone's directing and writing isn't the best. However, acting, camerawork and music are all fine.

Points Earned --> 5:10