Rooftops

There is something uncomfortable about 'Rooftops.' Perhpas it's the dreadfully slow pace and very thin plot. Characters threaten to foist revenge on one another, and each expects it, but none really seem to appreciate the danger. It comes off as young children bickering with each other about being on one another's property. It is meaningless and stupid.

Rooftops, however, does have some merit. The story is about a bunch of homeless kids living in the slums of New York. They've made their homes and their territory on the rooftops of the abandoned buildings. They carry about with their own sort of culture, particularly noted by a variety of combat (which looks more like dancing) which I think is one of the more uncomfortable moments since there seems to be no point to it.

"T" is the center of the story. Jason Gedrick's character is interesting at least in that he's not an annoying teenager (or older, I presume), but is actually a pretty smart, protective guy. Unfortunately, other than watching him go about his rather easy-going existence on the rooftops, there's not much to his character.

His unrelenting antagonist is Lobo, a pimp and drug dealer who plans to move T out of his territory. Like 'Deuces Wild,' T and his friends vow not to let Lobo move in and mess things up for these kids. I suppose they've been pushed out of one too many families (T was homeless after his parent's died and so was his friend Amber; Squeak left home to avoid his mother's abusive boyfriend; and so forth), so they're determined to just to finally find a place of their own.

Of course, getting rid of Lobo is no easy job. Especially when he patrols the rooftops with his gun toting goons,,going a little too far to get rid of a couple of homeless teenagers. Luckily, T's weird combat training and the rooftop kid's smarts make a pretty good match for Lobo. A little too unbelieveable, since Lobo was always threatening these kids with a gun. I bet a real drug dealer/pimp, intent on pushing his business no matter what, wouldn't think twice about killing these kids. Likewise, I doubt anyone would think twice about killing Lobo and his goons, since they never seemed to have connections to anyone else.

There are just some strange qualities to the movie, mostly marked by the pace. It takes a long time for characters to be introduced and understood, for the plot to actually have something interesting going on, and so forth. A lot of the movie just seems to follow the kids and their rooftop lifestyles which is unfortunate, considering that this probably could've been a much better movie, considering the story.

It sure does have a lot of weird junk going on, but I don't think it was too bad. There is just something entertaining about the whole mess. I may just be forgiving since I've seen one too many bad movies this week (at least when compared with this one). I think this one is just best recommended for die-hard 80s fans.

I have the sneaking suspicion that the the story behind the movie "The Ring" , wherein people die after watching a video, came to someone after watching this movie. My own VCR exploded in protest while I was watching it. It probably saved my life. It is the rarest of films, one in which absolutely none of the elements work. If you intentionally set out to make the worst movie in the world, I doubt you could equal the unholy "Rooftops". I have a method I use for measuring how bad a particular work is. I call it the David Lee Roth factor. Simply ask yourself "Would this be any worse if David Lee Roth were somehow involved?" In the case of "Rooftops", the answer is a resounding "No!" Believe you me, you don't want to see or hear anything that David Lee Roth can't ruin.

I saw this in the theater when it opened in the spring of '89 because it received a fair deal of publicity at the time. The dance show CLUB MTV even did an hour special featuring the cast and dancers/capoierists with accompanying film clips and videos. I was intrigued, especially when I heard the great Robert Wise was at the helm. It was touted as an aware, updated version of West Side Story against the back-drop of the crack-ravaged streets of Lower Manhattan. In spite of an engageing cast, slick production (co-produced by Taylor Hackford and Howard Koch, photographed by Theo van de Sande, designed by Jeannine Oppewall, and scored by Michael Kamen and Dave Stewart) it turned out to be a poorly-scripted update of the rock and roll B-fliks of the 1950s featuring Alan Freed. Needless to say, it died a quick death at the box office. Well, time heals old (cinematic) wounds. Just like the old Freed films Rooftops can be seen as a something of a curio rooted in its time. Its got everythin a nostalgia freak wants: period music, fashions and slang. It is also a glimpse into the world of pre-gentrification Manhattan, a place/time as exhilirating as it was dangerous. Check out the exciting title sequence/foot chase set to Etta James'"Avenue D." Worth a viewing.

First of all, why are most of the reviews on here from the early 2000's? Just sayin'. Anyhoo, I just watched this on Tubi 'cause I'm a sucka for '80s cheese and this movie is EPIC! It's got a b-movie script and mostly nobodies in the cast, but the direction and overall look and feel are first-rate. I guess it was directed by the guy who did West Side Story; it's kinda the same storyline, with a star-crossed love story between a dude who lives in an abandoned watertank and a girl who reluctantly works as a lookout for her crack-dealing cousin. There's a fair amount of that weird Brazilian dance-fighting as well as some parkour and the requisite terrible soundtrack. But the sense of time and place is great, and the acting is pretty good. Would make an excellent double feature with the amazing "Delivery Boys".

Rooftops is sort of Robert Wise's version of his West Side Story set in the eighties. The film has capoeria, karate and street fights. The film featured many young actors like Jason Gedrick, Tisha Campbell and Allen Payne. I like this movie though.