Girl in Gold Boots

Joy Division's Ian Curtis would often cause chaos at his concerts, because his dancing style closely resembled an epileptic seizure: bystanders would call 911 just to be on the safe side. I've never known how Curtis developed such a bizarre style, but I'm fairly certain he owned a copy of "Girl In Gold Boots". I also can't fathom why a woman that a) clearly can't dance, b) clearly can't act and c) isn't married to someone powerful would get cast as the lead of a musical, but one thing's for certain: this is about a dozen times as entertaining as a competent musical. The movie was produced and directed by prolific Z-grade horror/sci-fi legend Ted V. Mikels, who seems out of his comfort zone when he can't use zombies, evil witches or crazed serial killers who feed victims to cats. The movie doesn't have any plot, it just drags itself from one strange dance scene to another. But that's fine by me. Seeing our lead and her marginally less untalented co-star dance like they're on stilts never stops being entertaining. If anything, this movie should have more awkward dancing rather than less. Very palatable, for all the wrong reasons of course.

Girl in Gold Boots was on IMDB's infamous Bottom 100 list (the list of the 100 lowest rated movies) until the number required for votes increased, it's directed by Ted Mikels (considered by many one of the worst filmmakers ever) and to this day it has an appalling score of 2,2. But probably I am not the typical viewer, since for me it was an ok movie and hence my score of 4.

The movie is about three youngsters that are going to Los Angeles. The title character is a girl that works in a bar and hopes to become a nightclub dancer, his boyfriend is a thug-looking guy that at times he is on a short fuse, and the third one is a cute guy that likes to sing and play guitar. When they finally get there they discover that is not like they hoped (the girl discovers that being a go-go dancer is not that great a job after all and the cute guy hangs around while he keeps an eye on the duo).

Despite it's a B-movie it's well made compared to many others of the time. It has decent cinematography, nice soundtrack with various good tunes of the time, during the credits and halfway in the movie various shoots of pretty girls dancing. Also, and this is the thing I liked most of the movie, the cute guy halfway sings a couple ballads just like Elvis Presley and he was the most endearing character of the trio. Sadly, since this movie was made by Ted Mikels (that already in 1968 had the reputation of being one of the worst directors ever), it automatically killed the actors' careers.

While at times the movie drags, it's watchable. And despite is made by Ted Mikels is competently made and it's an interesting time capsule as well.

Before there was "Showgirls" there was "Girl in Gold Boots". This film is even worse and worse made. You know, I really think the director took himself seriously when he made this movie. Sad, is it not? But I think he didn't realize that he had a budget to stick to when making this movie.

The plot? Michele is a wanna be dancer (who really can't dance, but we're lead to believe she's the best) but is unfortunately kept with her alcoholic father in the popular restaurant "Eat". But when a Kasey Kasim wanna be walks in with promises to make her a professional dancer with the help from his sister who is the "main attraction" in L.A., she leaves within the blink of an eye. On their way they pick up a hitchhiker, Critter. Of course there will be tension since everyone loves Michele's looks.

When they finally arrive in L.A., and there is Christmas decorations all around Hollywood, where's a better place to go than a haunted house? But it's just a hidden dance joint where the dancers look like they're more having seizures and clucking like a chicken then dancing. Michele, Buz, and Critter get involved deeper than they would want in the business with a slick greasy pusher who owns the joint. When Buz's sister, Joanie, is obviously in bad shape from drugs and possibly overdosing on the fake eyelashes, she confesses that she once had a "pretty mind" and tells Michele to get out before Leo, the pusher, takes her down too. But can Critter and Michele make it alive when they already know too much about a plot and a murder that doesn't make much sense?

Oh, man. You have no idea how poorly made this film was made, I mean we're talking just God-awful acting, poor sound, bad editing, atroshish writing, and a horrific picture. I just loved how in one scene, it's just Critter and Michele are sitting ALONE at a table, but in the blink of an eye Buz is in the picture. I loved MSTK3's commentary "I'm back! Come on! I just teleported here! It's impressive!". Watch the MSTK3 episode, that's the only way you'll enjoy the film.

1/10 for the film 10/10 for MSTK3's version

...That really shouldn't have been combined. One half of the film is a woman chasing her dream of being a go-go dancer. The other half is about the seedy side of drug use, and drug pushers. Some films do well against the test of time. This one fell flat 10 seconds after its release. Bad acting and a second-rate band shoot this one down.

Girl in Gold Boots (1968)

** (out of 4)

Michele (Leslie McRay) is living in a small town working at a dead cafe for her drunk father. One day Buz (Tom Pace) stops in and offers her a chance for Hollywood. Michele has always wanted to be a go-go dancer so she goes along and the two head out for brighter days but end up in trouble with some crime boys.

Ted V. Mikels' GIRL IN GOLD BOOTS, for some reason, has a very bad reputation and I'm going to guess it's because it appeared on Mystery Science Theater 3000. It seems if you were on that show you were automatically labeled as being awful. Having seen most of the director's work I can honestly say that this here is actually a fairly well-made picture compared to most of them.

Mikels made a career out of making ultra low-budget movies and some of them managed to gain some acclaim just for their camp value. This film here really isn't all that campy and for the most part I would argue that it's at least well-made and especially when you consider the budget. The film at least looks professional and a far cry from some of the movies that Mikels would direct in the 70s and 80s.

With that said, there's still no question that there's not too much entertainment here. The story is a pretty familiar one as a couple good people go looking for riches and end up in trouble. The performances range from decent to poor but with the lack of any real exploitation the film is just a tad bit too dull for its own good.