Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

mark.waltz Giving her all to this big budget musical, Joan Crawford goes from the 42nd Street burlesque houses to the star of a lavish musical revue (that couldn't fit on any Broadway stage) and proves herself to be quite the dancer if not one of the better singers of the early movie musicals. She looks great in her evening gowns but in rehearsal clothes appears to be rather odd looking with a rather wide head that made her seem older than she was. Put her in frills and sequins, however, she's the glamorous Joan that made her one of the biggest stars of the 1930's, and certainly MGM's most financially successful.The men here are second string in supporting Joan with Franchot Tone a Park Avenue man about town who happens to spot Joan in the chorus of the burlesque show and takes her out, glamours her up and then tries to keep her from the big musical revue's producer, the rugged Clark Gable. She is unaware that Tone has manipulated her success by putting money in the show and withdrawing it when her initially cool working relationship with Gable seemed to be turning into romance. But Gable, like Warner Baxter in the same year's "42nd Street", is determined to make sure that the show goes on.1933 saw the return of the movie musical in a major way, and MGM produced several that rivaled the Busby Berkley dance extravaganzas being made over at Warner Brothers. Joan, however, isn't Ruby Keeler, the innocent chorus girl who gets a lucky break; It's obvious from the get-go that she's tough, sharing wisecracks with burlesque star Winnie Lightner and even getting some laughs with her brief encounter with none other than the Three Stooges. Like Marian Davies in MGM's "Going Hollywood", she is meant to be more window dressing than Jeanette MacDonald, and looks fabulous in her Adrian gowns. When all of a sudden she begins to dance with Fred Astaire in an outrageously lavish production number, she proves herself to be practically his equal, giving her the distinction of being his first screen dancing partner.Nelson Eddy leads the big production number of "Rhythm of the Day", giving "Dancing Lady" the distinction of having the two leading men who would become part of famous twosomes in musicals for the rest of the decade. "Rhythm of the Day" is almost laughably pretentious, but not as outrageous as "Heigh Ho the Gang's All Here" which has Fred and Joan dancing on a whirling gadget that flies through the sky and lands in the middle of a big festival with chorus boys and girls clad in liederhosen. "Let's Go Bavarian!" is actually ironic for a 1933 release with its Germanic themes considering that this was the same year that Hitler began his rise to power and ultimate reign of terror.May Robson, already having played Joan's mother in "Letty Lynton", is Tone's hard of hearing grandmother, with Grant Mitchell as a theater owner and in an unbilled role, the future Eve Arden as a chorus girl rejectee who had tried to feign a Southern accent. Of course, Arden would go on to support Joan in a larger way years later in "Mildred Pierce", so there's an irony in seeing her here. The blowzy Winnie Lightner, after a brief leading lady stint at Warners, gets in some good gags and an amusing musical number.While certainly not among the best of the 1930's big budget musicals, "Dancing Lady" is still fun, frivolous and frilly. Gable seems a bit out of sorts putting on a show, and his role is rather secondary. Tone's character lacks motivation, but somebody's got to be the heavy, even if the script gives no real indication as to why. This is Joan's picture all the way.

David_Brown Perhaps I am the wrong person to give an opinion of this film, because it is not my type of movie. That said, I give this film 2 Stars, 1/2 each for Moe, Curley (and one for Larry playing the piano). Basically I don't like Joan Crawford (The exceptions are "Grand Hotel" and "This Woman Is Dangerous"), and I HATE musicals. In fact the only way I watch them is when singing numbers pop up, the sound goes off, or if I recorded it, I zap right through them (And in all cases, it is to see a star I like (See Marilyn Monroe)). My objections to Crawford are she is essentially built like a linebacker (You see how bad she looks in a dress in this film), and she is overly melodramatic. The reason I put it on was were to see the Stooges, and to see Clark Gable, usually his films are good, and he always seems to have a co-star I like: Myrna Loy, Jean Harlow, Claudette Colbert, Marilyn Monroe & Sophia Loren to name a few. But this film is like "Parnell" (Considered Gable's worst film by most people) basically unwatchable, except for when the Stooges pop up. I would only recommend it to see Larry play the piano (You don't need to suffer with Joan Crawford to laugh with the Stooges). 2 of 10 stars.

secondtake Dancing Lady (1933)There are so many reasons to love this film above and beyond the dance numbers, which are only dazzling filler starring Fred Astaire. Yes, I mean to say that there is a lot going on here that is unsuspected and moving, beautiful and hilarious.Start with Joan Crawford. By now a star in her own right, she gets to reprise some of the routines, and personal history, that led to headlining a major movie like this MGM spectacle. Or start with Clark Gable, also a great star, and a year before It Happened One Night (which is surely a better film, but a more restrained one). Gable is held down a little by his role, which is meant to be secondary to the pretty and charming Franchot Tone, the other leading man, except that Gable has twice the screen presence, and of course has the underdog part.Add the music, which I can take or leave in many musicals, and which is more or less forgettable here, but which is so integral to the plot it works just fine. Related to this are the many amazing sets, including the sets within the sets when shooting rehearsals and performances, all of which are great Deco showcases. And finally, the brilliant, unrelentingly stunning photography by Oliver T. Marsh (see also another Crawford film, The Women). This is no small feat.Did I mention Fred Astaire? With little fanfare, arriving on stage with Crawford but under his own name, he dances, and sings! A perfect element for authenticity and flair, and it's his Hollywood debut. Oh, and we may as well mention the well placed, often used, never overused threesome known elsewhere as the Three Stooges, who appear and reappear with their usual comic zaniness. This was their debut year, doing cameos in several features with MGM. Yeah, all of this is in one film.For those wondering, the director, Robert Z. Leonard, did do a range of films over several decades, including some other musicals, and dramas worth seeing like the notable 1940 Pride and Prejudice (the one with Olivier). I suppose it was the producer who corralled such a terrific cast, but the director made them integrate with amazing fluidity. And there are some camera effects, too, that are first rate--virtuosic and fun, like the fast blur-pans (sideways and vertically) and a sequence or fast motion walking legs on the sidewalk as Crawford pursues Gable.Someone might say, hey wait a minute, the plot is contrived (it is only a little) or the overall tone is one of bald entertainment, not real drama. And the reply is, of course, of course! Just like any other Fred Astaire movie, or An American in Paris, or any number of serious dramas. No, there is little holding back Dancing Lady. You have to see it.

fwdixon I enjoyed "Dancing Lady" despite the fact that the titular "Lady" (Joan Crawford) is about as graceful as a pregnant camel. Other than her lead-footed dancing, Joan give a good performance. How many other movies can claim to feature The 3 Stooges, Clark Gable, Franchot Tone, Joan Crawford, Fred Astaire and Nelson Eddy? Even Eve Arden shows up in a bit part (years before being reunited with Joan in "Mildred Pierce"!) Only MGM could have come up with a cast like this! Nevertheless, it's apparent that MGM was still learning how to put on a proper musical. Warner's musicals of the period are light years ahead of this. The songs are terrible and, other than Fred Astaire's numbers, the dancing is mediocre. Maybe I'm making it sound awful but it really isn't. It's a fun 90+ minutes to pass away a rainy afternoon.