AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

aceellaway2010 This might be THE Ginger & Fred movie for people who are not huge great fans of the memorable team. The reason being is that there is a little more story than the earlier ones, and also because it is really quite Funny, Thanks in NO small amount to Ginger's performance. Often somewhat rudely underestimated in the partnership( And after all, she did everything Fred did ,but backwards and in heels, AND had to be Damn Pretty while she was doing it(even the kindest amongst us would find it difficult to make a great argument for Fred as being a "looker"). Fred is often given solo numbers in their films but here Ginger gets a good one "The Yam' which she performs with great style and wit. In fact Ginger dominates the film , and it is quite reasonable to point out that after the partnership ended it was Ginger who had the most initial success winning a Best Actress Oscar for "Kitty Foyle". But it is ginger's fun and very amusing performance that makes the film particularly watchable.

dzizwheel Many have described this movie as a screwball comedy. It is far too lumbering in it's pace, dialog and timing to be any such thing.It has a few good musical numbers in it that break up the tedium, but wastes a fine cast in beyond ridiculous situations. Ginger Rogers looks fantastic but her attempts at comedy while her character is under anesthesia look like a community theater amateur trying to be funny. Embarrassing. Same thing in her scene with Fred Astaire, as a psychiatrist, where she invents a dream to convince him she needs her help. The lines aren't funny,Rogers looks as if the director told her to improvise and the audience gets the message that her improvisational skills are all in her feet.Not good. And not amusing in any way.For prime examples of screwball comedy seek out My Man Godfrey, Bombshell. or more recently What's Up Doc. Any earlier Astaire/Rogers movie will do as well.The musical numbers are what one would expect and certainly up to the pair's skills. The rest of it could have used a good editor. Or writer. Your fast forward button will have to do.Better than many but a stinker for these two.

Steffi_P As with most movie franchises, the later Astaire-Rogers vehicles are repeated attempts to keep the formula fresh without losing the original magic. With its altered settings and characterisations, and an emphasis on comedy over music, Carefree was the biggest departure of the series thus far.This was the first of these pictures in which the duo do not play the part of dancers, Fred being a psychiatrist and Ginger his patient. Psychoanalysis was then vogue-ish, and the idea of the female patient falling for the doctor was already something of a cliché. And yes, it is Ginger this time who goes chasing after a hard-to-get Fred. It shows a marked shift from the usual harassment-cum-romance which usually stood in for a love angle in these movies, something which was particularly odious and unnatural in the first proper Ginger and Fred movie, The Gay Divorcée. Having said that, the final image of Ginger going up the aisle with a black eye is rather sickening even though its context is more innocent than it appears.Both Astaire and Rogers adapt competently to their new types and these are some very fine performances from them both. Astaire shows his finest dramatic nuances to date, and Rogers brings out a flair for comedy. The opportunities for dancing are sadly fewer here, but choreographer Hermes Pan has eschewed the increasing spectacle of the last few movies for numbers that are more intimate yet still inventive. Fred's golf routine is simply delightful, and the dream sequence for "I Used to Be Color Blind" is the one touch of classic Fred and Ginger beauty, with an elegant slow-motion segment that works surprisingly well. It's a pity the number wasn't shot in Technicolor as was originally intended – that would have made it even more special.The very look of Carefree is different – gone are the Big White Sets and in their place are offices, studios and even the open countryside. This was the last Fred and Ginger movie handled by their most frequent director, Mark Sandrich. Sandrich's forte in these pictures was the smoothness with which he segued dialogue scenes into musical numbers, but the way the songs fit into the narrative here there's hardly any call for that. I am however very impressed with the tenderness he brings to the hypnosis scene.Carefree was a decent attempt to reinvigorate a series that had more or less run its course. It's not a bad little movie on its own terms, but its just doesn't feel quite like a Fred and Ginger movie should. For example, the lack of any Edward Everett Horton or Eric Blore is glaring. There is a small part by a young (and surprisingly slim) Jack Carson, who is rather funny and seems slightly more in tune with this setting, but the point is, Fred Astaire was always magnificently in tune with Horton and Blore. It demonstrates perhaps, more than anything, that top hats, tails, swanky hotels and butlers were now outdated in the musical (as they certainly were in romantic comedy as a whole). Carefree is kind of a noble effort of a transition movie, but it isn't really anything more than that, and it doesn't represent any kind of mould that Fred or Ginger could now settle into.

dglink All of the Astaire-Rogers collaborations at RKO are worth seeing, although some are less deserving than others. Unfortunately, "Carefree" falls among the lesser offerings, despite the movie's fluid and graceful dance numbers. The silly plots of these films usually pit an antagonistic Rogers against a love-sick Astaire until Rogers realizes she really loves Fred more than the stiff hunk she originally intended to marry. What woman wouldn't prefer skinny, balding Fred to a Ralph Bellamy or a Randolph Scott. After all, hunks can't dance. "Carefree" wraps the standard Astaire-Rogers plot around some preposterous psychoanalytical nonsense that involves hypnotism, and rational brains may tune out between dance numbers. At times the film is downright unfunny. When a hypnotized Rogers stalks Astaire with a loaded shotgun at a golf course, the intended mayhem is more horrifying than hysterical.Luella Gear as Aunt Cora is the intended wise-cracking sidekick, but she is tepid, and her cynical remarks fall flat. The film sorely needs an Edward Everett Horton or a Helen Broderick to spark the proceedings, although two veteran character actors do bring a touch of needed life to their scenes. Franklin Pangborn appears briefly as the token gay stereotype, but he has little to do but flutter and faint, which probably had the audience rolling in the aisles in pre-Stonewall days. However, at least RKO gave their gay actors screen billing. Hattie McDaniel, who has more screen time than Pangborn, plays the African-American stereotyped maid, but she received no screen billing at all. A year later she would receive an Academy Award for "Gone with the Wind." Six writers are credited for the inane story and screenplay, but their names are best left unsaid. Mark Sandrich directed, but his work on arguably the best Astaire-Rogers pairing, "Top Hat," was superior. Only choreographer Hermes Pan deserves to be mentioned among the production crew. His work with Astaire and Rogers to Irving Berlin's music is what gives "Carefree" a reason to be pulled from the vaults.