Mjeteconer Just perfect...

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Michael_Elliott Dance with Me, Henry! (1956) ** (out of 4) Bud Abbott and Lou Costello's final picture together isn't quite as bad as its reputation but there's no question that both stars didn't appear to have their heart in it. Bud finds himself in trouble due to a gambling debt while Lou is trying to keep two orphans who he has been taking care of. Soon both sides are coming together as the boys must try and figure out a way to save themselves and the children. DANCE WITH ME, HENRY! has all sorts of problems including the boys wanting to try and do something a tad bit more serious. The problem with that here is that the serious side really isn't all that serious but instead it's more sugar-coated sentimental stuff that just comes off as fake and very forced. These scenes aren't really that funny when they try to be and they're not very dramatic when they try to be so they just really come across as flat. Another problem is that the comedy stuff really isn't up the high levels one would expect from the duo. I think Costello comes off the best as he at least gets a couple good one-liners and manages to come across decent but there's no denying that he has very little chemistry with Abbott. It really does seem like both of them weren't wanting to do this movie as their screen time together is mostly flat and just reminds you that much better times are to be found in earlier films. None of the supporting cast really jumps off the screen so this here doesn't help. If you're familiar with what was going on in both of their lives I think it's safe to say that making a movie wasn't a very high priority. Even though the relationship ends on a rather sour note, the two gave us so many great movies so this one here can be forgiven.

Jay Raskin It seemed to me that this was essentially a children's film. While A and C made films that children could watch and enjoy, I think this and "Jack and the Beanstalk" were the only two films they made which were explicitly for children.The beginning ten minutes (good set-up of a potentially funny situation) and the last ten (imagine "Home-alone" with twenty kids) are fine, but the middle is quite flabby. There are no memorable routines and very few (about ten) funny lines.Actually, I do not know if the producers had it in mind, but the movie works well as a pilot for a T.V. series. One can imagine all sorts of great sitcom possibilities with Lou as a bachelor trying to raise two kids while owning and operating a "Kiddie land" amusement park. When this was made, Danny Thomas's "Make Room for Daddy" had been a hit show running for three years and "Bachelor Father" was about to begin its run, so a "raising kids" comedies were the type of thing a network might buy. I suppose if it had done well as a movie, it could have been developed into a television series. So, I believe that it was rather a smart career choice for A and C.Sherry Alberoni as Boopsi and Rusty Hamer are the two stand-out kid performers. Sherry is Shirley Temple cute trying to convince the cops that she witnessed a murder and Rusty Hamer is the nicest and sincerest boy actor of that period (Ron Howard did steal his crown a few years later).A and C fans will savor a few well done moments,(the visit of the nasty welfare worker at the beginning, for example) but on the whole only their fans will be able to sit through it.The last shot of the movie with Costello playing the pied-piper is delightful and cute. If the rest of the movie had been so, this movie would have revived A and C's careers and fortunes.

captainbijou Contrary to popular belief, the title of this film was not changed. The December 21, 1955 issue of the New York Times carried a story -- ABBOTT, COSTELLO SLATE NEW MOVIE -- which detailed the particulars about the projected project, including the title, DANCE WITH ME HENRY, producer and distributor credit and noted the film would start filming in March, 1956.The song was a sanitized, pop cover by Georgia Gibbs of a suggestive 1955 Etta James R&B hit, THE WALLFLOWER -- written by Johnny Otis, Hank Ballard and James -- which was more popularly known as ROLL WITH ME, HENRY. Interestingly, THE WALLFLOWER was a follow-up song to Ballard's provocative 1954 hit, WORK WITH ME, ANNIE.

jimddddd Watching "Dance With Me Henry," I felt as if I were trapped in some kind of purgatory. There is nothing funny or entertaining about this film. It simply goes on and on, interminably, with no suspense or narrative drive. The characters are cardboard, the dialogue wooden, the pacing leaden. Because of the film's title, I kept expecting the song "Dance With Me, Henry" to be part of the story, but it was only hinted at in the incidental music and sung, very briefly, by a minor character in one throw-away scene. Otherwise, there was no point to the title. I say this because "Dance With Me Henry" by Georgia Gibbs was a #1 hit in 1955. It was a whitewashed cover of a #1 R&B song by Etta James called "Roll With Me, Henry," which in turn was an answer to Hank Ballard's "Work With Me, Annie," the biggest-selling rhythm & blues record of 1954. I have no idea why Abbott & Costello would finish out their career with a movie that took the title of a popular song and then throw that song away. In any event, I would rather sit through 100 spins of Georgia Gibbs' dreary "Dance With Me, Henry" than have to watch this horrible movie again.