Review of Carefree (1938) by Edith N — 31 May 2007

This movie makes no sense. None. The treatment of psychology is ridiculous; all the mental health professionals in the movie act like pinheads most of the time. Instead of showing concern over Ginger Rogers's alleged mental instability (and it takes more than describing one dream to get even a Freudian to think you're [i]that[/i] crazy!), they congratulate themselves on having such an interesting case to examine. And the treatment of hypnosis? Bizarre.

Oh, I know. 1938. It's just that I think a movie like this could still get made today--and still get laughs over how "crazy people" act and are treated. I'd be worried that they'd remake it except that I envision the remake starring Ashton Kutcher and going down in flames unnoticed by anyone but critics, who lambaste it all the way down. This is not a remake-likely movie.

I'm further quite aware that this movie, like all Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers movies, is just a vehicle to hang dance numbers off of. Oh, it's true. You do [i]not[/i] tune in to one of these to watch fine acting, though Ginger Rogers did win an Oscar in 1940 for [i]Kitty Foyle[/i]. (Also involved in this particular picture is Hattie McDaniel--Best Supporting Actress 1939 for [i]Gone with the Wind[/i], of course--as not just yet another maid but yet another maid called "Hattie.") I will, however, note that Fred Astaire wasn't in [i]Kitty Foyle[/i]. (The library only seems to have it on VHS, and since there are 17,596 titles in the VHS collection, I don't think we'll be going there any time soon.).

[i]Carefree[/i] is cute, though I don't understand why it's called that. It's just not at all good.