The Gay Divorcee

I liked this movie. If you are an enjoyer of classic era Hollywood movie musicals, as I am, you will probably like this movie too. The movie is not without its faults and, I must say, those faults surprised me. The thing about the Gay Divorcee is it is a total inversion of the other Astaire and Rogers pictures I’ve seen before it: it has comparatively weak dancing but a much stronger story, with a tighter and wittier script.

It isn’t that the dancing is bad, of course. The two famous leads are as good in this as they are in anything. Everything they do is still a treat. Astaire’s tap dancing, in particular, is on point here. Astaire and Rogers have a knack for using dance to tell the story, often having their characters fall in love through the conversation of dance rather than the conversation of words, and that trademark is here too, though perhaps in a manner slightly less refined than it would be in the coming years.

However, they aren’t in every number and they aren’t the focus for every minute of every number they are in. For example, in “K-nocking K-nees” the focus is on the main male supporting character, who can sing well enough but can’t dance at all. His lack of dancing ability is even part of his character, as established in the opening scene. He is surrounded by some supporting dancers, but many of them (though mercifully not all) seem like they were taken from an open casting call that was more interested in whether the women were attractive than if they could move with the grace and rhythm of a trained dancer.

There are also many more large production numbers, with hundreds of dancing extras, than in something like Swing Time. This gives space for Astaire and Rogers to show off while being part of a larger set piece, but the result is often disappointing. The most stand out misstep for me was the massive extravaganza that is “The Continental.” Better overall dance is on display here than in “K-nocking K-nees,” but the dance itself isn’t that interesting. It is playing to the same kind of style as Busby Berkeley, using masses of people to make interesting shapes and movements, but the result is something that is not as dynamic and interesting (Berkeley was much more adept at using camera position to aid visual spectacle) while being similarly over-long, self indulgent, and tad boring. “The Continental” is a good time when Astaire and Rogers are cutting up the performance space at the beginning and end, and the middle bit isn’t without its charm from time to time, but it truly goes on and on and on. Perhaps it is just my more modern sense of pacing, but the repetitive nature of the music and tapering of apparent fresh ideas in the dance had me feeling like the entire number was about twice as long as it needed to be.

All that being said, those flaws can be somewhat forgiven by how much fun the rest of the movie can be. The movie plays to one of my favorite types of comedy: farce. Like a British bedroom farce, but without all the sex, a series of miscommunications and mistaken identities create a series of hilarious mixups that build to a satisfying, silly conclusion. However, the script’s wit isn’t just in building an intricate web of character mistakes that don’t feel like convenient contrivances, but also in the dialogue itself. There are more snappy one liners and retorts here than in any other Astaire and Rogers movie I’ve seen. The repartee between Fred and Ginger, particularly during the early courtship parts, reminded me a tad of the feisty back and forth of His Girl Friday, for example. The comedy doesn’t end there. Astaire and his lawyer friend trade some deliciously barbed quips, the hired adulterer is a fount of absurdity, and much more. I would keep going, but I think the more I write the more I risk dissecting the frog, so to speak, but suffice to say if you like absurd situations and snappy dialogue, you’ll find something to like in this movie.

One final note, some modern audiences may find Astaire’s character’s blind pursuit of Ginger Rogers’ character a bit creepy, but if you are willing to get swept up in the silliness of it all it serves an important purpose in moving the fun little story along. There is a kind of story that can only really be told, and a kind of banter that can only really exist, when one party is initially more interested, romantically, than the other. This can be amplified by a tinge of antagonism tied to the pursuit, as seen in the likes of Sam and Diane in Cheers. This isn’t always done well, and there are problems with the enemies-to-lovers trope, but I do think it would be sad to throw away the unique joy that a story like this can provide because of fears that it will send the wrong message to young men to not take no for an answer and be overly persistent to the point of harassment. I recognize, however, that not everyone will feel the same way.

Would Recommend: If you enjoy a good, modern farce.

Would Not Recommend: If you are expecting a mind-blowing dance experience.