Movie Review: Dancing Lady (Plus: Internet BS Call-out)

I decided to watch this movie under a false assumption. I was tracking down the origin of a particular style of robot (used in Phantom Empire). They look pretty asinine and make no sense at all. Judge for yourself:

While this design makes no sense whatsoever for an actual sci-fi robot, it sort of (only sort of) makes sense for a robot designed for song-and-dance numbers, which apparently he was. The robot was originally designed for use in Dancing Lady, which you can see in this still:

And you get an interesting bit of additional trivia about this scene on Tales of Future Past:

The robots from The Phantom Empire were actually a leftover from the Clark Gable/Joan Crawford musical Dancing Lady (1933), which had a number featuring a group of robots infringing on Miss Crawford's personal freedoms. If you've ever seen the film, you'll recall that there were a heck of a lot of robots dancing around in that one. True, but in an economy move, only one of the robots was made out of metal. The others, which were only seen in long shot, were made out of cardboard.

An interesting factoid which gets repeated, almost verbatim on dozens of sites. There's only one problem with this: the scene was actually cut from the movie! So the spiel about "If you've ever seen the film . . ." is complete and utter fabrication. Yet it was repeated so confidently on so many sites that it was hard to believe these people were out-and-out lying. But they were. I watched the movie, then re-watched it THREE TIMES at 4X speed just to make sure I hadn't missed it. (I did it one more time after I saw that the image of this "dress" (obviously connected to the robot number) was printed on the DVD:

)And if you want to say I'm the one BSing, you can read this supporting quote on IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0026867/trivia?tab=tr&item=tr0744062

And if you still don't trust me, you can watch the movie yourself.

Speaking of which, how is the movie?, you may ask. It's actually not half bad, and not just because it's pretty racy for what I considered normal in 1933, though of course we're generally mistaken about that sort of thing--previous generations were never as prudish as we assume they were.

The movie begins with a burlesque show where a dancer's costume is partly ripped off by a drunken patron:

The dancer is Crawford, who longs to shed the burlesque lifestyle to become a dancer in a serious Broadway show. After getting tangled up in a mixed-up love triangle with Clark Gable and , showing off her bodacious booty in a swimming scene, dancing with Fred Astaire in his film debut, and getting the run around from the Three Stooges, she makes it, and boy, don't it look swell?

I haven't found images of the closing number's less classy costumes, some of which look like they would fit nicely in The Night Porter:

(Not the actual costume, but, really closer than you would think!)

And then there are some really provocative silhouettes on the shades at what appears to be a plastic surgery practice, and the not-to-be-missed Kaleidoscope of bathing beauties.

No, it's not classy, but it's fun, mentions beer (a lot), and shows a lot of really attractive bodies (for 1930s standards) in some revealing outfits. And overall it's not a terrible movie. Pretty well acted by all, with a little camp and corn, but quippy and quick. If you like the period, I'd recommend this movie.