UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Documentary >

That's Entertainment, Part II

That's Entertainment, Part II (1976)

May. 17,1976
|
7.3
|
G
| Documentary Music

Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire present more golden moments from the MGM film library, this time including comedy and drama as well as classic musical numbers.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Megamind
1976/05/17

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

More
KnotStronger
1976/05/18

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

More
Hayden Kane
1976/05/19

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

More
Guillelmina
1976/05/20

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

More
LeonLouisRicci
1976/05/21

With this Type of Clip-Compilation, Perfection will be a Subjective Term. Everyone will probably find something Missing or this or that inclusion They find Unworthy, but so be it. It is undeniable that this is Entertainment that is Entertaining, mostly.One Legitimate Gripe, that alienates some, is the between Scenes Commentary and Dancing from the two Biggies, Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly. As a Novelty and an Adhesive for the Clips, it could be said that it is Sweetness on top of Sweetness and that makes it a bit too Sweet. Actually there was actually no need for it and the Geezers Goofing around may be Physically impressive but also puts some unneeded weight on the already Heavy Dose of Dance Numbers that is the Forte of the Film.But the In-Betweens aside, what People came to Watch is the Incredible and at times Outrageousness that the Movie Musical could offer as, well, Entertainment. There is more of that here, as in Part 1, and one could argue about this and that being better or worse, or worthy or not, but that is a Matter of Personal Taste.Just sit back and Enjoy another Two-Hours of Scenes, Numbers, Skits, and Clips from the Movies. It really is a Thing that Sells Itself, and since Movie Lovers are here to Watch Samples of Movies, this kind of thing is really a No-Brainer, and needs no Hype.

More
eplromeo8
1976/05/22

This was certainly a surprise choice for the folks at Reel 13 Classics. It's not so much a classic as it is a retrospective of classics, which I guess qualifies if you look at it from a certain vantage point. Still, I couldn't help but be a little disappointed when I saw this film on the May schedule. Generally speaking, as a film buff, I enjoy retrospectives. More often than not, they offer unique perspectives on their subjects and insight into film history.THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT PART II is different, however, for three reasons. One is the series was made by MGM/UA and so they primarily feature MGM musicals/scenes. While MGM had a lot of great stuff, narrowing your retrospective to one distributor over a two-decade period is a limitation. Second, THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT PART II is an afterthought of a sequel – they already used their best clips in the first film, so we get the leftovers here. Finally, the intros to clips by Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly are inane and offer absolutely no valuable information or tidbits (Where was Neal Gabler when we needed him?). They are great performers, but Kelly, who also directs, insights on these pseudo-clever song introductions to each sequence of clips, which is a waste of time. As I mentioned, part of the joy of retrospectives such as these is that they give us insider information, production stories or something of that ilk – a kind of structure that tap dancing will not replace.

More
mountainkath
1976/05/23

This compilation isn't as good as the original, but it's still fantastic.One of my favorite things about this movie is the hosts: Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire. I'm a fan of both of them and seeing them together is so rare that I had a huge smile on my face every time they shared the screen. Throw in some short dances by them together and that alone makes this worth watching.This movie corrected two oversights from the first movie: we get to see Cyd Charisse's Singin' In The Rain dance (in the green dress) and Kelly's dance on roller skates from It's Always Fair Weather.I did enjoy the non-musical clips in this movie, although I thought there were some omissions. The most glaring was the absence of a clip from Woman of the Year (the movie that brought Tracy and Hepburn together both on screen and off).I was also disappointed that when musical clips were shown, the movie they were from was not always identified. I knew most of them, but there are one or two that I didn't know and wish that I did.Bobby Van's bunny hop dance was odd and at first I didn't like it. But, as it went on, I was amazed at how long and intricate that dance was. Yes, it looked simple, but I suspect it was actually very difficult.This movie stands on its own, but I think it's best watched along with the original.

More
strawberman
1976/05/24

My wife and I rented this movie tonight and thoroughly enjoyed it. A smile was frozen on my face for its duration. With that said, I couldn't help but feel a certain melancholy over the lack of minorities in it. Yes, there was Lena Horne, Ethel Waters, and Eddie "Rochester" Anderson; but Lena's light color and Ethel Waters's smiling and mammy look were safe enough to get them into a token few frames of the film. We look back at Major League Baseball in those days and reluctantly agree, if we're honest, that every record on the books- and not just Roger Maris's- honestly deserves an asterisk. Some of the greatest players of the day were never allowed onto the field because of their color. And, when I see That's Entertainment II, I can't but help feel that MGM, which billed itself as having the greatest stars in the world, should have had that statement followed with an asterisk, too. Fred Astaire, Gene Kelley, O'Connor, Fosse, etc. were great dancers, yes. But what if some of the great black dancers had that equal opportunity to shine on the silver screen? And, if other Asian, hispanic, native American artists were given a chance for their big break? I'm sure we would have all been much richer for it. You know, we think of the South in those days with its segregation and we justifiably get an angry feeling. How could that happen? But, movie studios outside of the South had a system that was just as segregated, if not more. But, in this case we don't get angry thinking about it; we sigh, and say, yes, that was just how things were in those days. The difference was that MGM, RKO, Warner Bros, Goldwyn, and the other studios didn't need to put WHITE ONLY signs up- it was understood. Anyway, go rent the movie today. It's fun and you'll have a nice time.

More