It is fantastic the way he moves, he is a fantastic dancer, I would evan go as far to say that hes better than Fred Astaire. The way he swings his legs is almost unrealistic and the speed looks like its set on fast forward, but the incredible thing is that its all real. Does anyone agree with me?
sharethey're both fantastic. gene kelly is the more athletic dancer but (although he may come close) he does not match fred astaire's effortless grace.
Chaos was what killed the dinosaurs, darling.
Compared to Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly is coarse, and his legs are short. You're always aware that he's dancing, and he's aware too. The way he rolls up his cuffs is annoying too. It's not a classy look. Fred Astaire is so graceful. He walks, he talks, he sings, he dances. It's all so seamlessly elegant.
shareKelly and Astaire are often compared but it's not a fair comparison. Both were incomprable dancers; certainly the best male leads/dancers in Hollywood history. Both could easily carry a film. Astaire was less of a principled choreographer and more of a make it up as he went type dancer while Kelly was into style and form. Kelly was so smooth and his every move picture perfect. Watch Kelly dance and nothing he does is accidental of made up off the cuff. Astaire is such fun because he was such an iconoclast; he never did anything the same way twice. I prefer Gene Kelly but then I enjoy watching well crafted choreography.
shareGene Kelly was amazing, but not better than Fred Astaire. Gene might have had a better body 2 look at, especially that booty(lol), but there's just something about Astaire that was so effortless, and smooth, it can't be matched. But Kelly comes as close as anyone.
shareI find it hard to compare the two - their dance style is so completely different. It's like trying to do a head-to-head of Bach and Stravinsky.
shareThat's right--like comparing apples and oranges. I love them both, and love watching them both.
shareI don't know if Kelly is a better dancer than Astaire, but he's definitely a more complete package. He can certainly sing and act better than Astaire.
Gene Kelly was kind of a one-trick pony in terms of he was the same type of character and did the same things in every movie, but he did it so well. He is just a joy to watch!
I'm not nearly as familiar with Fred Astaire as I am with Gene Kelly, so I have no way to judge them, but I love love LOVE Kelly. I remember my best friend showed me Singing in the Rain when I was really young, and I just fell in love with him from the start. Watching him dance now feels almost nostalgic, even though I'm from a completely different generation.
And, not to be crude, but HE'S BOOTILICIOUS.
I disagree with you. Freddie is better, more elegant, more graceful, more inventive. Check out any of the movies where he doesn't dance with a partner but instead dances brilliant routines with fireworks, drum-kits, chairs, an empty room you name it. Plus he doesn' t usually play an annoying jerk like Kelly often did.
I'm not familiar with Fred Astaire and to be honest have never been interested in seeing his films. Gene Kelly is just magical to me. I love his athletic, rugged dancing, his gorgeous body and face, and his charasmatic acting. Gene Kelly will always be my favorite actor of all time and Singing in the Rain my favorite movie.
shareBoth Kelly and Astaire were great in their own ways. If you are unfamiliar with Astaire or have only seen him dancing with, say, Ginger Rogers, look up his "dancing on the ceiling" or "hat rack" scenes from Royal Wedding. Amazing.
I think Kelly excelled in tap and Astaire in ballroom dancing, but both were very graceful and athletic. Kelly always seemed to have a bit of a "bedroom eyes" glint when he was dancing with a female partner while Astaire was more subtle. In short, I can't choose!