Charles Herold (cherold) For Me and My Gal is a rather odd bird. Set during World War I, The film begins by positioning itself as a tribute to the days of vaudeville, with sweet singer Judy Garland meeting obnoxious dancer Gene Kelly on tour. The two predictably team up after doing an impromptu version of For Me and My Gal that is the best thing in the movie.Then the movie wanders into soap opera before pulling the various war- themed threads together into a typical WWII rah-rah boost for contributing to the war effort.The story is a bit of a mess. I suspect the U.S. entry into WWII happened after the film was greenlighted and parts of it were grafted on as part of the war morale-boosting that was an inevitable part of most early 40s movies. There is a lack of cohesion, most notably with George Murphy's character, who feels like the vestigial tail of the original script. The movie also feels a little self-serving in its emphasis on the importance of entertainment for the troops. I feel this movie would have been done better if it's story had been allowed to play out without worries about patriotic fervor.Kelly is likable in his film debut, but his character is unsympathetic, and apparently the studio had to do a lot of reshooting before audiences could leave the theater not hating him. Garland is charming as she leaves her juvenile roles behind, although I can never be totally happy with any Garland movie that doesn't include at least one ballad. They have good chemistry, but it is better featured in The Pirate, which they made later on.The reason to watch a movie like this is for the musical numbers, but while these are good, there isn't much that is memorable (surprisingly director Busby Berkeley didn't do any of his trademark synchronized- chorus-girl numbers). There are also big chunks of the movie where the musical numbers disappear in favor of the story, which just highlights its weaknesses.Overall this isn't a horrible movie, but it's not one I'd particularly recommend.

lrocksalot This is one of my favorite of the Judy Garland movies. Being a big fan of her and her music, I've seen at least fifteen of her films, and this made it as my #2. 19 year-old Garland is our film's star, and top-billed for the first time. Besides her, this movie features Gene Kelly, fresh off from Broadway and in his first feature film. Alongside them is the always reliable George Murphy, who last starred with Garland in Little Nellie Kelly (1940). While Garland did play an adult for part of Little Nellie Kelly, this was the first film in which she had a complete adult role. We also have a guest in Marta Eggerth, an experienced opera singer who has a small part in this movie, and had a more significant part in Garland's next film, Presenting Lily Mars (1943).Garland easily shined above the rest. Being in her fifteenth picture, she was already a polished actress, and it definitely shows in some of the more dramatic moments. Her singing was just wonderful, having reached a new level of maturity. Her dancing was actually very good considering she was never actually a dancer. But she could pick up anything thrown her way. She was perfect.Kelly was a good co-star. Being as inexperienced as he was, he still acted pretty well, but that inexperience did show at some points. His dancing was brilliant of course, he was one of the best dancers at the time, second only to Fred Astaire. He was never really a singer, but he was okay. Murphy, sadly, was grossly underplayed, especially in the love triangle, but he did well as a supporting character. I wish he had gotten a little more screen time.The songs were wonderful. I find myself singing them all around my house. The sets were well put together and the plot was mostly tight. The ending was obviously tacked on, but I was able to ignore it.But my absolute favorite part of the movie was when Garland and Kelly sang "For Me and My Gal." I was actually surprised that it was played less than twenty minutes in, considering it was the title song, but I loved it all the same. I consider it to be one of the famous magical movie moments. The pacing, the dancing, the accompaniment, it was all so perfect. And of course, it was sung by the person Fred Astaire called, "The greatest entertainer of all time," Judy Garland.This movie will definitely put you in a good mood, despite its minor flaws. And for Garland fans such as myself, it will be a delight. The bells are ringing For Me and My Gal.

MartinHafer Judy Garland and George Murphy are a dance team. However, Judy falls for another (Gene Kelly) and George steps aside so the other two can form a new team. The problem is, Judy soon falls in love with Gene and Gene is a heel and doesn't notice. Later, to avoid serving in the war, he deliberately injures himself! Can Kelly somehow redeem himself and can Garland manage to land the lug? I watched "For Me and My Gal" along with my wife, aunt and uncle. And, about 2/3 of the way through the film, they declared that they'd had enough and they left. I managed to finish it, but must agree, a bit, with them. Although MOST of the songs were pretty good, the story was one giant cliché and really wasn't all that good. Plus, there was a god-awful song by Kelly's OTHER love interest and her high-pitched singing made everyone threaten to leave in the first place. Aside from being Gene Kelly's first film, it's an otherwise adequate film with little else to recommend it.

edwagreen Terrific plot underscores this great 1942 musical starring Gene Kelly, Judy Garland and George Murphy. While Murphy is relegated to a totally supporting role in this film, it was more than worth it as he holds his own.The musical numbers including the title song are marvelously staged. The tempo picks up as classic World War 1 songs are sung by Miss Garland and Mr. Kelly.You would never think that a Garland-Kelly musical with the two falling in love and fighting off temptation to abandon each other so as to advance in their careers would fall upon such tragedy here. Who would ever expect that the plot would finally revolve about Kelly's way to avoid selective service so that he could play at his beloved Palace Theater, only to incur the wrath of Garland whose brother is killed in the war.This was definitely the best of the 3 films that Garland and Kelly made together. The others were "The Pirate" (1948) and Garland's last film for MGM-"Summerstock," in 1951Note that this film came only after 3 years of Judy's "The Wizard of Oz," and yet she shows a phenomenal maturity here thus breaking out of her teenage role tradition. It was all uphill for Judy after this one.Who sang for Martha Eggert in the film? Whoever it was did a fantastic job.This heartwarming piece is a piece of Americana at its best.