MovieChat Forums > Judy Garland Discussion > Her Rise to Top Stardom at MGM Took Some...

Her Rise to Top Stardom at MGM Took Some Time

posted 10 months ago by Corryveckan45 (169)
2 replies | jump to latest

After just recently watching 1943's PRESENTING LILY MARS, I looked at Judy's MGM filmography and realized took some time to move her into top flight "Judy Garland" vehicles. Perhaps this was because THE WIZARD OF OZ, which wasn't promoted as a "Judy Garland vehicle", lost a good deal of money on its' original release?

Whatever the reason, it seems to me that MGM didn't begin providing Judy with first rate, lavish "superstar" vehicles until 1944's MEET ME IN ST LOUIS, nine years after she was signed by MGM in 1935.

Thoughts?

[–] AnagramYYZ (607) 10 months ago

I think she was almost always quite bankable for her singing, range, and charming personality. The Wizard of Oz was a pretty huge success, which received Oscar accolades including a ceremonial junior award for Garland herself. You seem to ignore that by focusing on it’s net monetary gain, but forgetting that it was a monumentally expensive picture that had to compete in 1939–which may have been the pinnacle year for high quality Hollywood output.

See Ziegfeld Girl, which is right smack in the middle of Garland’s early career, and you’ll understand that she just wasn’t quite old enough yet to be seen as a romantic leading lady, as Lana Turner and Hedy Lamarr were.

Meet Me in St. Louis is an odd comparison, since that was as much of an ensemble cast as Oz was.

But yes, Presently Lily Mars and For Me and My Gal represent Garland’s more cemented status as adult leading lady.

[–] Corryveckan45 (169) 9 months ago

Hi AnagramYYZ,

Thanks for your thoughts. What I meant was that MGM didn't follow up Garland's success in OZ with a series of "Judy Garland" musicals/films in which she was the central character/superstar attraction. I think she made 7 films between OZ and FOR ME AND MY GAL (1942), the first film where she received solo, above-the-title billing, an acknowledgement of her emerging superstar status. Of these 7, only one, "Little Nellie Kelly" (1940) could be considered a "Judy Garland movie."

In the others, she was cast as prominent support to other actors who had the leading role, most frequently Mickey Rooney in the ANDY HARDY and "Let's Put on a Show" films. You mentioned "Ziegfeld Girl (1941) and that's a perfect example. Even though Judy is billed second in the cast list (after James Stewart), an indication of her rising popularity, the film centers most on Lana Turner, and it's really a vehicle to enable Lana to graduate from starlet to star, much as OZ did for Judy.

Moreover, the "Garland vehicles" that Judy made at this time, "Little Nellie Kelly," "For Me and My Gal," and "Presenting Lily Mars," may have been "A" productions, but, if they were, they were modest "A" productions without the trappings of Technicolor, elaborate production numbers, original scores, etc. that Judy would get in her later films. In fact, Judy was so concerned about LILY MARS' modest budget that she reportedly went behind producer Joe Pasternak's back and complained to the front office that she thought it would fail, resulting in the film being turned over to the Arthur Freed Unit for an elaborate production number finale.