I greatly dislike and resent reviewers who give away plots and endings. Why do they do it? This is one of my all-time favorite musicals. It is not a flag-waver and it does not sugar-coat war (rah-rah-America!), though as one reviewer mentioned, there is a note at the ending saying that war bonds would be sold in the lobby. War is hell. Everyone in it was wonderful, Garland actually kept right up with Kelly in the dancing, and she came across strong, professional and abundantly talented, all of which she is. (Incidentally, before Pal Joey, there was a straight play by Saroyan called The Time of Your Life which I think was Kelly's first big break (he danced), and before that a part in the chorus of a Porter musical called Leave It To Me, more than that I don't know.) The movie is singing and dancing from stem to stern, all wonderful, all Garland and/or Kelly, and I loved every minute of it. The directing was also good, though I'm no judge of that kind of thing, but it struck me as inventive and original while I watched it. I totally abhored Murphy's bit in France when he makes a sap out of the poor dumb foreigner with the fake money. And then his men have a good laugh. I thought it stunk. And on the subject of George Murphy (whose career in movies was about as stellar as Ronald Reagan's), Tom Lehrer said (sang, actually), "Gee it's great! At last we've got a senator who can really sing and dance!" That's about the size of it, folks. And I didn't think he did either of those particularly well. If he'd gotten the girl, I wouldn't have watched the movie a second time. One last note. I cried during this movie when Danny left for duty. And I really cried at the end.
