Me and My Shadows is an above average TV film that tells an average story of Judy Garland's life. The acting, particularly by the two Judy's, Tammy Blanchard and Judy Davis, as well as Victor Garber as Sid Luft, is outstanding. The producers did an outstanding job of recreating decades of history. But this telling of Judy's life, based largely on Lorna Luft's recollection, would have been much better told with Get Happy or a more personal account of Judy's life.
Again, this is a pretty good film. The acting is outstanding, and the recreations of the musical numbers from some of Judy's films, particulary "Meet Me In St. Louis" and "A Star is Born" is incredible. The bit players, like Mickey Rooney, Louis Mayer and Vincente Minelli were also superbly cast.
However, this production is bogged down with a number of problems. First and foremost, Judy Davis takes over the role WAY too early. The filming of Meet Me In St. Louis started in 1943, when Judy was 21 years old. Judy Davis is 45. You do the math. Now, drugs and other factors did cause Judy to age pretty badly, but that really didn't happen until the fifties, when Judy hit her 30's. Twenty one year old girls do not have horribly visible wrinkles. Tammy Blanchard did an outstanding job, and should have held the role until 1950's Summer Stock, which isn't covered in the film.
Which leads me to another problem I had with this film: important parts of Judy's life/career are not covered, Summer Stock being one of them. After "Over the Rainbow", "Get Happy" is probably Judy's most well known song. And the story of how that number gets into the film was worth being told. The film, without commercials, is about 2 1/2 hours, and too much time is spent beating us over the head about Judy's pill problems. There are other aspects of Judy and her life that needed to be mentioned, as well, such as her promiscuity with characters such as Artie Shaw, her wild teenage years, and World War II, which all get absolutely no mention. Practically the last half hour of the film is more about Lorna Luft than Judy. Who cares about Lorna Luft???!!!
In addition to those things, I also have a problem with the way "facts" are dropped throughout the film. The characters don't speak the way people normally speak. It sounds awkward to hear Judy Garland tell Vincente Minelli that he and Gene Kelly are whispering all the time. She would have called him "Gene" or "Kelly", not "Gene Kelly". Or the way Judy and her friends throw out generic insults to the other Best Actress nominees Judy is up against in 1954 (Incidentally, Grace Kelly totally deserved that Oscar). There are silly speeches made by the characters to help move the script along where they would have been better served actually adding the scenes that they refer to. Judy's problems with Bubsy Berkeley were well documented, and he caused her an inordinate amount of grief over the years. A major part of Judy's early career that's just sort of swept along by a quick shot of Berkeley having a mild tantrum and Judy making an all encompasing speech about it. The film neglects many major characters in Judy's life, but for some reason, bothers to introduce some of them, only to never be heard from again. The scene where Judy meets Lana Turner is pointless if they're not going to show Judy's competition with Lana and her affair with Artie Shaw that ended with Turner taking him away from Judy. Same thing with Berkeley. Either tell the whole story, or don't bother introducing the character. Even major characters in the film are underdeveloped, Sid Luft being an example. This is a guy with a serious gambling problem and a very bad temper, who is pretty much angelically played by Victor Garber.
This production really should have been 4 or 5 hours. But as a 2 1/2 hour production, they should have cut some of the redundant scenes (pill popping), dug deeper into what they underdeveloped, and moved the film along with shots of newspaper and magazine headlines and radio and movienews voiceovers. They actually did do that in one part of the film; I don't know why they didn't do it throughout. One place in particular that something like this was needed was after Judy's first show at Carnegie Hall, which was considered a legendary perfect masterpiece by everyone who saw it, and one of the high points of Judy's entire career. The magnitude of this event is not conveyed in this film.
My final problem with this film is the passive way in which Judy and "her shadows" are filmed. This was a very emotionally unstable woman with a lot of serious issues. Judy Davis's portrayal of THIS woman, especially in the later years, is very shallow and too driven by incidents that occur than by whatever torment Judy Garland was actually experiencing.
It's hard to expect too much from a TV movie. Especially since they have to be designed to appeal to the masses and the short attention spans of people. But who was this film made for? Certainly not the big fans of Judy Garland, who like me, I'm sure wanted more depth and accuracy. This film was targeted to a general audience and assumes people have little or no knowledge of Judy, and don't want to find out too much. But there is plenty of good here, and it's entertaining. "B-"
Again, this is a pretty good film. The acting is outstanding, and the recreations of the musical numbers from some of Judy's films, particulary "Meet Me In St. Louis" and "A Star is Born" is incredible. The bit players, like Mickey Rooney, Louis Mayer and Vincente Minelli were also superbly cast.
However, this production is bogged down with a number of problems. First and foremost, Judy Davis takes over the role WAY too early. The filming of Meet Me In St. Louis started in 1943, when Judy was 21 years old. Judy Davis is 45. You do the math. Now, drugs and other factors did cause Judy to age pretty badly, but that really didn't happen until the fifties, when Judy hit her 30's. Twenty one year old girls do not have horribly visible wrinkles. Tammy Blanchard did an outstanding job, and should have held the role until 1950's Summer Stock, which isn't covered in the film.
Which leads me to another problem I had with this film: important parts of Judy's life/career are not covered, Summer Stock being one of them. After "Over the Rainbow", "Get Happy" is probably Judy's most well known song. And the story of how that number gets into the film was worth being told. The film, without commercials, is about 2 1/2 hours, and too much time is spent beating us over the head about Judy's pill problems. There are other aspects of Judy and her life that needed to be mentioned, as well, such as her promiscuity with characters such as Artie Shaw, her wild teenage years, and World War II, which all get absolutely no mention. Practically the last half hour of the film is more about Lorna Luft than Judy. Who cares about Lorna Luft???!!!
In addition to those things, I also have a problem with the way "facts" are dropped throughout the film. The characters don't speak the way people normally speak. It sounds awkward to hear Judy Garland tell Vincente Minelli that he and Gene Kelly are whispering all the time. She would have called him "Gene" or "Kelly", not "Gene Kelly". Or the way Judy and her friends throw out generic insults to the other Best Actress nominees Judy is up against in 1954 (Incidentally, Grace Kelly totally deserved that Oscar). There are silly speeches made by the characters to help move the script along where they would have been better served actually adding the scenes that they refer to. Judy's problems with Bubsy Berkeley were well documented, and he caused her an inordinate amount of grief over the years. A major part of Judy's early career that's just sort of swept along by a quick shot of Berkeley having a mild tantrum and Judy making an all encompasing speech about it. The film neglects many major characters in Judy's life, but for some reason, bothers to introduce some of them, only to never be heard from again. The scene where Judy meets Lana Turner is pointless if they're not going to show Judy's competition with Lana and her affair with Artie Shaw that ended with Turner taking him away from Judy. Same thing with Berkeley. Either tell the whole story, or don't bother introducing the character. Even major characters in the film are underdeveloped, Sid Luft being an example. This is a guy with a serious gambling problem and a very bad temper, who is pretty much angelically played by Victor Garber.
This production really should have been 4 or 5 hours. But as a 2 1/2 hour production, they should have cut some of the redundant scenes (pill popping), dug deeper into what they underdeveloped, and moved the film along with shots of newspaper and magazine headlines and radio and movienews voiceovers. They actually did do that in one part of the film; I don't know why they didn't do it throughout. One place in particular that something like this was needed was after Judy's first show at Carnegie Hall, which was considered a legendary perfect masterpiece by everyone who saw it, and one of the high points of Judy's entire career. The magnitude of this event is not conveyed in this film.
My final problem with this film is the passive way in which Judy and "her shadows" are filmed. This was a very emotionally unstable woman with a lot of serious issues. Judy Davis's portrayal of THIS woman, especially in the later years, is very shallow and too driven by incidents that occur than by whatever torment Judy Garland was actually experiencing.
It's hard to expect too much from a TV movie. Especially since they have to be designed to appeal to the masses and the short attention spans of people. But who was this film made for? Certainly not the big fans of Judy Garland, who like me, I'm sure wanted more depth and accuracy. This film was targeted to a general audience and assumes people have little or no knowledge of Judy, and don't want to find out too much. But there is plenty of good here, and it's entertaining. "B-"