MovieChat Forums > Easter Parade (1948) Discussion > Should they have rewritten the end of Ea...

Should they have rewritten the end of Easter Parade when they recast it?

posted 19 years ago by johandav
26 replies | jump to latest

As everyone here quite likely knows, Gene Kelly was scheduled to co-star in Easter Parade with Judy Garland, and shortly before filming started he was hurt and they got Fred Astaire to fill in for him (pulling him out of retirement).

Does anyone else out there think that they should have rewritten the love story when this recasting took place? Fred Astaire was 23 years older than Judy Garland, and looked it. When he kisses her I get a smaller version of the cringe that I felt when I saw Woody Allen kissing Mariel Hemingway in Manhattan. Plus, Garland and Astaire have very little chemistry in the movie, in my opinion. Gene Kelly and Judy Garland would have been fine together, I think; he was ten years older than she was but had a very youthful look (he was twenty years older than Debbie Reynolds in Singing in the Rain and they were fine together).

I think that the ending should have been rewritten so that Judy's Hannah Brown ended up with Peter Lawford's Johnny. They seemed much better together. And he seemed to love her - even at the end of the film I never believed that about Fred Astaire's Don Hewes.

Anybody out there agree or disagree with this opinion?

"Use the instrument panel, Loke. That's what it's there for."

[–] scootmandutoo 13 years ago

The poster nailed it. The love affair made no sense at all. There was no romantic chemistry between Garland and Astaire. Why she would fall in love with him over Lawford still baffles me. It wasn't as if he was showering her with affection.

[–] filmmekker 13 years ago

I totally bought the ending. Judy's character seemed like the type who wouldn't go for the young "prettyboy" but would be attracted to an older man, a father figure. And talent-wise they were a perfect match!

Open the door for Mr. Muckle!!

[–] joewilson70 12 years ago

Just watched it on TCM, I didnt know their ages or cared....it's a film, maybe she was playing someone a little older, and he was playing someone a little younger, either way, I didnt care.... to me this movie is just a bit of hokum and also a gloriously enjoyable fantasy......

[–] TheChamCham 10 years ago

Smart people marry for better reasons than love, although it is nice if they have that too.

Peter Lawford was a creep. The studio kept trying to push he and June Allyson together off screen as well as on and she said she didn't mind working with him but wanted nothing to do with him romantically. He was also six years her junior. She chose Dick Powell who was thirteen years older.

"I say,open this door at once! We're British !"

[–] Prismark10 8 years ago

Astaire was 49 when he made this film, the love story aspect with Garland is cringeworthy.

It's that man again!!

[–] Merry-Go-Girl 8 years ago

I was actually certain Hannah was going to end up with Johnny, and mildly horrified when she was batting hard for leather-face. I'm not anti age gaps but clearly Johnny was much more into her.

Why do people so frequently get told to read the book on a movie database?