MovieChat Forums > An American in Paris (1951) Discussion > Several reasons why this doesn't hold up...

Several reasons why this doesn't hold up.

posted 18 years ago by Registered_User
29 replies | jump to latest

The "romance" was creepy and rushed. How old was Caron when she starred in this movie? About seventeen? Eighteen? Twenty at the very oldest? The age difference between the two is definitely apparent on-screen despite how youthful Gene Kelly looks for his age. I never had this problem with the Reynolds/Kelly pairing because their characters were in tune. Kelly just comes across as a stalker here. Caron's acting doesn't help. This is not how I like my Gene Kelly! And was it just me or did she seem to reciprocate his feelings waaaay too fast? I'd be pissed off for a while... I liked the idea that Gene was a bit of a giggolo to his benefactor, but of course this could never be explored because it was 1951. I loathed his out-of-work musician friend who seemed only to appear in the movie to annoy the hell out of me. He was an excuse for another (boring) musical number. This movie is worth watching for the finale, but beyond that it's so abysmal.

A good traveller has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Registered_User 18 years ago

No, Gene was more like 40 and Caron was 20. Just looked it up to be sure.

A good traveller has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JacquesDemy 18 years ago

Cultural differences, I guess. It is ok in France. French girls are not like American girls so childish. And they don't have the American trandistion that ideal couples should be sort of "High-school sweetheart" or something like that. A lot of French movies are about romance between teenager girls(16 or older) and 20 or even 30 years old men. While there also are some Hollywood movies with similiar themes, like American Beauty, Ghost World, but for most of American audience, I guess, this is totally a disgusting, creepy or even pedophilia thing.

[–] Registered_User 18 years ago

I wasn't implying that at all and I think you both know that. It wasn't so much their ages as it was that there was NO CHEMISTRY between them.

A good traveller has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

[–] ragreen259 18 years ago

Then why did you say age instead of chemistry? They're two entirely different things... apparently you assume everyone can read your mind, otherwise why claim "I think you both know what I mean." Personally, I think a person means what they said in the first place. I can't help detecting some backpedaling here...

[–] Registered_User 18 years ago

And I repeat,

I never had this problem with the Reynolds/Kelly pairing because their characters were in tune.

...meaning they had a chemistry going, despite the age difference, that I felt was lacking in AIP. That sentence is the key to everything I said. No backpeddling. I never backpeddle.

A good traveller has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] NSurone 17 years ago

I'd say there was quite a bit of chemistry between them, more so than between Kelly and Reynolds in SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. Maybe that was because Caron was a trained dancer, so that the ballet sequences went smoothy. It was no secret that Reynolds had to learn to dance and that Kelly was deeply resentful that Louis B. Mayer "forced" her on him.

[–] jaddeo 17 years ago

Who the heck cares about their age. That's the least of it. This is an appalingly bad and boring musical. It is a travesty that it won the Academy Award as best picture let alone even nominated! This was the year of Streetcar Named Desire and A Place in the Sun. Their age difference!!! Ha!!

[–] ragreen259 18 years ago

You really don't know much about Americans, do you?

[–] gribfritz2 12 years ago

French girls are not like American girls so childish.

Go suck a snail, Frenchy.

[–] ragreen259 18 years ago

My guess is that you're about 15 if you find a relationship between a 20 year old woman (take a minute and look, it only takes about the same length of time that paragraph of tripe you wrote did)and a guy 15-20 years older (and that's real life, we aren't told how old they're supposed to be in the movie) to be "creepy"... not to mention, IT'S A MOVIE.
Gotta say, you titled this post "several reasons," and the only ones you've come up with as to why the story doesn't hold up is:
1.Gene Kelly is older than Leslie Caron
2.You liked Debbie Reynolds
3.This isn't how you "like your Gene Kelly" (whatever that means)
4.You think she reciprocated his feelings too fast (hey, she only has about 2 hours)
5.You don't like out of work musicians, apparently

Now, give that list a look and see if I missed anything, and then actually explain each point and why the movie "doesn't hold up" because of it.

[–] Registered_User 18 years ago

You simplified everything I said to make me look shallow and ridiculous, but the post is more a reflection of your attitude than mine. You obviously like this movie enough to feel it's your duty to vehemently defend its integrity at every turn, even at the cost of sounding immature and desperate. You're right about one thing; it's just a movie and I gave my thoughts on it. You could have given your response without assumptions based on limited understanding of my tastes.

I'm 20-years-old. Make of that what you will.

A good traveller has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.

[–] bradford-1 18 years ago

I'd say the "out of work musician friend" was there to provide something that used to be known as "comedy relief." Oscar Levant did pretty much the same thing in THE BANDWAGON and RHAPSODY IN BLUE. Plus, Levant was also an accomplished pianist and songwriter.

[–] Registered_User 17 years ago

I found him irritating.

To thine own self be true.

[–] Mel204 17 years ago

Gene was between 38 and 39 when this was being filmed whilst Leslie was between 19 and 20. I love this movie, but I don't think the chemistry between Gene and Leslie was as strong between him and some of his other partners (except when they're dancing, they looked wonderful together in the ballet). Personally I think that Judy Garland had the most chemistry with Gene on screen.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] funkyfry 17 years ago

I completely disagree with your interpretation of the Nina Foch character, Milo. I definitely do not think that Minnnelli and Lerner (the writer) were trying to condone Jerry's attitude towards Milo. You're absolutely correct to say that it was an "extremely self righteous way the Nina Foch character was treated by Mulligan and his piano playing friend" -- you are wrong in my opinion to assume so easily that the director and the writer intended to approve of their attitude simply by showing it on screen. As you say, he shouldn't have kept sponging off her. I think the film deliberately makes the audience uncomfortable with the Jerry Mulligan character. In fact it's quite a brilliant set-up because he at first makes the audience believe that she is going to be this predatory person, when in reality especially after Mulligan makes that speech about how he's going to pay a lot of romantic attention to her "from now on" (implying that so far she has not demanded any sex in exchange for her assistance with his career), it's Mulligan who ends up being the one who is the "heel" who takes advantage of a wealthy woman. His eventual rejection of this set-up at the party and his return to the poor girl he truly loves makes this clear in my opinion. It's actually a very interesting reversal of the usual gender roles and I would argue that in many ways it presages Lerner's later work in "My Fair Lady."

It's fairly well documented that MGM saw "American in Paris" as a project that would replicate some of the themes and character of Kelly's original Broadway hit character "Pal Joey" insofar as it makes Kelly at first disarmingly aggressive, then his charm starts to shine through before we see that he's really just taking advantage of BOTH women he's involved with (in "Joey" his rich patron helps buy him a nightclub while in "Paris" it's a painting career that Kelly wants). In the case of "Joey" the Kelly character ends up being rejected by both women, but the people behind "Paris" didn't want an ending quite so downbeat, but they did want to capitalize on Kelly's success with that type of character and story.

Did I not love him, Cooch? MY OWN FLESH I DIDN'T LOVE BETTER!!! But he had to say 'Nooooooooo'

[–] ceebeegee 17 years ago

Why are you so hostile? I love the movie as well but he's entitled to his opinion and I think he explained his positions adequately.

And frankly I agree about the creepiness WRT the age difference. And no, I'm not 15--I'm an adult woman who thinks when you're getting to be 15-10 years apart, it feels generational.

[–] funkyfry 17 years ago

Well, I'm a huge fan of this movie so naturally I disagree with your sentiment overall, though I do detect some of what you're talking about in the initial encounters with Caron. When they were out by the river (Siennes?) and he tells her she's beautiful, she says "I am?" and then Kelly says "Yes, you are!" in this really cutesy annoying voice that for some reason reminds me of what a sex predator would sound like talking to a kid. I know that sounds crazy but I definitely don't think the film was intended this way, I think it's just that our souls have now been so corrupted by sexualized representations in culture that we can't help but react to certain things that might be "innocent" in a totally different way.

p.s. I love Oscar Levant in the movie and I find him far from annoying, but mostly hilarious! The scene where Kelly and the other guy were talking about their gals and he's lighting all these cigarettes and putting them in his coffee is laugh out loud funny! And I really think the version of "Concerto in F" with the all-Levant orchestra is the most imaginative classical music scene I've ever seen in a film.

Did I not love him, Cooch? MY OWN FLESH I DIDN'T LOVE BETTER!!! But he had to say 'Nooooooooo'

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sean_pak215 13 years ago

I agree that Kelly's character seemed a bit aggressive in the beginning but I think the key moment was the very first time she laid eyes on him at the restaurant. Obviously (to me) she was attracted to him right away, just notice at how she looked at him. In classic movies that was the split-second "look" a girl gave a guy when she was caught by surprise by handsomeness. So the gist I got from the later courting scenes was that she was feeling a mix of flattery and annoyance. And in the end her attraction to him won out, due in no small part to his sweet talking by the river. We have to admit that he came off as much more down to earth guy on that date, which was probably what made her feel comfortable. And in all this time, remember that she thought he was good looking, always an important factor in romance. Something which gave Kelly's character a lot more leeway in how "creepy" he could act.

Of course, my parents courted in kind of the same way so I may be biased in how understanding I am. My dad was smitten by mother right away, and was very aggressive about getting a date. Initially she wasn't interested. In fact, she already had her own crush at the time. But with the same sort of determination that Kelly showed in this movie, he finally won her time (and eventually her heart). And hey, they're still married, and I'm 25.

The age difference between Kelly and Caron wasn't distracting, because he definitely looked more 30 than 40 (and his physique was more 20, haha). And somebody else already mentioned how Europeans are more open about somewhat large age discrepancies. I'm Korean-Japanese and it's the same way in those countries. Many women from those cultures WANT older men; I've dated some who admitted as much.

Also, maybe it's because I'm a sucker for the comic relief characters in musicals, but Levant was the best thing about this movie for me. Perhaps it's because I relate to his character (I'm also an aspiring musician who tends to be moody, and drinks a lot). And I love the skill set he showcased in this film.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nycruise-1 11 years ago

Have to agree with you.

I showed "Gigi" to a 20-something and all he got out of it was that it was full of "creeper" guys who lusted after little girls.

Likewise, I thought twice about showing "The Graduate" to the same young crowd and thought twice, since the movie is about stalking and what was a laugh riot back in the late 1960s now comes off as "creepy".

Times change.

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"