MovieChat Forums > An American in Paris (1951) Discussion > Love that '50s mentality!!

Love that '50s mentality!!

posted 18 years ago by lauraeileen894
18 replies | jump to latest

In the dance montage that introduces Leslie Caron's character, during the one where she's reading a book in that demure schoolgirl outfit, does anyone laugh out loud when you hear Oscar Levant ask "Doesn't all that reading make her moody?"? I'm sorry, but the '50s were such a silly decade to me, and I love how stupid and sexist that line is (I'm a woman, but I can laugh because it's such a ridiculous notion). It really represents the mentality towards women and intellectualism during that period.

[–] derekrss 18 years ago

Funny thing is that this film is more 1940s than 1950s. It may have been released in 1951 but the overall feel is very much immediate post-war as far as I'm concerned.

[–] robertcampopiano 18 years ago

One thing you have to keep in mind is that France and most of Europe were just beginning to recover from the devastation of WW II. Their "post war" feel and mind set lasted much longer than here in the US. The only reason that Paris was still standing was that the German general in command of Paris defied Hitler's order to burn the city. He negotiated with the Allies to surrender rather than destroy the city he had come to appreciate. The influx of artists helped to restore Paris's vitality and made it the center of the art world for 20 years or so. I wish I had been around to experience the immediate post war atmosphere and rebirth of Paris.

[–] velcronewsletter 8 years ago

exactly so. rationing and austerity lasted for up to 10 years in some places so the post war mind set was very real

[–] velcronewsletter 8 years ago

agreed. but remember that rationing and austerity lasted for up to 10 years in some places so the post war mind set was very real

[–] Registered_User 18 years ago

That part irks me. I can laugh at it too, but come on.

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

[–] starwarssucksmypoo 18 years ago

I think the line might be a subtle joke. You know, the sort of blissfully ignorant nonsensical thing that the -average- guy would say back then. I think someone was touching on the old fashioned idea that when women turn intellectual it makes them "nervous" or "moody". Anyway, if you look at that whole number, you'll notice that to every description the guy gave of Lise, the other fellow seemed to pick out the worst (and least logical) synonym.

[–] viaggio1 18 years ago

Yes, I would agree with starwars.....
the scene was a showcase for the
crabby / off-centered /
vaguely misanthropic personality
of Oscar Levant's character.

But the scene is also a compliment
to Leslie Caron's character --- that
she was involved in so many activities,
talented in so many ways.

Same concept is explored in another
Gene Kelly flick, "On the Town,"
where "Miss Turnstiles" is portrayed
as a multifaceted, multi-talented woman.

[–] thomaswords 16 years ago

It irks you? Jesus you must be a lot of fun at parties. Don't move, sweetheart! Your thin skin will burst and the confetti will get all over the carpet.

[–] artihcus022 17 years ago

I didn't think that line was sexist. You can call it anti-intellectual but it's obviously a joke. Nothing to get PC over. In any case the point of that montage is that Lise is a character who doesn't fit in society's conception of different types of women. Which to me is the exact opposite of sexist.

The idea in that line is that 'reading' can make you moody and there's this stereotype of people reading a lot of books becoming depressed(I'm a guy and I face it all that time).

It really represents the mentality towards women and intellectualism during that period.

Seriously!!! A better example would be another musical about Americans in Paris called Funny Face which while nice is more in line with what you are looking for.

That line doesn't represent anything. It's just a conversation between friends cracking a joke. This is what's known as reading-too-much. And in any case the rest of the film is far from sexist and anti-intellectual.

How much is a good nights sleep worth?

[–] lauraeileen894 17 years ago

You misunderstand me... I wasn't offended by the line, I was greatly amused by it. I'm not by nature a politically correct person; otherwise I could never in a million years enjoy old movies (which I do). I was just saying that it, without meaning to, summed up the silly attitude towards intellectualism that ran rampant in the '50s. And the '50s were anti-intellectual! Anyone who lived during that era could tell you that!

I found the line funny, not offensive. It's too ridiculous to be offended by, that was my point.

[–] kaiachautauqua 17 years ago

AMDG

Now you're making me wonder whether there were viewers in the 50s who had the same reaction to that line that we have today. I mean, we have our own silly attitude of political correctness running rampant today, but we can appreciate anti-PC jokes in our movies. Given the fact that Levant's character said it, I've always taken it as very tongue-in-cheek, and assumed that everyone, including the original audiences, did, too.

[–] writers_reign 17 years ago

I just read the whole sequence as one guy explaining to another that he has located the 'perfect' woman who is all things to all men, i.e. virgin, cocotte, intellectual, homemaker, artiste, and attractive with it.

[–] funkyfry 17 years ago

"I wasn't offended by the line, I was greatly amused by it. I'm not by nature a politically correct person; otherwise I could never in a million years enjoy old movies (which I do). I was just saying that it, without meaning to, summed up the silly attitude towards intellectualism that ran rampant in the '50s."

I see what you're saying but i think what the other poster was trying to say, and I agree, is that you're making a big assumption by saying "without meaning to". I think Minnelli and the writers were fully aware of what they were doing there, and it was a joke about Levant's character really.

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

[–] artihcus022 17 years ago

Exactly and in a way it establishes irony because look what happens to Levant's character, he ends up going nowhere and is moody and depressed...and also might be in love with Gene Kelly's character.

How much is a good nights sleep worth?

[–] Jane_Doe01 17 years ago

I'm not by nature a politically correct person

Lol, good one. Anyone who screams out "sexist!" at the most trivial of things(or arguably, at most anything. I find it a loaded term, especially after researching how it was born about), "laughingly" or not, is by definition politically correct. Thems the breaks.
You're so prepared with condescending, critical assaults towards just about anything 1950s and earlier that you disagree with, due to your life-long, PC indoctrination (from public education and the media)about the supposed "oppression" of these times. Naturally, these things are guilty until proven innocent for modern audiences trained to believe they live in better and more "free" times.

[–] funkyfry 17 years ago

Not sure if I'm fully understanding your post, but in my opinion there's nothing wrong with laughing at the line and it certainly is an example of some kind of "sexism", the real question is just to what extent it was intended as an ironic reflection on gender roles or to what extent it could have been "unintentional" sexism. You can read my comments earlier in the thread as far as the fact that I consider it intentional irony. I do agree that people tend to look at things from the 50s and assume that there might be a more conservative viewpoint -- to be fair while that often isn't true I can think of many "liberal" people in the past who would seem conservative by our standards. But I think the reputations of Vincente Minnelli and Alan Jay Lerner should really inform our thinking on the subject as well -- it's not like we're talking about "typical" moviemakers/songwriters here, we're talking about a director who pioneered positive and liberated portrayals of "minority" characters and women in film for 50 years and we're talking about the writer of "My Fair Lady." So I think it would be naive to think that the sexism in the line wasn't intentional, and I also think it would be wrong to assume that simply by depicting the sexist attitude it means that these people agreed with it. I mean is the Oscar Levant character a hero? Is he some kind of role model in the film for everyone else? So I do wonder why there should be this assumption that simply because the character makes that statement, that the authors agree with it.

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

[–] snoopdavidniven 16 years ago

This entire thread proves Levant's wisecrack correct.

[–] kkristians9 16 years ago

I think everyone is looking waaaay to into this one, it's just to set them up for "no, she's gay!",the scene with the ballarina costume and the upbeat music at the end the montage, jeeeeeze!