Wow! Such a good movie.

How sad is this?

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Producer: Arthur Freed. Copyright 5 September 1951 by Loew's Inc. A Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer picture. New York opening at the Radio City Music Hall: 4 October 1951 (ran 7 weeks). U.S. release: 9 November 1951. U.K. release: 24 December 1951. Australian release: 2 April 1952. 10,204 feet. 113 minutes.NOTES: M-G-M production number: 1501. Negative cost: $2,723,903. Total worldwide rentals gross to 1975: $8,050,000. Initial domestic rentals gross: $4 million, which gave it the number 5 position at the U.S./Canadian box-office for 1952. When the film was being edited for release, some musical numbers were deleted and minor cuts were made to tighten the picture. Kelly was extremely sorry to see his favorite number eliminated. "I've Got a Crush on You" was a solo number to which he had given particular thought and attention. "Love Walked In" and "But Not for Me," both Guetary solos, were also taken out of the film. The former held up the tempo in the early part of the picture and the latter didn't play in the surrounding whirl of the Beaux Arts ball.Shooting from 1 August 1950 to 8 January 1951, with one day of re- takes on 2 April 1951.While Kelly was rehearsing the final ballet, Minnelli directed a sequel to his "Father of the Bride". On 6 December, when Minnelli came back to shoot the ballet, he brought with him John Alton, his cameraman on that sequel, namely "Father's Little Dividend". "I regretted that I hadn't had him for the whole film," Minnelli later stated. "I think he is one of the greatest cameramen that I have ever worked with. Alton is very flexible; he doesn't have a set mind like Gilks had, and he is capable of modifying his lights according to the director's preferences." This was Alton's first Technicolor assignment. But even so, he had very definite ideas as to how to bring about certain color effects. Many of Alton's fellow cameramen believed that it was impossible to shoot the ballet the way he did: shooting directly into a light, or using less than the minimum of light deemed necessary for a good negative. There was also a row with the electricians, who strongly objected to Alton's procedures. Instead of flooding the set with sixty lights, Alton would use only three or four. COMMENT: Unlike every other movie studio in the entire world, M-G-M really hated newspaper critics. Give an M-G-M movie a bad review and they'd suspend your press privileges for a week, a month or even a year. They black-balled me on any number of occasions. I was never permitted to review this film, for example, so I am forced to rely on the excellent Warner DVD. All the same I do remember very distinctly how disappointed I felt when I finally saw the film.Admittedly, the film was handicapped for me by the presence of Gene Kelly himself. I concede that he is a brilliant (if extremely flashy) choreographer, an amazingly adroit dancer and an equally imaginative director, but as a singer he is weak and as an actor he often displays many of the least likable aspects of the American character: his brash, aggressive manner, his supreme self- confidence, his boastfulness and perhaps above all, his ingrained belief that the world owes him deference simply because he is an American. Unfortunately, these traits are in great evidence in "An American In Paris". Lacking sympathy for the central character, it is easy to see why the film failed to fully engage my attention when I finally caught up with it in 1971. I was not happy with the supporting characters either. As a singer, Georges Guetary belongs to the florid school, and as a personality, he did not come across at all. And I much preferred glamorous Nina Foch (who is supposed to be the unsympathetic character) to gamin Leslie Caron (who is supposed to be the heroine). At least Oscar Levant is his usual amusing screen self.The plot is slight and all-too-familiar but some of the songs are very catchy. On the other hand, I have never cared for the music of "An American in Paris," which seems to me to be strident, forced, lacking in harmony and melody. What impressed me most about the film in 1971 was its glittering color photography, its sumptuous sets and its dazzling costumes. I have no doubt that "An American In Paris" fully deserved the Hollywood awards it won in these departments.

An American In Paris is a very different beast of a movie than Singin' in the Rain. It's not as fun as other MGM musicals (although there is fun to be had) but it's better described as a more intellectual viewing experience. The film is light on plot like other classic Hollywood musicals but there is much going on internally between and within the characters. Simply put, this movie musical is dark. Gene Kelly's role of Jerry Mulligan is a cynical loser who is not a very successful painter (although I do like when he tells of the pretentious art student, telling it like it is!). Likewise the romance between Jerry and Lise Bouvier (Leslie Caron) is a hopeful but not entirely a happy one. Even with Kelly and Caron ending up together at the end, the character relationships in the film are never resolved. During the film I kept thinking is she not better off with Henri Baurel (Georges Guetary)? The guy who is a successful actor and saved your life during the war or the loser whom you only recently met? Likewise in Milo Robert's (Nina Foch) final appearance she states "I think I need some champagne" and is never heard or seen again. Even though her character denies wanting more with Kelly than championship and only wants to help him professionally in a surprising prostitution reference ("If you're hard up for companionship there are guys in town who do this kind of thing for a living, call one of them"), I never felt convinced by this. Who says classic Hollywood is all just happy endings?An American In Paris is the perfect display of the artistry of director Vincente Minnelli. He found French painting an inspiration for his own style; a skill he would incorporate into other productions such as Lust for Life. There couldn't be a better or more obvious choice of director for An American In Paris than Minnelli. Not many other directors can use space as effective as Minnelli and display such a fluid motion of the camera. Just look as the film's introductory sequence to Gene Kelly and his chums or the shot of Kelly walking down several flights of stairs in his apartment building; thus I can forgive the very visible camera shake 47 minutes into the movie during the Tra-la-la number. Even though he was a contract director (he made 33 films, only three made outside of MGM) he rose above these constraints and formed his own style whereas contract directors where usually assigned to conform to the studio's standard and aesthetic. Whether or not he can be classified as an auteur there has been no other filmmaker like him in Hollywood history.The film's sets themselves look like they've been lived in instead of coming off as totally shiny and glossy with frames still looking like Paris as the impressionists saw it. Have neighbourhoods in Paris ever looked like this or is it just movie fantasy? Likewise take in the appearance of the Beatnick nightclub and observe the early incarnation to the modern day world of the hipster.Kelly's ability to dance alongside children and interact with them is something no one could do better than him which is evident from the genuine reactions from the on looking kids during the I Got Rhythm number; truly the dancing figure for the everyman. Leslie Caron's introductory ballet sequence on the other hand is a Technicolor assault on the senses; the backgrounds are one solid colour while she wears dresses which totally contrasts them. Could you ask for a more memorable first ever screen appearance; complete with a sexual chair dance and one flexible body. Likewise the contradictory humour from the sequence's narration always makes me laugh. Another major musical highlight is Oscar Levant's dream sequence which reminds of the Buster Keaton short The Playhouse in which every member of the theatre is played by Keaton; likewise here he have an army of Oscar Levant. The sequence was actually his idea and along with the character he portrays in the film reflects his real life personality as a neurotic. The appearance and the colours of the sequence definitely remind me of Powell and Pressburger; surely the filmmakers must have taken inspiration. They do save the best for last however in the form of the American In Paris Ballet; among one of the greatest things ever committed to film. A sequence which takes full advantage of cinema as an art form; could the entire thing be recreated on the stage? Watch French impressionism come to life in a 17 minutes feast for the senses which is artful without being artsy. There's choreography and then there's this with so many people moving, dancing and doing their own thing; with Gene Kelly's graceful yet masculine dancing still being at the centre of it. Fred Astaire once said he didn't want the camera to dance for him but rather stay stationary with as few cuts as possible. Kelly's style is very much the opposite of this in that the camera movement is integral to the dance but doesn't take away from his talent, not one bit. Yet I haven't I even mentioned the music of Gershwin; could it be more lush and rich?

American ex GI Jerry Mulligan (Gene Kelly) decides to stay in Paris after the war to be a painter. His neighbor friend Adam Cook (Oscar Levant) is a struggling songwriter pianist. Adam's longtime French singer associate Henri Baurel (Georges Guétary) tells him about a new young girlfriend. Wealthy older heiress Milo Roberts (Nina Foch) takes an interest in Jerry's art and Jerry himself. While trying to avoid her on a date, he starts flirting with Lise Bouvier (Leslie Caron).There are iconic songs. The music is loverly. There is Gene Kelly dancing. This is a must for any song and dance fans. As a story and a romance, it takes awhile to heat up. Leslie Caron's character doesn't speak until after over thirty minutes. They need an early scene to develop more chemistry. It's not until their riverside dance in midpoint where their romance truly break through. That is probably the only minor failing and this is simply an icon that any film fan must see if only for the big dance number.

Although director Minelli's work is generally considered Hollywood gold his experiment with an early 1950's dance oriented film won an academy award for best picture without translating well to millennium audiences today. Among the five leads Nina Foch was ill for most of the shooting, Georges Giuterry was a relative unknown in America, Leslie Caron and Oscar Levant became infamous as difficult to direct and Gene Kelly as the choreographer of a dance film was more a line boss than a performer on the set. The tap sequences are exquisite and there is a full performance of a one act ballet during the running time, all positives for dance fans. Despite Minelli's obvious talents shining through casting three leads who are not dancers in a dance film - Foch, Giuterry and Levant, gives the romantic leads, Kelly and Caron more to dance than to sing and does Caron really have a song in the film?