Tuesday, June 08, 2004

Meet Me in St. Louis

Observations? Questions? How do you read the film's use of mise-en-scene? Cinematography? Sound?

Also, a reminder: be sure to read the Beth Genne essay on electronic reserve. It's a valuabe reading of the film's opening sequence.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree. The plot definitely does seem inconsequential, much less important than the Aesop's Fable type moral of the story. While the story constantly focused on not taking your home for granted, it wasn't really St. Louis that I think the writers intended the audience to appreciate. Home in general, almost patriotism, was being promoted. Since the film was made in 1944, that makes sense. As far as cinematography, the use of lighting was important. It was used to set the mood, as any scene with romantic elements was relatively darkened, with the light focusing mainly on Judy Garland. Most scenes were cheery, colorful and upbeat, where the lighting was very bright. I wish we had seen more character development, but I think the film was enjoyable and served it's purpose.
~Karen

3:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Meet Me In St.Louis seemed very funny to me. The Smith sisters were trying to get married to the first men that they saw. They fell in love so quick. At first the older sister was going to marry the boy from New York on the spot and within a year she is married to someone else. The father seemed as if his job was to just bring money to the household. He never knew about anything taking place in his house. He didn't even meet the men who where supposed to be marrying his daughters.

11:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home