Too 'high brow'

Of course, the MGM musicals that featured Trolley rides, Easter parades and hoofers were set in the United States -- NOT France.

Fred Astaire dancing on the ceiling in Royal Wedding and Gene Kelly dancing with Jerry in Anchor's Aweigh are both special effects scenes. They required groundbreaking technical innovation to be achieved and were both achieved to a very high standard.

The An American in Paris ballet was innovative in its use of artifice to achieve settings and visual themes which were in sync with the musical landscape of Gershwin's composition and the concepts chosen (French impressionist paintings).
It was a masterpiece of dance, choreography, costume, set and production design.
However, for the most part, it doesn't feature any special effects.

Like many audience members, you seem to be more impressed by special effects than artistic expression (although Royal Wedding and Anchors Aweigh are aplenty with both).

I almost think, however, that you're taking it too seriously. You call An American In Paris "pretentious". I don't think it's any more or less pretentious than anything else the Arthur Freed unit produced at MGM. You're imposing artistic importance on it, as have the Academy, rather than there being any pretensions on the part of the makers of the film.

This is a Gene Kelly, Vincente Minnelli and Arthur Freed collaboration. Have you seen any of their other movies? Trying to think of new ways of conceiving the musical was what these men did for a living. An American in Paris is one example of their ideas coming to life. During the careers they happened to make a fair amount of stunning movies - this is one of them.

The Academy recognized it as an achievement and perhaps over-awarded it. So then for decades new audiences see it, aware of its large amount of positive recognition, and choose to call it pretentious and over-blown. I think it's simply a misunderstanding on your part, to be honest.

Well we all know that film critics are always 100% correct so let's form our opinions based on what they tell us.

I don't find this film pretentious at all. I think certain people think that any time an American tries to depict any aspect of European culture, the knee jerk reaction is that the person is trying to be hoity toity.

I think Kelly's attempts to broaden our cultural horizons through films was admirable and not an attempt to cram "art" down the audiences' throat. The technically innovative stuff that was done is fun but parlor tricks aren't interesting to everyone.

I enjoy the grandeur of this film. It was beautifully shot and well directed. Yes, the American In Paris ballet was a bit overblown and too long but I never felt like it was pretentious.