Celebrating the holiday season this year, the AFI Catalog shines a spotlight on the Christmas classic MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS (1944), which first played in theaters 80 years ago this month after its world premiere in late November 1944. Aside from being the film that famously connected Judy Garland with her future husband, director Vincente Minnelli, it was the second highest-grossing picture of 1944 (after the Bing Crosby musical GOING MY WAY) and remains a favorite among critics and audiences as demonstrated in its inclusion on AFI’s lists of the greatest movie musicals and greatest movie songs of all time; MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS introduced the world to musical numbers that have become standards, including “The Trolley Song,” “Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas” and “The Boy Next Door.” Fifty years after its release, MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS was inducted into the National Film Registry for preservation, acknowledging the picture’s historical, cultural and aesthetic significance.
MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS follows the lives of the Smith family over the course of one year, 1903, as they anticipate the upcoming 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis – the Smith children believe the event will make their hometown the center of the universe. In the meantime, Rose (Lucille Bremer), the eldest daughter, patiently awaits a marriage proposal from her beau, Warren Sheffield (Robert Sully), while Rose’s younger sister, Esther (Judy Garland), pines for the boy next door, John Truett (Tom Drake). The sisters’ plans for domestic bliss in St. Louis are thwarted when their attorney father (Leon Ames) accepts a work promotion that will relocate the family to New York City after Christmas. Smith finds his family mournful about the move, and when he sees his youngest, Tootie (Margaret O’Brien), destroy her snowman family outside in a fit of rage on Christmas Eve, he decides they will stay put, after all. Rose finally receives a proposal from Warren, and Esther accepts John’s request for her hand in marriage. In spring 1904, the Smiths attend the much-awaited World’s Fair with Warren and John. Along with her sisters and mother, Esther wonders aloud at the spectacle in her very own hometown, “right here in St. Louis,” in a finale that evokes Garland’s iconic last line from an earlier MGM musical, THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939), “There’s no place like home.” The two films shared an art director, Cedric Gibbons, and MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS’ producer, Arthur Freed, was credited as an assistant to the producer in THE WIZARD OF OZ (only his second feature). Freed would soon become MGM’s musical czar, heading his own unit and creating a style unique to the studio with Oscar®-winning hits including AN AMERICAN IN PARIS (1951) and GIGI (1958), as well as SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN (1952) among many others.
Like THE WIZARD OF OZ, MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS was based on a literary source. The story by Sally Benson, which appeared in the New Yorker magazine in twelve installments, from June 1941 to May 1942, had the title “5135 Kensington,” reflecting the Smith family’s fictional home address. Some modern sources contend that Benson’s work was partially autobiographical, with the character Tootie portraying her real-life experiences growing up in St. Louis.[i] When MGM acquired screen rights to Benson’s story for $25,000 in 1942, she published the series as a novel titled “Meet Me in St. Louis.”[ii] Although MGM purchased the property as a vehicle for Judy Garland, who had been under contract at the studio since she was 13, the young actress (now 21) was at first opposed to participating in the project, as she was warned against taking on additional adolescent roles by MGM producer Joseph Mankiewicz, with whom she was linked romantically.[iii] He assured Garland that the path to stardom would only be attained if she embraced adult roles, so Garland bravely took a stand against the studio’s demands and declined the part of Esther, which also appeared to be a secondary character overshadowed by Tootie.[iv] Studio head Louis B. Mayer, who was within his rights to penalize Garland for her provocation (due to her contract), agreed with the young actress’ stance but entrusted Freed to continue production and Garland acquiesced with assurances from Minnelli.[v]
Whether or not she was aware of it, Garland expressed her displeasure by holding up production, arriving late to rehearsals and detaining the shooting schedule by claiming illness. She was also addicted to prescription medications that her mother procured for her years earlier, causing her to be unreliable. Minnelli, a perfectionist, demanded multiple takes, which took a toll on Garland’s self-esteem as she was accustomed to delivering the right performance right away (she had a photographic memory and could recall her lines without much preparation).[vi] Around that time, Mankiewicz wished to end his affair with Garland and encouraged her to pursue other men; the leading lady set her sights on her co-star, Tom Drake. The romance was short-lived, and Garland began to fall for Minnelli after observing his talent at making her look beautiful on screen.[vii] Garland notably changed her appearance for MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS with assistance from her new make-up artist, Dorothy “Dottie” Ponedel, who would go on to work with Garland for 10 additional MGM pictures.[viii]
Garland was not the only cast member to hold up production, however, as there were several other medical emergencies, as well as inclement weather in Los Angeles’ shooting locations, and the budget inflated to well over $1.5 million, making MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS the highest-budgeted Garland vehicle in her career so far.[ix] Although Freed gambled on relative unknowns for the picture (aside from Garland and O’Brien), his bet paid off, and MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS was a critical and box-office success. Earning more than $7.5 million upon its initial release, the picture was MGM’s biggest hit to date.[x] Minnelli, who had only directed two features previously (CABIN IN THE SKY and I DOOD IT), demonstrated the aesthetic skills he honed as an art director and costumer, and Freed was hailed by critics for creating a musical that was decidedly unformulaic for its time.[xi] When the film was released, America was deeply immersed in World War II and audiences were nostalgic for better days, when families could celebrate the holidays together instead of missing those who were off at war. In a world of brutal conflict and unimaginable tragedy, MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS provided a cathartic expression of unity which helped audiences transcend their lived experiences to hope for a better future – one that resembled their collective memory of a joyous past that might never have been in reality – but was sentimentalized, nevertheless. Today, especially around the holidays, there continues to be a vital desire for unison, the kind of consensus and compassion which is sometimes only possible in movie theaters, projected on the big screen.
