Trouble
in Paradise
1932
Director: Ernst Lubitsch
Starring: Herbert Marshall, Miriam
Hopkins, Kay Francis, Charlie Ruggles, Edward Everett Horton
“The
Lubitsch Touch” is a famous saying in film.
Lubitsch, an early film director, became renowned for his notoriously
deft handling of screwball comedies; his later films even used the saying in
their ad campaigns. The Lubitsch Touch
refers to his superb sophistication, a debonair suavity that pervades his
work. Of the Lubitsch films I have seen,
none personifies this elegance more so than Trouble in Paradise.
The
story is about Gaston Monescu (an insanely sexy and
suaver-than-Cary-Grant-no-really-I-mean-it Herbert Marshall), a thief and
pickpocket who masquerades as upper class nobility. He meets his match in Lily (Miriam Hopkins),
a fellow con artist pretending to be a countess. The two fall madly in love when they realize
they are kindred spirits. Their romantic
bliss is threatened, however, when they decide to con the wealthy and widowed
but gorgeous Mme Mariette Colet (Kay Francis).
When Mariette falls for Gaston, and Gaston finds himself falling for
Mariette, the brewing love triangle and the law closing in on the thieves puts
the relationship between Gaston and Lily in danger.
Typically,
the phrase “Trouble in Paradise” refers to marriage woes, but there are
husbands or wives in the picture.
Instead, as the opening credits make abundantly clear, “Trouble in Paradise”
is really about trouble in, well, bed.
In the first shot of the film, the words “Trouble in…” appear on the
screen, followed by a picture of a bed, and then an extremely long pause before
the title completes itself with the word “Paradise.” Lubitsch is not trying to fool anyone. This film is about sex and love and how the
two interfere with each other. Lubitsch,
in key scenes, intentionally returns to shots of a made bed, covered in silks
and satins, looking incredibly inviting.
Characters walk into a room, then immediately notice the bed, walk over
to it, as if entranced. Lovers embrace,
and then look down at the bed. A mirror
above the bed shows the reflection of kissing lovers with the pillows
underneath.
Innuendo much? |
Along
with the bed, Lubitsch is very aware of time of day in the film, with clocks
and timepieces featuring prominently in many shots and scenes. In one tantalizing sequence, Lubitsch keeps
the camera focused entirely on a mother-of-pearl clock face while we hear
different characters talking. One couple
says goodbye at 5pm, while another couple says hello at 6pm. As it gets later and later in the evening, we
are left wondering, what did they do for those two hours between midnight and 2
am? Talk? Doubtful.
This was 1932, so obviously, there are no explicit sex scenes, but my
goodness, the sex is clearly laced throughout the entire film.
What
makes an early Hollywood sex comedy the prime example of the Lubitsch Touch is
the incomparable sophistication that Lubitsch brings to the table. The film is painfully beautiful – silks,
satins, furs, gleaming black and white floors, immaculate art deco apartments –
this is a fantasy world of elegance.
Even the opening camera shot of the film – on a garbage man in Venice
picking up refuse in his gondola – is elegant.
The garbage man suddenly breaks into song, singing ‘O Sole Mio’ with an
operatic tenor voice. Even the trash
collectors in a Lubitsch film are sophisticated! Given this, it makes perfect sense that
Gaston, the main character, a con artist, a thief, a pickpocket, absolutely
oozes debonair grace. Herbert Marshall
is beyond immaculate in this film as a silver-tongued sophisticate. There is little question why both Miriam
Hopkins and Kay Francis fall for him.
Cary Grant, Sean Connery, and George Clooney have nothing on Marshall
from this film, especially when he’s purring out seductive lines like, “Do you
see the moon? I want to see the moon in
the champagne,” and “It could have been marvelous – divine – glorious.”
The
relationship between Gaston and Lily is easily the most fun pairing of the
film. Their courtship over their shared
livelihood in an early hotel scene is intoxicating. “I have a confession to make to you,” Lily
says. “Baron, you are a crook! You robbed the gentleman in 253, 5, 7, and
9. May I have the salt?” He responds with, “Let me say this, with love
in my heart. Countess, you are a thief!
The
wallet of the gentleman in 253, 5, 7 and 9 is in your possession. I knew it very well when you took it out of my
pocket.” They then proceed to hand back
the various items they pickpocketed off each other. Their relationship is consummated, so to
speak, when Lily realizes that Gaston took off her garter without her
noticing. She throws herself around his
neck, realizing that she has met her match, not only romantically but
professionally as well. Their
effervescent relationship is so sexy, so perfect, so delightful, that despite
the fact that they are world class con artists and thieves, I can’t help but
root for them.
Contrasting
Gaston and Lily’s relationship is that of Gaston and Mariette Colet, a wealthy
widow not exactly careful with her money, making her an obvious target for the
thieves. Kay Francis as Mariette is so
languorous, so dreamy, with a constant look in her eyes as if she just came
from a romp in the hay, that despite the appeal of Gaston and Lily, it’s also
obvious why Gaston falls for her. Francis
purrs seductively to Marshall when Mariette knows that she has Gaston within
her clutches, never breaking eye contact, and smiling tantalizingly when she
declares, “You want me.” The sex appeal
oozing out of her is off the charts, yet it is never crass or vulgar, once more
reflecting the sophistication of the Lubitsch Touch.
Providing
amusing comic supporting characters are Edward Everett Horton and Charlie
Ruggles as two stymied suitors of Mariette Colet. Gone are the days of the great supporting
actors, but thank goodness we have films like this one to remind us of the
awesomeness past. Horton plays, well,
his classic stammering part, but as always, he’s perfect. Ruggles is equally amusing, and the banter
between the two of them is wonderful.
Normally
I meticulously avoid spoilers in my film reviews, but I must make an exception
for Trouble
in Paradise. If you’ve never
seen it and want to keep the surprise intact about the resolution of the love
triangle, by all means, skip the rest
of this paragraph. Ready? Done skipping? Good, because here I go. Despite Colet’s money, seductive voice, and
the clear power she holds over Gaston, he ultimately realizes what he values in
his life – and it isn’t the fleeting yet wonderful relationship he could have
with Mariette. It is his life with Lily,
a life that includes love, sex, and crime, which he wants. As he says in his apology to Mariette, “But
in the morning, there would be a policeman holding a warrant.” He must be on the run, and she can’t join
him. She stares at him in shock – not
that he revealed himself to be a criminal, but that he is turning her
down. Lily, for her part, is upset that
Gaston even considered Mariette, but the film ends brilliantly, echoing the
pickpocket courtship that brought Lily and Gaston together in the first place. Mariette is seductive and lovely, but it is
Lily and Gaston who are truly made for each other, and it is beyond gratifying
to see them end up together… on the run to a different city with the police hot
on their heels.
There
is a playfulness to this film that puts it in the same category of film as The
Thin Man and Some Like It Hot. If you’re a fan of those two classics and
you’ve never heard of Trouble in Paradise, I more than
recommend you give it a try. It’s
positively delicious.
Arbitrary
Rating: 9/10
If I had to review this film in a single word, my word is "elegant." Lubitsch so could have turned this into a screwball comedy, but he didn't. He was too smart for that, and instead, he turned it into a real romance.
ReplyDeleteI liked it a lot, too. I loved the courtship-by-theft stuff, and pretty much everything else about this one.
You're right, this could have been madcap wacky. I agree though, I like his (Lubitsch's) restraint. So elegant it's painful.
DeleteThis one is just so dang fun. Stylish and elegant and, well, cinematic champagne.
I think this was my favorite from among the DVDs you loaned me. It is also one of the more pleasant surprises for me from the book (when I started I had already seen half of them, and I've come to the somewhat depressing conclusion that I mostly saw the better half first.)
ReplyDeleteJust a year or two later and they wouldn't have been able to make this film because of the enforcement of the Production Code. I'm glad they were able to get this film in under the wire.
I completely know what you mean about "worrying" that you've seen all the "good ones," and that the ones that are left have been unseen for a REASON. Maybe I'm still naively hopeful, but I try to go into movies with a positive outlook. (notice I said "try" - I'm not always successful)
DeleteThis is such a fun movie. I'm pleased you enjoyed it. Seriously, what's not to enjoy?
I really wonder what would have happened to film were it not for the Hays Code.
I loved this one as well. Great label: "suaver-than-Cary-Grant-no-really-I-mean-it Herbert Marshall". He is so smooth it is almost over the top. There are so many highlight, but my personal favorite is the dinner party where Gaston and Lily draw out all the stuff they pilferred from each other and thus win each others heart. That is just pure genius.
ReplyDeleteYou need a bit of champagne when you watch this. Maybe not in such conspicious amounts as when watching The Thin Man, but just enough to feel the elegance.
Thanks! I definitely equate this movie to champagne - the same sort of glamorous feeling! That dinner with Gaston and Lily courting each other through pickpocketing is just genius, and definitely seems to be a favorite! What's not to like?
DeleteMarshall is stupidly smooth in this movie. CLEARLY not meant to be realistic!!!!