. . . that they never got away with imposing upon Broadway theater or the book publishing industry, because these Fat Cat Rich One Per Center Bozos knew that U.S. 99 Per Centers almost never see Broadway plays or read books, but nearly all of them flock to movies, and they were scared to death of flicks showing the "Little People" how Romans were hypocritical superstition mongers, while bankers sucked the life-blood from ordinary folks, not unlike swamp leeches. TROUBLE IN PARADISE focuses upon this latter legion of "legal" looters of their "Lessers." Toward the end of TROUBLE IN PARADISE, master thief Gaston Monescu ruefully complains to Fat Cat Mariette Colet that as a low-born "self-made crook" he's lucky to filch 100K at a crack, while Madame Colet's Blue-Blood Board Chairman Adolph J. Giron has been able to easily embezzle millions from her as an unquestioned birthright. TROUBLE IN PARADISE, of course, is "Pre-Code." Post-Code, pervasive thought censorship persists throughout Hollywood right down to Today, as the Fat Cat Roman Bankers easily squelch anything similar to TROUBLE IN PARADISE vaguely resembling free speech, as spelled out in the 2006 documentary THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED.

A gentleman thief and a lady pickpocket join forces to con a beautiful perfume company owner. Romantic entanglements and jealousies confuse the scheme.Ernst Lubitch is a legend, both of the silent film and of the comedy. He was a primary influence on Billy Wilder, who took his ideas and improved upon them. And "Trouble in Paradise" is one of those key films that made him a legend.The concept is pretty simple -- two people who con the wealthy out o their money and jewels. But what if one of them falls in love with their target? Does love trump money? How that question is answered depends on whether this is a romantic comedy or just a comedy... and who am I to give it away?

This 1932 film, the first talking film by Lubitsch is a dear moment of pleasure. It is a comedy but the comedy is a lot more subtle than anyone may think.It is about a crook who meets a thief and they fall in love but then they plan schemes that are so big it is amazing how easy they seem to be. They plan an operation that would capture a fair amount of cash, and some jewels, from the heiress and boss of the first cosmetic (in those days it was mainly perfume) business in Paris and probably the world. It sounds like L'Oreal so much that the only difference between the young widow who is heading the business and Ms Bettencourt who has finally been court-ordered out of freely managing and using her money is their age.Yet that did not prevent the gay photographer who had been her late husband's lover to take her over and manipulate her like a piece a play dough. Never too old to be submitted to that game.The second difference is that the crooks are a couple and the danger for them is that the man may fall for the heiress, really fall I mean, and that solution is caressed for a short while but the dramatic suspense it creates is short lived in the end.The third interest is that the film clearly shows how the main board member of the business is using his position to enrich himself with discrete transfers from the business accounts to his own knowing that the heiress or boss or widow will never understand the procedure but the new secretary who is the crook and thief who infiltrated the business to get to the lady's safe knows about it at once and can reveal it. It takes a crook to know another.But then how funny it is to see the victim of all these rotten crooks refusing to call the police because of the scandal it would create. They did not know yet that a good and deep scandal is the best publicity for a business, as long as the scandal does show any support to the wrong side, and there Lubitsch is a very subtle man. The crooked board member who is stealing from the business on a regular basis has a secret first name he does not like. In 1932, guess twice what it could be? Adolf of course, and even if you write it the French way Adolphe it does not change and in the film it sounds just like Adolf, the other Adolf of 1932 who was starting to loom high over Europe.But a funny film after all far from such political considerations. Is it now so far from these political considerations? Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

Trouble in Paradise is a film that could not have been produced only four years after its 1932 release. Under the soon-to-be Hays Production Code, this narrative of con-artists flagrantly breaks levels of decency, sexual innuendo and criminality that the code was set up to eradicate. Lily (Miriam Hopkins) and Gaston Monescu (Herbert Marshall) join forces in Venice to become a couple of grifters, they live together in sin and have no scruples when stealing is concerned. They move to Paris where they target the famous perfume manufacturer Madame Mariette Colet (Kay Francis), finding confidence with the heiress, Gaston becomes her secretary, and play the long game in consuming as much of her wealth as possible.With romantic entanglements becoming increasingly apparent, Colet practically offers Gaston a position as a gigolo. This menage-e-trois - love triangle - complicates the situation, as relationships become heated. It's a masterwork of comedy, with Hopkins being the most delightful and versatile of the cast. Her plucky attitude, and effervescent presence gives the film a fantastic tone - in one scene she sits at the bedside of Colet, and anxiously holds her hands under her legs so as to stop herself from stealing the jewels on the bedside table.Based on Hungarian playwright Aladar Laszlo's stage work, 'The Honest Finder', this was the first of Ernst Lubitsch's films given the mantle of having "The Lubitsch Touch", this is a perfect example of creative film making. His camera glides through scenes, and from window to window in some scenes (perhaps nothing to a modern audience, but an incredible achievement in 1930's cinematic production). This is possibly the finest film in the pre-code era, and a complete joy in all respects. As it was produced before Will Hays's iron fist came crashing down on Hollywood production, the film doesn't insult its audience with a moral conclusion, as the thieves happily disappear into the sunset, laughing at the "ill-gotten" stash. Beautiful, anti-moralistic comedy at it finest.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com