So This Is Paris

Ernst Lubitsch cannot be over-praised. One of his classics is a silent version of "Lady Windermere's Fan," by that iconic wordsmith, Oscar Wilde.

Lubitsch knew how to use a camera to tell a story, and "So This Is Paris" illustrates -- if you'll pardon the expression -- that facet of his talent perfectly.

But he also had four of the most expressive actors available, especially Lilyan Tashman, who certainly should be better known now, even if nearly a hundred years later.

She was lovely, yes, but what a talented actress, so animated and full of facial and bodily gestures to get her point across.

She lit up the screen, but her character's husband, played by George Beranger, listed here as Andre Beranger, who had a long and busy career, including as director, was not totally in her shadow.

Beranger needed to stand up straighter and hold his shoulders back, but he was obviously in good shape, and even looked as if he lifted weights. It's nice to know he kept busy for so many years since he was talented as well as good looking.

Another good-looking actor was Monte Blue, who eventually accumulated nearly 300 credits, working nearly to the last years of his life, to the credit of Hollywood, which -- sad to say -- so often forgot its pioneers.

The fourth star, and star she was, is Patsy Ruth Miller. Probably her most famous film is "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," with Lon Chaney, but she went on to play in about four score movies, making a praised appearance in her last role as the title character in "Mother," 1978.

When "So This Is Paris" was presented on Turner Classic Movies, 9 May 2021, it was a surprise to me, being totally unfamiliar with it. Apparently it is a refurbished film with a new score, and I hope it plays often, so you can see it.

The script, by the way, steals quite a bit from Strauss's "Die Fledermaus," and I don't know how many others, including critics and reviewers of 1926 as well as audience members of today, realize the source.

Never mind, even if it is plagiarized, "So This Is Paris" is so beautifully performed and directed, we will overlook the theft and just enjoy.

Based on a play by Henri Meilhac and Ludovic Halevy, Ernst Lubitsch's So This is Paris is the first time his writing partnership with Hans Kraly bore good fruit. A light comedic farce, a genre that Lubitsch obviously liked to tell stories in, it's the sort of film that is a trifle and a confectionary creation, a film of wit that doesn't ask for too much from its audience, choosing to be pleasing and delightful over anything else. I feel that some parts of it would fall apart, especially morally, if you considered it too deeply, reminding me of Lubitsch's protégé and acolyte Billy Wilder's first film The Major and the Minor.

Doctor Paul Giraud (Monte Blue) is married to Suzanne (Patsy Ruth Miller). Across the street moves in a pair of actors, Maurice (Andre Beranger) and Georgette Lalle (Lilyan Tashman). They are practicing a routine dealing with Arabia where they dress in Arabian outfits just as Suzanne is finishing up a steamy romantic novel set in Arabia. She sees this man in foreign looking attire (without a shirt) across the way and gets all worked up at the sight. It's so bad that Paul goes to the apartment to tell them off for such indiscretion when he realizes that he knows Georgette. They were an item some time ago, long before either of them got married, and she tries to make a pass at him, which he shuts down. When Paul comes back home, he puts on a small show for Suzanne, talking about how he got into a tussle with Maurice, breaking the man's cane in the process, in a show of strength for his wife's honor and decency. This is undone when Maurice shows up at the door, complete with intact cane, and immediately hits on Suzanne while Paul is in the other room, resting after his "ordeal" where he hears everything in the other room.

So sets the stage that the couple of actors use their time to try and get romantically involved, individually, with their neighbors across the courtyard. The joys of the film are in the lies that the "good" couple tell each other to continue down these potentially indiscrete paths with other married people, like when Georgette calls the apartment hoping to get Paul. Instead, she gets Suzanne and tells her that Paul must come to a café where a man is very sick. Believing it is true, Paul drives as fast as he can, getting caught for speeding by a police officer who lets him go in order to save a dying man, only to catch up again to witness Paul and Georgette laughing outside the café. This leads to Paul getting sentenced to three days in jail.

The big finale of the film is centered around the Artists' Ball. Paul is determined to go with Georgette. Maurice is determined to visit Suzanne while Paul is out. There's a bit with mistaken identity that leads to the wrong man going to jail and Paul and Georgette winning the Charleston dance contest which gets announced on the radio that Suzanne is listening to. Is Paul trying to cheat on Suzanne with Georgette? It's not entirely clear, but it probably has more to do with him trying to get back at Suzanne for his perception that she was willingly falling in for Maurice's seductions.

The movie's lack of seriousness is really what sells the film overall. It's got this light and airy tone as it moves from one little domestic event to the next, and it's highlighted in the film's final intertitle that describes the moral of the story as not walking in front of your window with your shirt off. It's an amusing end to a trifle of a film, and it's the perfect little capper to tie everything together. "Don't take this too seriously," the movie is saying. And I happily took that advice.

Now, just a quick note on some technical stuff. This is Lubitsch really stretching himself in interesting ways. Firstly, there's the big Artists' Ball where Lubitsch uses montage and really complex multiple exposures to create a kind of euphoric representation of the out of control party. It's the kind of stuff that Murnau put into Sunrise and Hitchcock did in Champagne, and Lubitsch predates them both by a couple of years. There's also a moment where a husband is put in his place by his wife late in the film, and Lubitsch uses a surprisingly sophisticated compositing trick to diminish the husband in the frame like The Incredible Shrinking Man, and he walks through a doorway quite convincingly. I really did not expect to ever see Lubitsch using special effects and visuals this sophisticated, and he handles them quite well.

Lubitsch's early period in Germany largely disappointed me, but since coming to American I'm seeing why people like Wilder and even Irving Thalberg were so taken with his work. There's a light, effortless feel to Lubitsch's final products that so easily entertain that he makes it feel simple. Filmmaking is never simple, and that light touch is really why his films are becoming more and more enchanting, even when we're dealing with lesser works of a man obviously made for greater things.

"So This is Paris" is nothing short of perfection, an absolute joy from start to finish. I saw it for the first time very recently and I was overawed by it. Without a doubt, it ranks as one of the great Lubitsch's finest silent films, up there with "Die Puppe", "The Oyster Princess", "Rosita", "The Marriage Circle", "Lady Winderemere's Fan" "The Student Prince In Old Heidelberg" and "Eternal Love". All the familiar Lubitsch touches and themes are here: gaiety, enchantment, naughtiness, cynicism, extramarital affairs, manage a trois, etc. The standout moment is the Charleston sequence at a Parisian ball, where people are dancing and jumping. Lubitsch uses multiple camera angles and superimposition to create a feeling of joy and excitement.

... but other than the names of the characters, I see nothing about this film that would indicate anything particularly Parisian about it.

A doctor's wife, Suzanne Giraud (Patsy Ruth Miller) , laps up romance novels about sheiks. Across the way, the apartment of the Lalles, who are professional dancers who dress in Middle Eastern attire, is visible via the window. Through a misunderstanding, Suzanne thinks the man living there has exposed himself to her, and demands her husband (Monte Blue as Dr. Girard) go over there and "get satisfaction" by caning him. It turns out the man's wife is an old flame of Dr. Giraud, Georgette (Lilyan Tashman), and the two begin an emotional affair. Meanwhile, Mr. Lalle, who never even encounters Dr. Giraud, goes to the Giraud apartment to return the doctor's cane, and becomes enamored of Suzanne. She does not return the sentiment only because Mr. Lalle is not her idea of a romantic sheik.

Suzanne is the only one not cheating or attempting to cheat on anybody, but she does have the knowledge - eventually - of the behavior of everybody else. And if Mr. Lalle had been more Valentino and less librarian, she probably would have been having a rendezvous too.

This is just a very light enjoyable film that is a great showcase for the fashions and dance styles of the time. The best scene in the movie is the Artists' Ball with a rowdy band and a rowdier Charleston. It was highlighted in the documentary series "Silent Hollywood" as an example of silent film not having any problems with musical numbers. Warner Brothers recently restored it, and it looks terrific, but I think the music that was used, particularly at the Artists' Ball, was not nearly as good as what was used in Silent Hollywood.

I'd recommend it as a good example of that Lubitsch touch in the silent era. It also showcases Lilyan Tashman as being as good in silents as she was in sound films, her natural mischief coming through.

Seeing this film at my schools auditorium with a packed house of people who actually want to be seeing a 1920's silent film and with a live organ player was a delight. It made me wish I lived in Hollywood where old films are actually shown with a live orchestra and score pretty normally. If it weren't for the obnoxious lady next to me who would not stop laughing at every single thing, I probably would have liked the film even more. So This is Paris was very racy for its time, and I think that's part of the reason why it was so funny. It caught the audience of guard as to just how raunchy it was for its time. But make no mistake, the film is a good time at the theater.

It's about two couples who get caught up in a love quad with each other and attempt to keep it from their significant others. This makes for great comedy if handled correctly. Specifically when we know something that characters don't. The way the film is presented is controversial for its time. There just weren't films made at this time that displayed infidelity, at least not like this. The party scene alone made me think of how everyone may have perceived the film at the time. It was almost like a scene out of the most recent Great Gatsby, very trippy.

The film is definitely funny, but I just didn't get the laughs I do out of watching some of the other 20's classics. I'm much more a fan of the physical comedy. I guess I just don't find reading a joke as funny as seeing it, probably why I don't read books. I was also impressed by the camera movements and the subtle special effects this film had. Such as the drunk visions and even the shrinking scene. With all that said, I think So this is Paris can be a joy to watch even with some of it's faults.

6.8/10