
Plastered in Paris
1966

1966
ApprovedDirector
Gerry Chiniquy
Runtime
6 minutes
Average Rating
No ratings yetSynopsis
Inspector Clouseau and Sergeant Deux-Deux's investigation into a stolen cargo of bananas takes them to a run-down waterfront apartment building, where they follow a trail of banana peels to the abode of a diminutive Cockney sailor and his impish ape. Clouseau doesn't see the ape, and when he is repeatedly punched through the floor by the ape, Clouseau thinks the stocky sailor has been the one hitting him. When he sees Deux-Deux easily subdue the sailor, Clouseau believes that Deux-Deux is a muscular power-house and declares the Sergeant his hero.
Overall Score
Limited
Category Breakdown
LGBTQ+ Representation
The film lacks any depiction of non-cisnormative identities or same-sex intimacy. It adheres strictly to the conventional social structures of the mid-1960s.
Gender Representation
The story centers on male characters, reinforcing traditional masculine archetypes like the investigator and the hero. There is a notable absence of female agency or diverse gender expressions.
Racial & Ethnic Diversity
The cast is Eurocentric, featuring a French inspector and a Cockney sailor. The narrative does not include non-Anglo-Saxon perspectives or a blending of different races.
Religious & Cultural Diversity
The film operates within a traditional Western comedic structure. It does not challenge established social orders or provide evidence of diverse cultural or secularist viewpoints.
Disability Representation
There are no characters depicted with visible or invisible disabilities or neurodivergence. The narrative provides no representation of individuals with chronic health conditions.
Strengths
Areas for Improvement
AI Analysis
Ape Suzette is a mid-century slapstick short that relies on homogeneous character archetypes. The narrative focuses on a French inspector and a Cockney sailor, maintaining a strictly Eurocentric and male-dominated perspective. The film functions as a traditional comedy, prioritizing physical humor and situational misunderstandings over any meaningful social commentary. It lacks intersectional depth, offering no representation of LGBTQ+ identities, diverse racial backgrounds, or female agency. Ultimately, the work upholds the standard social hierarchies of its era without attempting to subvert them or include marginalized voices.

1966

1967

1968

1967

1974

1967

1967

1968

1967

1967

1978

1968
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!
Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.