Paris Secrets

Paris Secrets -The Strange Case of the Eiffel Tower Tattoo: A 1960s Film Controversy

 

A tall story made the papers in the 1960’s when ‘Ulysses Films’ made the movie ‘Paris Secret’ starring the beautiful actress Mlle Claudine Perrot.

Now, as the story went (in the papers) that she (Miss Perrot) was paid to have a tattoo of ‘The Eiffel Tower' covered in roses on her left buttock – Where. After the shoot finished – the film company claimed the rights to the tattoo as they had paid for it and had the tattoo removed and sold to an art dealer.

Later the French beauty sued ‘Ulysses’ to the tune of £170,000 pounds – but after much argument, an out-of-court settlement for her physical hurt for £2,500 was accepted, and the skin was returned to her, and the (tattoo) sequence in the film was cut from its final edit – True or not who knows but this did indeed make big news in the ’60s.

The above was reported in the ‘Daily Telegraph’ on the 4th of June 1969. There was also another report in a British tabloid – telling of this story – but this time, the report described her as the pretty Paris model Claudine Perot (one - r – in Perot - not two as above) and told of how the 20-year-old Miss Perot was paid £40 pounds for getting the tattoo of the ‘Eiffel Tower’ and that it took five hours to have put onto her and after the filming of ‘Secret Paris’ (called ‘Paris Secret’ above) was complete – Miss Perot had the piece of artistic skin removed by a beauty surgeon, and it was sold to a collector for £850 pounds.

It was also claimed that the model did not realise that her piece of tattooed skin would be worth so much and was suing ‘Ulysses’ productions director Jean Louis Van Belle and producer  for the return of it - or the £850 pounds paid for it as well as claiming £17,000 pounds damages for having been disfigured stating that she had suffered a great deal and could no longer model bikinis or underwear

This newspaper report did not say whether she won her case or even if the skin was ever returned to her. But Like I said that this was from two newspapers of the day, and in both - different tales were told – especially the money side of it – In hindsight, this was probably one of what is termed in the UK as silly season or no news day story - in regards to appeasing the great British public – And we all know what the papers are about don’t we?