Stavisky…

The film opens with flashbacks to Stavisky's teenage years, hinting at a life of pleasure and self-justification that foreshadows his later schemes. These glimpses establish the personality behind his public persona and reveal an appetite for thrill that will drive his decisions. They set the tone for a life spent chasing spectacle and advantage.

In 1926, Stavisky is arrested as a petty crook, a turning point that marks the end of his innocent youth and the beginning of his willingness to bend rules. The incident haunts him as he constructs a narrative of resilience to justify his later actions. The event provides a lens on how he packages misdeeds into a larger personal myth.

The film flashes to his father's suicide following family dishonour, a trauma that casts a long shadow over Stavisky's choices. This tragedy helps explain his obsession with control, reputation, and image management. It also frames his relentless need to avoid scandal at all costs.

In the waning days of 1933, Stavisky operates as a 'financial consultant', launching a mysterious company to handle international bonds. He secretly launders stolen jewellery and shuffles funds to cover up fraudulent bonds sold via the Crédit Municipal in Bayonne. The operation sits at the crossroads of legality and deception, driving the plot's core danger.

Simultaneously he stars as a theatre impresario in Paris, gambles in casinos, and uses his charisma to draw in supporters. His extravagant lifestyle and appetite for spectacle blur the lines between art, business, and crime. These performances are as much about influence as they are about entertainment.

The film shows him buying influence among the press, the police, and politicians, cementing a web of protection around his activities. He understands that visibility and connections can delay detection of his frauds. This network becomes the backbone that sustains his sprawling deceptions.

Stavisky exploits his wife Arlette's beauty to lure funds from a Spanish revolutionary fascist, using personal leverage to facilitate money flows. The arrangement illustrates how he intertwines personal life with financial schemes. It signals the depth of his manipulation and the risks hidden behind his charm.

Friends hear contradictory accounts of his past as he presents different versions to different audiences. These shifting narratives reveal a pattern of deception designed to keep his true history hidden. The inconsistencies deepen the audience's suspicion about his character and motives.

Interjected scenes depict Trotsky arriving in France to seek political asylum and staying in country houses and hotels. The moments are juxtaposed with Stavisky's world, highlighting a broader political backdrop of tension and exile. Left-wing activists visiting Trotsky show the era's volatile atmosphere.

A police inspector monitors Trotsky's movements and later turns his attention to Alexandre, blurring the lines between international intrigue and domestic crime. The inspector's investigations connect the two plot threads and foreshadow a crackdown. The tension between surveillance and secrecy becomes a driving motif.

Stavisky's web collapses as he is exposed as a Ukrainian immigrant, a Jew, and a confidant of members of the left-of-centre government. The revelation unsettles allies and undermines public trust in the government. The exposure rattles the era's fragile political balance and reshapes the story's stakes.

Following Stavisky's exposure, Trotsky is expelled from the country and a new 'government of national unity' is formed. The political landscape shifts, underscoring how international events ripple through domestic power plays. The film uses this to frame the era as a turning point in both politics and personal fate.

The final mystery centers on Stavisky's death in a chalet in Chamonix, with uncertainty whether it was a suicide like his father or an assassination to silence him. The ambiguous death mirrors the film's themes of deceit and opacity. It leaves the audience pondering culpability and consequence.

Flash-forwards show Stavisky's funeral and a parliamentary enquiry into the Stavisky affair, where friends and associates provide varying testimonies. The enquiry reframes his life as a public scandal rather than a private crime. The film closes with questions about accountability, truth, and the legacies of power.