VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,5/10
1454
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaThe wealthy Rothschild family undergoes prejudice from the anti-Semitic society they live within.The wealthy Rothschild family undergoes prejudice from the anti-Semitic society they live within.The wealthy Rothschild family undergoes prejudice from the anti-Semitic society they live within.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Candidato a 1 Oscar
- 2 vittorie e 1 candidatura in totale
Ivan F. Simpson
- Amschel Rothschild
- (as Ivan Simpson)
Recensioni in evidenza
This is quite a rousing film for a biopic, and sports one of Arliss's best performances. Made two years after Hitler's rise to power, the whole subtext of the film is anti-Semitism and the then-current events in Europe. Napoleon is the stand-in for Hitler--the man all peace-loving men must join together to wage war against to secure peace. There are scenes of violence in the Jewish ghetto--stirred up by anti-Semite Karloff. Everything Rothschild does he does to end anti-Semitism; many speeches on this theme. Rothschild's father is shown as a Shylock-type, making money with money, fooling the tax collector, but with reluctance and great bitterness, doing so only because other professions are denied him, and because the tax collector overcharges Jews. C. Aubrey Smith gives a really delightful performance as Wellington. The final scene is one of the first live-action sequences to be made in three-color Technicolor, before BECKY SHARP. The topicality gives the film an immediacy that is often lacking in period films.
A dramatic, inter-generational history of the House of Rothchild. Most people have a vague notion of the Rothchild banking dynasty, but like me, probably didn't know the history and pain that went with it. This story covers the origin and evolution of that dynasty and an explanation of it's motivation. The story centers around the elder brother, Nathan, played by George Arliss and his four brothers. I have to admit that I never saw the George Arliss magic until I saw this picture. He really was a major talent, although he was quite old when he did this. We see the family breaking out of "Jew Street" in Frankfurt, and establishing banks throughout Europe while struggling to overcome anti-semitic attitudes and actual pogroms. There are some personal vignettes involving Loretta Young as Nathan's daughter and her goy suitor played by Robert Young that tend to humanize the family but really don't amount to much. The real story is the family drive to help stabilize a war ravaged Europe and through it, command the respect of a deeply anti-semitic aristocratic European society. The picture paints a rather pastel version of what was probably a grueling battle for acceptance, but it managed to convey a feeling of warmth and respect for the underdog. There are some very nice touches. The family members all touch the mezuzah each time the enter or leave the house. Everybody kisses Mama, and George Arliss shows what appears to be a real tenderness whenever he interacts with Loretta Young. The brothers never appear to be avaricious, but rather an integrated force of will, determined to succeed, yet determined to play by the rules. All in all, an enjoyable and informative docu-drama. Well worth the 90 minutes.
This interesting early talkie from 1934 is a biopic of Nathan Rothschild, the British-German-Jewish banker from the times of Napoleon that is considered one of the founders of international finance. Rothschild is famous among many things from making a fortune in the London Stock exchange by speculating successfully on Wellington's victory over Napoleon at Waterloo (this is in this film, though apparently according to recent historians it probably never happened).
Rothschild, as portrayed in the film by George Arliss, is not a very likable person: unabashedly ethnocentric (he is adamant that his daughter must not marry a gentile suitor), he is always ready to take offense, views almost every non-Jew as anti-Semitic, is willing to use money to exercise power, etc. Probably because of this, the Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels was an unlikely fan of this film, releasing an edited version in Germany (that emphasized the most negative aspects of the protagonist) and in 1940 he used an unauthorized clip from this film in the infamous anti-Semitic documentary "The Eternal Jew" and also had his own German remake, "The Rothschild's shares in Waterloo". The German film, by the way, despite its obvious propaganda intentions, is well made and has a literate, intelligent script. In a way, Rothschild is a more sympathetic character in the German film than in the Hollywood version! The Hollywood film is also notable for the last scene (in which Rothschild is knighted by the King) being shot in an early Technicolor process.
Rothschild, as portrayed in the film by George Arliss, is not a very likable person: unabashedly ethnocentric (he is adamant that his daughter must not marry a gentile suitor), he is always ready to take offense, views almost every non-Jew as anti-Semitic, is willing to use money to exercise power, etc. Probably because of this, the Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels was an unlikely fan of this film, releasing an edited version in Germany (that emphasized the most negative aspects of the protagonist) and in 1940 he used an unauthorized clip from this film in the infamous anti-Semitic documentary "The Eternal Jew" and also had his own German remake, "The Rothschild's shares in Waterloo". The German film, by the way, despite its obvious propaganda intentions, is well made and has a literate, intelligent script. In a way, Rothschild is a more sympathetic character in the German film than in the Hollywood version! The Hollywood film is also notable for the last scene (in which Rothschild is knighted by the King) being shot in an early Technicolor process.
The movie tells the story of the beginnings of the Rotschild empire ,at a time (1934) when the Jews were about to suffer as never.The pogroms were a sinister omen of the Crystal Night which would happen in Germany and in Austria in 1938.And the worst was to follow as everybody knows.
I did not like the very beginning of the movie,which shows the Jews with the traditional spate of clichés.But further acquaintance with the old man shows this: he has realized that only money can bring him power and dignity and thus help his people.There is something biblical (Old Testament) when the patriarch sends his five sons to set up banks all over Europa (the score over the cast and credits includes snatches of "La Marseillaise" "Das Lied Der Deutschen" and "God save the king" ). George Arliss outclasses all the other actors ,even Boris Karloff ,in his portrayal of Nathan Rotschild,a noble gent ,probably too good and too generous to be true.Napoleon works behind the scenes ,although he plays a prominent part in the screenplay.The two Young (Robert and Loretta) supply the love interest in the Romeo (Christian or gentile) and Juliet (Jew) mold.
Dazzling finale in color ,which is quite a surprise for a 1934 movie!
I did not like the very beginning of the movie,which shows the Jews with the traditional spate of clichés.But further acquaintance with the old man shows this: he has realized that only money can bring him power and dignity and thus help his people.There is something biblical (Old Testament) when the patriarch sends his five sons to set up banks all over Europa (the score over the cast and credits includes snatches of "La Marseillaise" "Das Lied Der Deutschen" and "God save the king" ). George Arliss outclasses all the other actors ,even Boris Karloff ,in his portrayal of Nathan Rotschild,a noble gent ,probably too good and too generous to be true.Napoleon works behind the scenes ,although he plays a prominent part in the screenplay.The two Young (Robert and Loretta) supply the love interest in the Romeo (Christian or gentile) and Juliet (Jew) mold.
Dazzling finale in color ,which is quite a surprise for a 1934 movie!
Five brothers, born & raised in a Jewish ghetto at the end of the 18th Century. Taught by their parents in the ways of international finance & commerce, but above all in living a life of dignity as Jews. Five brothers who grew to establish banks wielding enormous power from the five great European capitals - Frankfurt, London, Paris, Vienna, Naples - yet who always worked together for the common goal of peace in Europe & the destruction of tyranny. Five brothers united as THE HOUSE OF ROTHSCHILD.
In this lavish film, Mr. George Arliss gives yet another splendid history lesson and this time the old fellow gets to play two roles: Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the founder of the dynasty; and eldest son Nathan Rothschild, who established the London branch of the family. As always, Arliss is fascinating to watch, his every twitch conveying significance & meaning. It is a shame he is almost forgotten today, as he was a marvelous actor.
But he does not act alone here. Indeed, his co-stars are quite accomplished. As in so many of his films, his real-life wife Florence Arliss plays his (Nathan's) spouse and is charming, as usual. The somewhat obtrusive romantic subplot is handled by the two Youngs, Loretta & Robert, who look lovely & handsome respectively. Helen Westley is exceptional as Mayer's wife Gudula, the matriarch of the family. Also on hand are Reginald Owen, Alan Mowbray, Ivan Simpson, Ethel Griffies & wonderful old Sir C. Aubrey Smith as the Duke of Wellington - it is a particular treat to watch his scenes with Arliss.
A rather subdued & urbane Boris Karloff is the villain of the film, playing a Prussian nobleman who delights in being anti-Semitic. Pains are taken to show the evils inflected upon Continental Jewry during the age of repression & pogroms and it is important to remember that this film was produced in 1934, as Evil was once again raising its head in Central Europe. The ideas of men in the 19th Century, such as Karloff portrays here, would lead inexorably to the gas chambers & furnaces of Nazi Germany in the 20th. Forget Frankenstein's Monster. This was Karloff's most horrific role.
In the last 4 minutes, the movie turns from black & white to beautiful early Technicolor, a delight to the eyes.
There are a couple of glaring historical inaccuracies in the movie that must be pointed out. Nathan was not the elder of Mayer's sons - in fact he was the 3rd born. And it was not he, but his grandson, another Nathan, who was raised to the peerage to become Baron Rothschild in 1885, 49 years after the death of his grandfather. Trifling, yet significant.
In this lavish film, Mr. George Arliss gives yet another splendid history lesson and this time the old fellow gets to play two roles: Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the founder of the dynasty; and eldest son Nathan Rothschild, who established the London branch of the family. As always, Arliss is fascinating to watch, his every twitch conveying significance & meaning. It is a shame he is almost forgotten today, as he was a marvelous actor.
But he does not act alone here. Indeed, his co-stars are quite accomplished. As in so many of his films, his real-life wife Florence Arliss plays his (Nathan's) spouse and is charming, as usual. The somewhat obtrusive romantic subplot is handled by the two Youngs, Loretta & Robert, who look lovely & handsome respectively. Helen Westley is exceptional as Mayer's wife Gudula, the matriarch of the family. Also on hand are Reginald Owen, Alan Mowbray, Ivan Simpson, Ethel Griffies & wonderful old Sir C. Aubrey Smith as the Duke of Wellington - it is a particular treat to watch his scenes with Arliss.
A rather subdued & urbane Boris Karloff is the villain of the film, playing a Prussian nobleman who delights in being anti-Semitic. Pains are taken to show the evils inflected upon Continental Jewry during the age of repression & pogroms and it is important to remember that this film was produced in 1934, as Evil was once again raising its head in Central Europe. The ideas of men in the 19th Century, such as Karloff portrays here, would lead inexorably to the gas chambers & furnaces of Nazi Germany in the 20th. Forget Frankenstein's Monster. This was Karloff's most horrific role.
In the last 4 minutes, the movie turns from black & white to beautiful early Technicolor, a delight to the eyes.
There are a couple of glaring historical inaccuracies in the movie that must be pointed out. Nathan was not the elder of Mayer's sons - in fact he was the 3rd born. And it was not he, but his grandson, another Nathan, who was raised to the peerage to become Baron Rothschild in 1885, 49 years after the death of his grandfather. Trifling, yet significant.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe brief closing scene was shot in the newly developed three-strip Technicolor process; filmed in 1933, this was the first feature film to include such a sequence.
- BlooperThe gathering of all of the five sons of Mayer Rothschild on his deathbed never happened; the scene was a dramatic license taken by the writers. In reality, only two of his sons were present while the others were living in different European nations.
- Citazioni
Nathan Rothschild: I lost the bid on a technicality.
Hannah Rothschild: A technicality?
Nathan Rothschild: Because I'm a Jew.
- Versioni alternativeOlder television prints of "House of Rothschild" were totally in black-and-white, and did not show the final scene in its original Technicolor form. Most current TV prints have now restored the Technicolor finale.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Der ewige Jude (1940)
- Colonne sonoreLa Marseillaise
(1792) (uncredited)
Written by Claude Joseph Rouget de Lisle
Arranged by Alfred Newman
Played often in the score
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The House of Rothschild?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- The House of Rothschild
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 28 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti

Divario superiore
By what name was La casa dei Rothschild (1934) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi