StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

kijii The House of Rothschild was nominated for Best Picture in 1934 and although I would love to see this movie completely restored. In this movie, George Arliss takes on the roles of both the elder Rothchild, Mayer Amschel Rothchild (in the 1780 Frankfort Prussian "Jew Street" ghetto) and his son, Nathan. Nathan succeeds him (in London) as the leader of the Rothchild family. The family would place themselves throughout the great European cities at that time and always act as a group whenever they made large financial decisions. In spite of widespread anti-Semitism and pograms throughout Europe, the Rothchilds became a powerful financial empire, able to overcome other larger banks and financial institutions. They did this through their cohesiveness and lines of communication during the Napoleonic Wars. Even when other banks were predicting Wellington's defeat and the collapse of England, the House of Rothchild remained true to England, the allies. and freedom. The story contains a subplot of Nathan Rothchild's daughter, Julie (Loretta Young), falling in love with one of Wellington's officers, Capt. Fitzroy (Robert Young). The problem with this film is that it contained some scenes that the Nazis could later take out of context, place a negative spin on, and use to make their case against the Jews. The opening scenes of Mayer Amschel Rothchild hiding his money from the tax collector and then pleading poverty probably just played right into Hitler's hands to show his audience the "tricky money-grabbing Jew bleeding the country dry." So, the Nazis DID use scenes from it to make such Nazi propaganda films as Der ewige Jude (1940) and Die Rothschilds (1940).

MartinHafer I think it's a very ironic thing that the most overtly positive and obvious portrayal of Jews comes from Twentieth Century Fox--the only major American studio that was NOT controlled by an ethnic Jewish man at the time! So, as folks like Louis B. Mayer and Jack Warner chose to de-emphasize their Jewish roots and make films which almost never even mentioned Judaism, Daryl Zanuck dove head first into the topic and brought us this very unusual biopic.The story is about the Rothschild family and only concerns a snippet in the history of the family--from the 18th century through the fall of Napoleon. When it begins, the family patriarch (George Arliss) instructs his sons to divide up the banking business among five major European capitals. Then, following his death, the story jumps decades later and the new head of the banking family is ALSO played by Arliss--albeit without the wig and makeup he donned at the beginning of the film. The theme is how honorable the family was and how they stood behind freedom and right...and that mistreatment of them and other Jews is just morally repugnant. Interestingly, the biggest anti-Semite of this portion of the film is a German guy (Boris Karloff)...and was perhaps the studio's way to address the rising tide of Naziism at the time.Regardless of its intent, the film is a well acted and interesting costume drama. How close this all actually is to the real life Rothschilds, I have no idea but it was entertaining. Plus, I'd watch Arliss in just about anything!

Robert J. Maxwell This would never have made it past the producers, the Breen Office, or the German representatives in Hollywood a year or two later. It opens with what appears to be an outlandish parody of Jewish life in 1780s Prussia. The father (Arliss) is a money lender or pawn broker or something, overacting to beat the band. He and his family run around their humble household when they see the tax collector coming. Arliss wrings his hands and in a quivering voice orders the rest to hide the silverware and the roast, and to break out the second set of books. The sneering tax collector is amenable to a bribe, and when he leaves, the family cackled over how they outwitted him and saved money on the deal. It sets the stereotype in cement -- greedy, money-mongering, clannish cheaters.It develops that there were reasons enough for the family's worry. The Jews of Frankfort all live in "Jew Street" and are taxed at a far higher rate than the mayor himself. The government is corrupt and openly anti-Semitic. But all that has little impact on the unwittingly comic scene of the poor Rothschild's noisily dashing about and trying to hoodwink the tax collector. The old man dies at the end, advising his sons to go out into the world and establish a vast banking empire because "money is the only power we have." The four or five sons follow his orders and we skip to the Napoleonic period an focus on Nathan Rothschild (Arliss, again). The family is fabulously rich and it becomes even more so by betting against Napoleon in both wars. Despite the anti-Semitic feelings among the Allied leaders, Nathan bets everything he has and manages to save all of Europe from extinction.They've done what they could with the story but banking is essentially a boring business, I guess. I certainly have no interest in it and there were some arguments about points being up or down that left me in the dust. There is a sub-theme done with quiet subtlety. Nathan's daughter, Loretta Young, wants to marry a Captain of the Guards, Robert Young, a Gentile. And Nathan is faced with the same problem as Tevyev in "Fiddler on the Roof," the best line of which came from a young Russian who asks one of Tevyev's daughters, "Do you feel about me the way that they feel about you?" When Benny develops a warm feeling for a shiksa in "The Benny Goodman Story", Goodman's mother phrases the issue in terms of social class: "Bagels and caviar don't mix." The underlying questions have to do with the group loyalty of minority groups who have been victimized and the social borders they themselves create, but that's another story.There has always been intolerance, here and in Europe. Minorities are often discriminated against. But my understanding is that the Jews of Germany and elsewhere, like the Rothschilds were doing a pretty good job of being assimilated -- poets, doctors, bankers, scientists -- until the changing times brought disaster. By contrast, the Jews of Eastern Europe held niche occupations in smaller cities and towns. My immigrant German grandfather lived in one of those villages and I once asked him about the Jews when he was growing up. Of course there were Jews. They were money lenders. Why were the Jews the money lenders? "They ver dzha only pipple in dzha village you could trust." He was entirely serious.Didn't the Rothschilds make fine wine too? I'd like to learn more about that. Wine is more interesting than banking.

howdymax 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.