The film "Komedie om geld" has a rather un-Dutch appearance, which is undoubtedly due to the director, the German Max Ophüls. It was made in 1936, a few years after the coup d'etat of Hitler in Germany. At that time many employees from the avant-garde German film industry had fled from their country, and in an effort to secure a living occasionally worked for the few Dutch film projects. In fact "Komedie om geld" has quite a few similarities with "The three penny opera". Both films make references to money and capital, although this aspect is especially clear in the "Komedie". Indeed the effects of the Great Depression were still omnipresent, and the film theme is the threatening failure of an investment bank. The theatrical part of the "Komedie" is visible in the appearance of a circus director, who at times interrupts the film in order to address the public with a song or a comment. This helps the viewer to remain at an emotional distance, just like some tricks of the nouvelle vague do. The message of the "Komedie" is somewhat obscure, but financial fraud definitely plays a major role. It were the times, when business had lost all credibility in the eyes of the common people. This makes the film of present interest, in view of the many bank directors, who in their lust to grab the maximum amount of bonuses ruin their firms. Actually the story is rather tragic. A bank clerk and money roundsman loses a large sum of capital from his money bag. Although embezzlement can not be proved, he is dishonourably discharged. His applications all fail, and in spite of his charming daughter he is close to making a suicide attempt. But then a miracle happens: the management of a bank offers him the position of director. The clerk is happy to agree. He doesn't know that his predecessor has disappeared together with the contents of the bank vault. Consequently the bank management searches for ways to hold up the appearance of credit-worthiness and solvency. Their job offer speculates on the fact that everybody in the branch is certain that the clerk still possesses his supposed loot. As a director the clerk tries to introduce a culture of integrity, and at the same time feels that he is not up to the job. The film does not reveal if he would have succeeded. For he accidentally recovers the lost sum of capital, and he immediately returns the sum to his former employer. Of course this makes things worse, because the insurance has already paid for the loss and damage. So his honesty is used against him, the court interprets the recovered money as the proof of the embezzlement, and the clerk is yet put into prison. But now the circus director intervenes: "Dear audience, we will not let this drama impose a burden on you". A witness is found in favor of the clerk, and he is released. Basically I would call this a German-like film, but it is a real gem. The play, the shots and entourage are all excellent. On the other hand, the story is rather ill-tempered. It is clearly a complaint against big business, and a portrayal of the little man being crushed by the system-innate faults. But the little man himself is only slightly better than his superiors: in his worst moments he starts drinking, he succumbs to temptations etc. So in spite of its qualities the film was not a commercial success. If you prefer social films with a perspective, see my other film reviews.
4 Reviews
An inspired misfire - Max Ophüls' only Dutch effort
gorson_mont14 April 2022
I consider the reviews for Komedie om Geld on imdb so far quite insightful and generally on point. Allow me, however, to delve into the way the project came together a bit more; not only mentioning the 'what', but explaining the 'why'.
After the international success of Henry Koster's De Kribbebijter, another exiled filmmaker was hired to direct a Dutch cinematic prestige project. In celebration of the 15th anniversary of Tuschinski theatre, Amsterdam's most prestigious cinema, Max Ophüls was contracted to helm what would be a rather special production. At the height of the Great Depression, the Tuschinski's deemed it a good idea to release a relentless critique of the banking world - a moral shot in the arm of sorts. At the same time, however, the budget of over 135.000 Dutch guilders made it the most expensive production the Netherlands had ever seen - talk about extreme insensitivity. One should not be surprised that audiences at the time decided to pass on this tonedeaf, hypocritically moralising misfire en masse and see De Kribbebijter again instead.
That said, not all is bad in Ophüls' only Dutch effort. In his autobiography, the director recalls being generally unhappy with the slow shooting process - in France he would have 'finished four films in that time' - but declares having been very content with the actors. It shows. The lead performance by Dutch stage legend Herman Bouber is beyond effective in its sincerity, young starlet Rini Otte is utterly convincing and charming as ever (Ophüls himself insisted on having her join the cast after seeing Jonge Harten) and scene-stealer Cor Ruys appears in a small but powerful part as cunning Bank President Moorman. If anything, Komedie om Geld is worth watching because of its performances. The camerawork is also inspired, as are certain elements such as the clownesque presenter.
Even though the performances, visuals and unique intermezzo's make Komedie om Geld interesting and over-all fairly enjoyable, it remains moralising, not too well-written and in my humble opinion certainly not on par with other early Dutch sound films such as De Kribbebijter, Jonge Harten and Pygmalion. The latter aside, Komedie om Geld is now the only Dutch 1930s film with English subtitles on EYE Amsterdam's Youtube channel and Eye Player. It is beyond embarrassing that the leading film institute in the Netherlands continues to propagate this picture, stating that "oddly enough, audiences did not take to the film", thus proving that they know jack sh*t about the cinematic history they possess.
After the international success of Henry Koster's De Kribbebijter, another exiled filmmaker was hired to direct a Dutch cinematic prestige project. In celebration of the 15th anniversary of Tuschinski theatre, Amsterdam's most prestigious cinema, Max Ophüls was contracted to helm what would be a rather special production. At the height of the Great Depression, the Tuschinski's deemed it a good idea to release a relentless critique of the banking world - a moral shot in the arm of sorts. At the same time, however, the budget of over 135.000 Dutch guilders made it the most expensive production the Netherlands had ever seen - talk about extreme insensitivity. One should not be surprised that audiences at the time decided to pass on this tonedeaf, hypocritically moralising misfire en masse and see De Kribbebijter again instead.
That said, not all is bad in Ophüls' only Dutch effort. In his autobiography, the director recalls being generally unhappy with the slow shooting process - in France he would have 'finished four films in that time' - but declares having been very content with the actors. It shows. The lead performance by Dutch stage legend Herman Bouber is beyond effective in its sincerity, young starlet Rini Otte is utterly convincing and charming as ever (Ophüls himself insisted on having her join the cast after seeing Jonge Harten) and scene-stealer Cor Ruys appears in a small but powerful part as cunning Bank President Moorman. If anything, Komedie om Geld is worth watching because of its performances. The camerawork is also inspired, as are certain elements such as the clownesque presenter.
Even though the performances, visuals and unique intermezzo's make Komedie om Geld interesting and over-all fairly enjoyable, it remains moralising, not too well-written and in my humble opinion certainly not on par with other early Dutch sound films such as De Kribbebijter, Jonge Harten and Pygmalion. The latter aside, Komedie om Geld is now the only Dutch 1930s film with English subtitles on EYE Amsterdam's Youtube channel and Eye Player. It is beyond embarrassing that the leading film institute in the Netherlands continues to propagate this picture, stating that "oddly enough, audiences did not take to the film", thus proving that they know jack sh*t about the cinematic history they possess.
Perception Is More Important Than Reality
boblipton10 July 2023
Bank messenger Herman Bouber loses fifty thousand pounds, and his job. He and daughter Rini Otte find themselves out of work, until a secretly bankrupt company led by Cor Ruys makes him the managing director; evenone assumes he has put the stolen money into the firm. But as the plans grow larger, and the matter of profits consume him, he finds himself overwhelmed by responsibility, at odds with his daughter, and even the butler.
This being a movie directed by Max Ophüls, the first thing I noticed was that I was overwhelmed by all the moving shots. Ophüls seems to have thought that by moving the camera, he transmuted a stage play into a motion picture. I find that particular technique of his overdone, but let that go. The performances are fine. The story has some merit -- although what the point of it is is quite beyond me. Is it that there are honest people and dishonest people, and people in between, and it's a mistake to confuse them? Matthieu van Eysden as Bouber's shady but fond brother-in-law is the point-of-view character, and his crotchets (and his dog) are the best thing about this movie.
This being a movie directed by Max Ophüls, the first thing I noticed was that I was overwhelmed by all the moving shots. Ophüls seems to have thought that by moving the camera, he transmuted a stage play into a motion picture. I find that particular technique of his overdone, but let that go. The performances are fine. The story has some merit -- although what the point of it is is quite beyond me. Is it that there are honest people and dishonest people, and people in between, and it's a mistake to confuse them? Matthieu van Eysden as Bouber's shady but fond brother-in-law is the point-of-view character, and his crotchets (and his dog) are the best thing about this movie.
Decent Max Ophuls Film, But Best Appreciated by Completists
jrd_7310 April 2019
Comedy of Money is a somewhat different film than what I have seen from director Max Ophuls. The tone is lighter and the setting the (then) modern day.
Brand is a respected bank employee with a pretty daughter just beginning her career as a physical education teacher. However, Brand has a brother-in-law, Ferdinand, who is a scoundrel. Ferdinand runs a con on the rich. He offers to sell them his dog, takes their money, and then, when he is out of sight, whistles for the dog to come running to him. The bank wants Brand to dissociate himself from Ferdinand, yet Brandt cannot do it. One day, Brand is to deliver money to another bank. This money disappears. Brand is accused of theft and arrested. The charges are soon dismissed due to lack of evidence. However, Brand's name is damaged. Both he and his daughter are fired from their jobs, and the bills begin to pile up. Then, when things are at their bleakest, another bank seeks out Brand for a new job, bank manager. There has to be catch, right?
The print that I watched had vague subtitles that made some of the characters' motives unclear. Regardless, I still feel comfortable stating that this is not a film that is going to be re-discovered as a classic any time soon. The film is pleasant enough and easy to watch. However, it does not seem like a film from a major director. The film does feature a few of the long(ish) tracking shots that the director is known for. My favorite is a circular shot as Brand, now bank director, dresses down Ferdinand, now the bank's doorman. I also like a montage of bills being typed up from early in the film. I was less taken with the film's carnival barker, acting as a chorus, who breaks the fourth wall. Also, there is no getting around the fact that I never found the film funny, even the more farcical elements (like a talkative butler).
Comedy of Money is best watched by Max Ophuls completists. Most viewers can probably skip it, although the film is a painless viewing experience.
Brand is a respected bank employee with a pretty daughter just beginning her career as a physical education teacher. However, Brand has a brother-in-law, Ferdinand, who is a scoundrel. Ferdinand runs a con on the rich. He offers to sell them his dog, takes their money, and then, when he is out of sight, whistles for the dog to come running to him. The bank wants Brand to dissociate himself from Ferdinand, yet Brandt cannot do it. One day, Brand is to deliver money to another bank. This money disappears. Brand is accused of theft and arrested. The charges are soon dismissed due to lack of evidence. However, Brand's name is damaged. Both he and his daughter are fired from their jobs, and the bills begin to pile up. Then, when things are at their bleakest, another bank seeks out Brand for a new job, bank manager. There has to be catch, right?
The print that I watched had vague subtitles that made some of the characters' motives unclear. Regardless, I still feel comfortable stating that this is not a film that is going to be re-discovered as a classic any time soon. The film is pleasant enough and easy to watch. However, it does not seem like a film from a major director. The film does feature a few of the long(ish) tracking shots that the director is known for. My favorite is a circular shot as Brand, now bank director, dresses down Ferdinand, now the bank's doorman. I also like a montage of bills being typed up from early in the film. I was less taken with the film's carnival barker, acting as a chorus, who breaks the fourth wall. Also, there is no getting around the fact that I never found the film funny, even the more farcical elements (like a talkative butler).
Comedy of Money is best watched by Max Ophuls completists. Most viewers can probably skip it, although the film is a painless viewing experience.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
