Master of the House (1925) User Reviews

Who says Dreyer is boring?

[Marc Ambit · 8/10 · 27 September 2000]

After seeing this movie (along with many other Dreyer's movies) I still wonder why people think that this Danish director is kind of boring.

This is perfect example of what Dreyer's cinematography is and what is not. This is a film where you can find some gentle spirit lying beneath. Some sort of quietness that fulfils the whole movie. As in many other of his early movies, Dreyer puts the spectator in a superior level. We are given the opportunity to watch an everyday's scene: a woman subjugated to a spoilt man's will. We watch her wake up early in the morning, wash dishes, clean the whole house, prepare her husband's breakfast and all she gets in exchange is bad manners and retreats from him. The complot that the nanny builds up to make the man feel guilty and so, to make him behave, unfolds in a subtle and sometimes funny way, making the watching more enjoyable from the distance.

It's hard to describe the perfect acting that the main characters bring to this beautiful film; an acting full of details and emotion.

Enjoyable form the first frame to the last one, this film will work perfectly for Dreyer's fans as long as for those who ever thought this was a tough one. It's, probably, the perfect bridge to approach to Dreyer's masterpieces such as "Ordet" and "Gertrud".

Hope you like it as much as I did.

A Dreyer Masterpiece

[gavin6942 · 8/10 · 16 May 2014]

Victor Frandsen is a domestic tyrant. His wife Ida has to work as a slave for him and the rest of the family. She rises early to prepare everything for the day, she toils all day long, and she is often up also in the night, doing some sewing to earn extra money for the household.

Dreyer is one of the greats in silent cinema, both in his homeland and internationally. His greatest achievement is probably "Joan of Arc" and many have appreciated "Vampyr". This film came a few years earlier, but is every bit as good in its own way (and with its release on Criterion, it has never looked better).

The Danes are not typically known for their role in cinema history, but Dreyer was an undeniable force in the 1920s If nothing else, he inspired Bergman, who was probably the greatest Scandinavian director of all time.

The Shaming of the Brute

[JoeytheBrit · 6/10 · 10 July 2009]

"We men are such fools!" proclaims former master of the house Viktor, and you can't help but feel a sliver of guilt as he silently utters those words. That's the timeless universality of film, I suppose: a Danish movie made over 80 years ago is still relevant today.

This was my first Dreyer, and it is quite a light offering considering the man's weighty reputation. It's a social drama with a patently feminist message delivered with a typically heavy hand (by today's standards). Johannes Meyer is Viktor, the decent man turned into a brute by the failure of his business who doesn't realise just how much he takes his long-suffering wife Ida (Astrid Holm) for granted. Fortunately for Ida, Viktor's curmudgeonly former nanny (Mathilde Neilsen), takes control of the situation by packing the frazzled Ida off to a sanatorium so that she can sort Viktor out.

The film drags for the first half-hour as the daily ritual of the Frandsen family is established. Let's face it, there's little of interest in watching people polishing shoes and preparing breakfast, but things get a little more interesting once Nanny takes charge. It's message is a bit too sweeping (although all us men are probably guilty to some degree) and a little too simplistic in its treatment and resolution, but there's plenty on the screen to demonstrate Dreyer's talent as a director - although some symbolism (caged birds, for example) must have been overused even by 1925. A decent enough film, worth watching despite its mundane setting.

A rather dour piece...

[AlsExGal · 7/10 · 19 November 2023]

...that explores the deterioration of a relationship of a husband and wife in Denmark after the man has lost his business. He becomes, not only morose, but extremely nasty towards his entire family, channeling all of his own personal misery towards his wife, his mother-in-law, his children, and his former nanny.

The first half of this film will win few viewers' sympathy concerning the husband. Frankly, in most of today's world, especially in the USA, any wife would have walked long ago rather than put up with such abuse. Instead, we see a form of mores that existed in a culture of yesterday, where this particular wife still holds great affection for her husband. Carl Theodore Dreyer does a commendable job showing the breakdown of the situation into its component parts, the breakup of the relationship, not by the wife, but by the nanny and mother-in-law, and then the re-assembling of the pieces into a concordant whole again. It's beautifully done, but it's dated. The major star of the piece is Mathilde Nielsen who plays the former nanny of the husband. Her eyes alone are worth the show.

This is well worth the watch but be forewarned that this is not necessarily a very pleasant piece, and I found as much to frown as to smile about.

Even Dreyer's Pedestrian Films are Masterwork

[truemythmedia · 8/10 · 16 May 2019]

The thing that struck me most about this film is how progressive it is though maybe not by today's standards. In a modern film Ida would be setting out for a divorce and establishing herself into a career and provided for her own but this is a film that revolves around a man learning to appreciate the work that his wife does and even coming to realize that while he earns the money, she has the harder job.

With the many different faces that the feminist movement has taken over the years this early step of correcting a man who has taken his wife for granted was especially meaningful for me. I'm not a business owner so it feels like there are many things that are out of my control to help women. I can't raise their wages or give them healthcare they need or even, as a poor person, help them get out of bad living situations.

What I can do, and is easier to forget than I would like to admit, is be gracious and kind, thankful that my wife is who she is and works as hard as she does.

As our culture has turned itself on its head with such an extreme form of Capitalism, it is easy to forget that the main function of a home is not to give wage earners a place to eat and sleep till they go back out into the world but rather, the other way around. The wage earner leaves the home to provide money so that the family, the home, can be a place people want to spend time and company within.

In this film, Viktor has it upside down and the women in his life see it. When he does not respond to verbal cues, they give him a last chance to learn, though it will be a hard lesson to swallow. In many ways this is a profoundly feminist film. The lead male is the only character who is seen as ignorant of his actions effects and he is the only one so stubborn as to believe that he is always in the right.

The Good Wife/The Bad Husband

[movingpicturegal · 7/10 · 27 November 2006]

The story of a "spoilt husband" - selfish, irritable, very ill-tempered and demanding as he rules the house, while his patient/devoted wife gets up at the crack of dawn to start her drab day of tending to his constant needs and complaints. Even the kids have to perform tasks all day rather than play to satisfy their tyrant of a father - but he's NEVER satisfied, nothing seems to be to his liking! Yeah, you got it, this guy is a serious jerk leaving me to wonder why the wife hasn't left him long ago. Luckily smart Nana, hubby's childhood nursemaid, steps up to the plate to help make some changes as she fetches the wife's mother and the two old women set out to straighten this guy out and teach him the lesson he so badly needs - to appreciate his wife. So the wife goes away for a "rest" (well needed, I should say) leaving hard-nosed Nana in charge of the brute!

This film is adequately entertaining, it is photographed in an interesting way, but is somewhat slow-moving and drags a bit in places. I would say at least half an hour shorter would have made this a better film. The acting is quite well done by all players. The version as shown on TCM included a pleasant piano score that sometimes suits the plot - and sometimes doesn't. Worth seeing.

Dreyer the master

[sveinpa · 9/10 · 8 February 2012]

Du skal ære din hustru was restored last year by Palladium, the original company that released it in 1925. It was also released on DVD along with the likewise newly restored Vredens Dag, Ordet and Gertrud. These are actually the first ever releases on DVD by the Danes themselves of their most important films. It took some time but the result is splendid, at least as far as Du skal ære din hustru is concerned. The current version is free from scratches and dirt and comes with the original Danish intertitles. It runs for 107 minutes.

Having seen the other early Dreyer films (before Jeanne) both long ago on the screen and on DVD relatively recent, I must say that this remains for me without doubt the most interesting one. Indeed it is great! This is because its success is purely cinematographic: Although based on the popular 1919 play "The tyrant's fall", it strikes me how little it resembles a stage performance; how well the natural acting (not in any way overacted) is integrated in the two or three small rooms of the troubled family's apartment, not least how excellently the scenes are constructed, and especially the lightning, which is never too bright, yet bringing out every detail in the house. It is a joy to see this environment come alive; a cross between a petit bourgeois and an upper working class world, as well as to study the many objects appearing from another time: The carefully hung pictures on the walls, the always-burning oven (it is winter) with its place for the kettle, and all the small oddities from a hundred years ago (well, almost). Indeed Dreyer himself paid utmost importance to it; he constructed everything from scratch to look exactly like a Christianshavn apartment, and he made sure that the camera always was positioned around the characters like it was another ghostly member of the family. We are drawn into the surroundings in a way that a theatre stage never could manage, and the actors are shown in their best possible manner, where only a small wink or a troubled gaze is enough to indicate what goes on inside them and how they interact with one another. This is a huge step forward from the previous films by Dreyer, and indeed from most other films at the time.

As the plot is well cared for by other posters, I will not bother here with any details but must say that I find the relationship between husband and wife to be as realistic as could be hoped for in a 1925 movie: Viktor may be a tyrant but only a household tyrant (they can be bad enough). He is cross, not violent. And Ida may be the typical suffering and under-appreciated wife but she bares her lot with great dignity. She loves him and supports him because she understands that his loss of business gives him hard times; he can barely support his family, yet he must appear like a winner to the outside world. The children seem to understand this as well, particularly the sympathetic and obedient Karen but also her younger brother Frederik, who must nevertheless endure some humiliating punishment. They seem to know every possible little detail that Viktor craves, and they try not to makes things worse for him. That leaves the rebel of the house, Viktor's old nanny, who provides both comical relief and some clever revenge structures. They all tell so much by playing so little, it is as if the story could be told almost by their gestures alone, without the need of the abundance of intertitles which to me are only stating the obvious. We can see what's going on; every frame tells a story and every cut makes us notice how swiftly the action can change from the tense to the out of hand. Dreyer is really himself the master of the house as far as editing is concerned, often creating fast moving scenes by making movement continue from one shot to another in a masterful way that was not common at that time. Today it easy to overlook such important details and consequently loose much of what makes this film special.

When first released, the film was an outstanding success, both with the critics and with the audiences, both in Denmark and abroad, most notably in France, where Le Temps saw its simplicity and attention to small details as a great example to be followed by French directors. In 1925, that included at least Jean Renoir, whose first films were not free from stagey drama and overacting (Nana...). The official Carl Th. Dreyer website provides both this review and others, although you need to brush up your Danish to read them (Well if James Joyce could do it...): It seems that the Danish critics all agreed that this was the best Danish film yet. The site also provides the full manuscript with many scenes missing from the current print. I think I remember seeing a beautiful scene where Karen, full of sisterly love, washes the nude Frederik, who is standing in a basin in the kitchen, but it is now missing. It is, however, shown on a still photo that is both on the DVD and on the Dreyer-site. Was it censored? Or is it just my dirty imagination? There are also some hilarious fantasy scenes in the manuscript, including one where Viktor is horsewhipping the entire family who are pulling him around on a wagon, that were either not filmed or cut somewhere along the way.

Anyway, the film as we have it in the current print remains one of the most moving of its era, as good as the similar ones by Murnau and Pabst from around the same time (say Tartuffe and Geheimnisse einer Seele), and that for me is as good as domestic cinema ever got in the twenties.

Old-Fashioned Male Social Conduct

[FerdinandVonGalitzien · 6/10 · 8 April 2011]

It has been well known for centuries that aristocrats have, among other virtues, a spoiled and frivolous disposition, but it is certainly very strange that such privileged characteristics are sometimes shared with certain commoners.

And that's precisely what happens with Herr Viktor in the film "Du Skal Aere Din Hustru" ( Master Of The House ), a film directed by Herr Carl Theodor Dreyer in the silent year of 1925 in which is depicted the tyranny of Herr Viktor over his family; the man is always in a bad humour and takes out his frustration on his wife, Frau Ida and children ( aristocrats correspondently are always in the same mood and do the same with their servants ).

"Du Skal Aere Din Hustru" is an unpleasant film, the chronicle of an unhappy marriage constituted by a dutiful and self-sacrificing wife and her irascible and demanding husband. It is an excellent portrait of old-fashioned male social conduct that in other times was considered almost normal in many European societies (the head of the household's supremacy and unquestioned rights) which meant the psychological and physical maltreatment suffered by many women around the world even today.

Such an embarrassing subject is treated with sensitivity by Herr Dreyer in what it is a detailed account of the tyranny of the husband over his family, especially during the first part of the film where, in a detailed way, the whims, continuous demands and bad behaviour of Herr Viktor achieves a vivid portrait of a disagreeable man.

Most of the film is set indoors, in the family apartment, achieving in this way the feeling of a more oppressive atmosphere that is suffered by the wife and her children; a cage where they live just like the canaries owned by Frau Ida.

In such a claustrophobic atmosphere, the wife dutifully and quietly goes about her daily work routine, a sacrificing spouse and mother who puts the health of her body and soul at risk doing such labor for an ungrateful and contemptuous man. These sequences are realistic and without artifice, ja wohl.

During the second part of the film and thanks to the help of an old woman who was Viktor's nanny, we will see the process of the re-education of this ill-spirited man which brings him down to earth and out of his frustration and anger. This proves to be a long and complicated task that the old woman will do boldly and effectively.

Herr Johannes Meyer, who plays the husband, does an excellent job as the tormented man who behaves improperly with his family, although he isn't quite conscious of his tyranny. His attitude is caused by economic and work problems, which lead him to take out his anger and frustration on the people around him, the beloved ones who can't understand but suffer in silence such bad behaviour.

Herr Meyer performs his character in a restrained way, without overacting or extravagant gestures, a fine depiction of an unfeeling man who can't express any emotion except anger. Frau Astrid Holm, who plays the wife is equally convincing. Herr Dreyer's careful direction scrutinizes these scenes from a marriage and the unhappiness that results and must be dealt with.

And now, if you'll allow me, I must temporarily take my leave because this German Count must re-educate himself about some aristocratic old-fashioned conduct.

Far from perfect, but awfully entertaining

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 28 November 2006]

Before I begin, I must confess that I am not eternally in awe at the genius of the director, Dreyer. While he has an absolutely amazing reputation, several of his more famous films have left me a bit flat. So it was a very welcome thing when I watched this more conventional and entertaining film--after his vampire film and the other about Joan of Arc, I was really, really looking forward to something lighter in mood. This film was exactly what I had in mind. This is a pretty ordinary domestic comedy for Dreyer. I don't say ordinary in a bad sense, but that the film felt more approachable and designed for the common person in the audience instead of being an obsessively-made art film (which he was famous for making). Okay, now that I probably have insulted all the Dreyer fans out there, I'll get on the heart of my review.

This is the tale of an over-worked and completely unappreciated housewife. In so many ways, she tries so hard so be the perfect wife but the cad of a husband can do nothing but criticize and berate her as well as be harsh towards the kids. And, the wife being a "co-dependent" (a nice modern psychobabble word, huh?), she thinks all she needs to do is try even harder and she makes excuse after excuse for the jerk. This seems to be a problem without a solution until the husband's old nanny comes to the home and sees how frazzled the wife is and how the hubby is a selfish spoiled brat. "Super-nanny" comes to the rescue--getting the wife out of the house and to a sanitarium for a rest. And, with the nanny back in charge, the spoiled guy slowly starts to realize just how good he had it--as he no longer is allowed to bully and browbeat to get his way.

The film is mildly funny, but is meant more as social commentary. In some ways it's pretty effective, but at times it is also kind of heavy-handed. Also, the film says things like "all men are that way" and "women do three times the work of men" and so it seems like the pro-feminist message is just a little too much at times. Instead of presenting a balanced view and showing how both men and women work hard and deserve respect, that men are like big babies and women are the backbone of every family. While this is definitely true of the family in this film, the film is itself perpetuating a stereotype. This can easily be forgiven, as in the 1920s, women were so much more under-appreciated, so it isn't like it irritated me--it just tended to occasionally use hyperbole and overstate things to drive the point home--again and again and again--making the film a tad heavy-handed. My advice is to ignore the excesses and just enjoy good film-making and entertainment.

One of the earliest films to break the silence on the domestic tyranny of husbands over housewives. A commandment for all men: "Thou Shalt Honour Thy Wife."

[SAMTHEBESTEST · 7/10 · 5 August 2022]

Du Skal ære Din Hustru / Master of the House (1925) : Brief Review -

One of the earliest films to break the silence on the domestic tyranny of husbands over housewives. A commandment for all men: "Thou Shalt Honour Thy Wife." I never really imagined an unorthodox filmmaker like Carl Theodor Dreyer making such a simple film with a sweet message. So Master of the House was like a notion breaker for me, and it also made me realise the fact that Dreyer was a master of all genres and various topics, that too in different cinema industries. This was a Danish film - a cinema industry that wasn't fully exposed to the pathbreaking cinema at that time. Yet, Carl brought them a pathbreaking topic without going beyond mainstream theories of society. Now this one is deeper and closer than it appears because it takes you inside a house. The film shows you the happenings we all see in every alternate family and almost every next couple. We all witness such things even today, almost a century later. So you can imagine the power and importance of this concept brought to light by Carl Theodor Dreyer. It was one of the earliest films to break the silence on domestic violence, verbal abuse, ill-treatment, and humiliation faced by common housewives. I am a man, but I felt for her, and I hated the man here, and I also liked the change in his behavior. That was predictable, though, and still extremely lovable. When a man loses his job, he becomes tyrannical towards his family and the women of the house. A nanny and mother-in-law decide to teach him a lesson in gratitude, or to the entire fraternity of male dominance for that matter. Astrid Holm makes a housewife that you'll love to have in your life, while Mathilde Nielsen's portrayal wins your heart. Carl Theodor Dreyer's film is sweet, simple and beautiful, but most importantly, it teaches all men to honour their wives, who tirelessly rub the house 27x7 for them.

RATING - 7.5/10*

By - #samthebestest.

A finely made, rewarding domestic drama

[I_Ailurophile · 9/10 · 29 March 2022]

"A drama," they call it, and true enough, a drama it is. But to an extent this is a film that somewhat occupies a strange place. The content defining the first 45 minutes or is strikingly dark - any basic premise of the movie refers to male figure Viktor as a "tyrant," but that alone is too kind a word to describe his monstrous behavior and cruel disposition. The tone that 'Master of the house' adopts is much too light to wholly impart the horrid abuse he inflicts upon his wife, his children, and everyone else around him, which with a mere change of technical composition would be fitting for a more modern, grittier rendition. At the same time, the described comeuppance he slowly comes to receive is indeed gratifying, and conveys much needed levity to offer counterbalance to the severity of the first act. Even as the picture ultimately ends as we anticipate, there's sufficient somber realism in the course of events that frankly a content warning is necessary in light of Viktor's iniquities and his family's victimization.

With all that said, however, there's also no mistaking that the miasma serves to build a wonderfully engrossing, compelling story. The adapted screenplay concocted between director Carl Theodor Dreyer and playwright Svend Rindom is filled with vivid, engaging scene writing, and strong characters who have real arcs. The narrative is unexpectedly rich and satisfying as it plays with timeless themes of family, responsibility, and humility. Plenty of other movies over the years have toyed with similar notions in different ways and to varying degrees of success, yet to whatever measure comparisons can be drawn, 'Master of the house' still comes off as a title all its own, with a precise, pleasing mixture of drama and lightly comedic elements. Moreover, at length it's terrifically endearing in its heartfelt sincerity, communicating important social messaging as Viktor learns what is most important.

One must note the swell contributions of everyone on hand, including those behind the scenes working in costume design, hair and makeup, and set design and decoration. Dreyer's direction - guiding the cast, arranging shots and scenes, and helming the production generally - is sturdy and capable, as is his editing. Above all, though, the cast is a delight. Johannes Meyer gives an exquisite performance as Viktor, illustrating super range and poise in embodying the man at his most cretinous, but also in his humbled state. Playing opposite Meyer with great nuance and strength of personality, Mathilde Nielsen is a blast as nanny Mads, serving as a brilliant foil and corrective force in the home. Even the young actors depicting the children, especially Karin Nellemose as oldest daughter Karen, demonstrate fine ability even at just the start of their careers, and it's a treat to watch them all practice their craft.

Between the subject matter, the overall thrust of the plot, and the film's place in the silent era. This isn't necessarily going to be for all viewers. For any subjective difficulties that may present, however, by far I dare say this is a tremendously worthy, absorbing feature that very well stands the test of time. Rather excruciating as the first bit of the length is, when all is said and done 'Master of the house' is earnest and beautiful, and rewarding as a viewer. Anyone who isn't turned off by what a mere glance may portend would do well to sit for it, and I think there's enough value here that enough those who tend to resist silent pictures may still find it worthwhile. Long story short, if you have the chance to watch 'Master of the house,' I think these are 107 minutes that hold up very well almost 100 years later!

The Taming of the Brute

[wes-connors · 6/10 · 28 November 2012]

After a business failure, grouchy Johannes Meyer (as Viktor Frandsen) is out of control. He browbeats cheerful wife Astrid Holm (as Ida) and mistreats his children. Even a caged bird is not safe. To keep up with his increasing demands, Ms. Holm stays up late sewing to give Mr. Meyer extra money. She even starves herself so teenager Karin Nellemose (as Karen) and her two younger siblings are not hungry. When Holm appears at the breaking point, elderly nanny Mathilde Nielsen (as Mads) takes charge. The old woman reared young Meyer, and was not above corporal punishment (this invites speculation). She conspires with Holm's mother to have the overworked housewife removed from home. While Holm recovers with mother Clara Schonfeld, Ms. Nielsen shows Meyer the error of his ways...

Propelled by Nielsen's all-knowing performance and an artful use of camera domesticity, director Carl Theodor Dreyer's social consciousness drama struck a chord with 1920s audiences and became his biggest box office hit.

****** Du skal aere din hustru (10/5/25) Carl Theodor Dreyer ~ Johannes Meyer, Mathilde Nielsen, Astrid Holm, Karin Nellemose

Good Look at Social Issues

[Michael_Elliott · 27 December 2012]

Master of the House (1925)

*** (out of 4)

An introduction that came with my viewing of this film had me learning that this here was the second and final comedy that director Carl Theodor Dreyer would make in his career and this here also turned out to be the only hit of his career. This comedy centers on an abusive husband (Johannes Meyer) who is constantly putting down his hard-working wife (Astrid Holm), which doesn't sit well with the man's former nanny (Mathilde Nielsen) who decides to send the wife away so that she can teach him a lesson. MASTER OF THE HOUSE is one of the worst comedies I've ever seen in my life. I say that because had I not read a few reviews or seen the introduction then never in my wildest dreams would I have guessed that this here was a comedy. There's simply not a single laugh to be had anywhere and I really can't see where there was even much of an attempt for humor. With that said, the film works well for several reasons but I think the biggest is that it's a pretty interesting look at the differences between men and women in these older days. The social message here is certainly something interesting to watch and especially when you consider how it shows the non-paid work that a wife does and doesn't get credit for. The film also gets some very strong performances and especially by Meyer. I thought he was completely believable in the role of the abusive husband and even when the screenplay becomes predictable, Meyer manages to make you believe everything you're watching. Carl Theodor Dreyer isn't one of my favorite directors and while this film is lacking his typical style, I think it shows that the director could handle something more "mainstream" than what we normally saw from him.

Mainly interesting for scenes of housework at the time

[psteier · 5/10 · 4 July 2001]

Viktor (Johannes Meyer) is a tyrannical middle class husband who expects everything to be done to his demands of the moment and does not appreciate the efforts of wife Ida (Astrid Holm) to get by on a reduced income since his business failed. When former family nursemaid Mads (Mathilde Nielsen) and Ida's mother (Clara Schønfeld) rescue Ida to allow her recover from overwork and self starvation, and is taken care of clever Mads, who will not take any mistreatment, Viktor slowly realizes Ida's value.

Slow going and not much excitement. It seems mainly a moral lesson. Mathilde Nielsen is best, but the daughter (Karin Nellemose) is also very good.

This is a comedy?

[garytheroux · 6/10 · 30 July 2017]

This film recently played on TCM and was billed as a comedy -- one of only two comedies it's director was involved with. Be aware of two things. One, that while easy to follow and reasonably well acted and edited, a good half-hour or more of this movie could be cut and no one would be the wiser. In fact, doing so would improve the production quite a bit. Second, this is NOT a comedy by any known definition. Most of it is a stark depiction of a family suffering under the thumb of the cold insensitivity of the leading male character. One really feels for that character's wife and children, who seem to accept his abuse as the price of living under his roof. This same plot line has turned up in many other movies -- including 1932's "Birthday Blues," one of the very best of the Our Gang shorts. So who actually is the most interesting player here? Surprisingly, it's the elderly former nanny -- played by a woman whose body language and facial expressions are spot-on in every scene. In the latter part of this movie, the "master" comes to realize the enormous value of his wife's contribution to their home - and how it is she who is the glue holding their household together. That was true in many marriages in 1925 and remains so today -- which makes the film's main point still relevant nearly a century later.

exceptional entertaining film

[non_sportcardandy · 8/10 · 27 November 2006]

Exceptional because 90% of the story is set in an apartment but does not bore the viewer.The main credit to the movie should go to the writers.Although the story is mainly serious many of the lines show well thought out humor.It's already been brought out how the film is a step back in time showing how a typical Danish family might of went about doing daily chores in that era.At times it has the look of being filmed for future generations to study.Seeing a person carrying a tub of clothes up a few flights of stairs can generate a lot of appreciation for a clothes dryer.The few outdoor scenes were of interest also as they reflected a lifestyle of the past.Yes the story is of a a bad husband/father mistreating the family.To add to his fearful image he seems to be a huge man.This may be best noted in a closeup scene of his hand and the oldest daughter's hand together,the difference in size is great.The emphasis on his being a tyrant is great also but quite believable.The wife's slave like existence is laid on thick and is not quite so believable.The doubt here being brought about by her total lack of verbal response to the husbands unreasonable comments.She just puts her head down and obeys.Her role is almost 100% fairytale like.Compared to her Cinderella might seem sassy.The mentioning of the wife's lack of protest is an observation not an criticism (it's not easy to make that sound right).Anyone with only a slight interest in this subject matter will probably still be entertained by this movie.

Great message, but a little dry

[gbill-74877 · 6/10 · 20 November 2019]

I admire the intention of this film, standing up for a woman against her oppressive husband who orders her around like a tyrant. That's a pretty great thing for 1925, or any era for that matter. The first part of the film that shows his abrasiveness to his wife and kids is strong because of the indignation we feel, and because of Johannes Meyer's snarling, sarcastic presence. When she decides to leave him with the kids and his old nanny for awhile, I really wondered what dark or interesting places the film might go. Unfortunately, it's nowhere, and the last half lags because it's so simple. The combination of missing her and being regularly put in his place by the nanny adjusts his views quickly and dramatically. I like how director Carl Theodor Dreyer gives us close-ups of all these characters where we see the emotion in their eyes, and the husband's look resembles religious repentance or conversion. It's a great message, but it's dry and laid on more than a little thick, which made it a tough to get excited about.

Favorite quote: How foolish we men are! We believe that we carry the load since we make the money...but it is really SHE who carries everything...and is rewarded with her husband's brutish behavior!

Overlooked family feminist comedy

[MissSimonetta · 10/10 · 22 April 2016]

Carl Th. Dreyer is best known for his religious dramas like The Passion of Joan of Arc, Day of Wrath, and Ordet, so that he made this little family comedy is quite a shock. Possessing no religious themes whatsoever, Master of the House (1925) focuses its attention on the plight of women in the domestic sphere. The movie concerns a woman whose duties as wife and mother leave her exhausted due to her husband's nastiness and lack of understanding. She lets his behavior slide since she knows he has been stressed since he lost his high ranking position at work, but this neglect of her own health leads to a nervous breakdown. Fed up with the injustice, the elderly Nana has the wife go away for a few days so she can put the master of the house back in his place.

While the film is comic, it is not of the laugh out loud variety. It is a gentle comedy, though it pulls no punches when it comes to calling out the undervaluing of domestic work. All the actors are restrained and portray family tensions and tenderness with great realism, making the film feel more authentic. It's a shame it has been so overlooked; a feminist gem silent film geeks shouldn't miss.

The Hidden Heroine

[kidboots · 10/10 · 17 January 2013]

The scene is set by the initial articulate titles - a spoilt husband, a forgotten heroine and Nana, the all wise one. John is the "master of the house" - a tyrant who complains from the time he opens his eyes in the morning - no spoons, not enough butter, shoes need mending, coffee should be on the table before he sits down etc. Mary is the hidden heroine - the wife who is up before sunup, attending to the house so it runs like clockwork, even on the limited housekeeping budget she receives. Every morning there is a struggle to get all the tasks done on time before John returns for lunch. Nana, an old nurse who looked after John when he was a child, comes in the morning to do sewing - and she doesn't like what she sees, although for Mary's sake she stays silent. She does fetch Mary's mother and then they are all a witness to one of John's tirades. Over the years he has become a bully but Mary feels it has become worse since he lost his business and she is now broken in mind and body.

When demanding John returns from work he finds Mary has been whisked away by her mother and now Nana has taken her place. Life is very different for John now and within a month he finds himself once again "a small boy terrified of his nurse's wrath" - so the title says. He becomes closer to his young daughter and, through her admissions, he realises all the little sacrifices Mary made for his comfort - sewing far into the night to earn extra money for luxuries like meat and butter.

It is the little scenes of home life that make this picture so perfect. The frugalities such as scraping butter from the children's bread so John will have plenty and scrimping and saving so there will be enough to have John's shoes repaired. (I love the scene where Mary dashes to the cobblers to pick up John's repaired shoes before she goes on her "holiday", gives them to Nana who carefully locks them in the cupboard with a wry little smile!!!) It is hard to say whether the actors are great, they are just so real in their roles, but in my opinion, dominating the film is Mathilde Nielson as the all wise Nana - who never seems to sleep, who sees everything that goes on and decides that the right time for Mary to come home is the time when John is made to stand in the corner!!!

Highly Recommended.

Magnificent!

[martinlevacic · 10/10 · 1 December 2022]

One of the best silent films I've seen, Dreyer was truly a master of cinema and this movie is a great example of his brilliance. Excellent script, kept me interested all-around. Stellar performances by pretty much the whole cast, especially Mathilde Nielsen that assumed the role of the nanny, "Mads". Her face expression shifts were outstanding. Astrid Holm was also astounding as the mistreated wife, so kind and beautiful. Most of the plot happens in one house, and the movie's simplicity is one of its finest traits. Movie explores moral values in family and does an astonishing job at that. I loved the occasional shift from sad to funny, a couple of hilarious one-liners. At the end of this review I'd like to add that the musical score is also first-rate. Highly recommended!

This Was Considered "Entertainment" 94 Years Ago!?

[StrictlyConfidential · 3/10 · 23 June 2018]

This German, silent-era, domestic-drama from 1925 sure painted things black and white when it came to playing up the polar stereotypes of a husband and wife in serious conflict with each other.

He, of course, was presented as being the absolute, most demanding and miserable SOB's imaginable. While, on the other hand - She was the meek, dutiful, little ass-kisser who tolerated (short of physical abuse) being treated like a literal doormat, 24-7, by her hubby.

With a bunch of annoying, meddling, busybody neighbors living in the same crowded apartment building, offering the little wifey their 2-cents worth - This woman takes some pretty drastic measures in order to convince the lousy tyrant (who she loves so much) to change his tune.

Anyway - In the long run - This 93-year-old relic's bottom line all came down to - "The wife is the heart of the home."..... Now, ain't that sweet? It's hard to believe that a story as mundane as this one actually passed as entertainment nearly 100 years ago.

Revenge Is Sweetest

[Hitchcoc · 9/10 · 2 August 2020]

This is a nicely done Dreyer offering, though a less serious one. A man who has fallen on hard times when he loses his business, takes it out daily on his family, mostly on his poor wife. We see his stern, demanding personality in the first half until her mother tells her to leave him and teach him a lesson. Things are very predictable but the film is nicely done and the main character Viktor becomes hateful to us. There is a sad scene where in order to appease his demand for more butter, the wife scrapes what little she has from her own bread as well as her children's.

A Radical Feminist Film Way Ahead Of Its Time !!!

[JoeKulik · 10/10 · 9 June 2015]

Carl Dreyer's Master Of The House (1925) is an ant-Establishment film that is very radical for 1925. Being the first Dreyer film that I've ever watched, I must say that it took me by complete surprise, being very different from any other silent era European film that I've viewed. This is a film that was definitely ahead of its time.

Master Of The House is definitely a feminist film, decades before "feminist", both as a word & as an idea, even existed.

It highlights the dependence of the wife on the husband in the traditional nuclear family. In this film, as in most families in the whole world in 1925, the wife did not hold a job outside the home. She was totally financially dependent on the husband. The husband was seen by his wife, his children, & indeed by the whole world as the supreme, unquestioned authority figure in the home. His decisions were never questioned. The wife was to be the subservient, ever obedient "door mat" who never dared to criticize or question her husband. His every whim & criticism was his command to her. The wife, as is the wife in this film, is very "co-dependent", inasmuch as she psychologically adjusts herself to believe that her husband can do no wrong, regardless of how outrageous his behavior & criticisms are. Indeed, her co-dependency convinces her to believe that she is deserving of her husband's bad behavior & that he would behave better if she could only do a better job as the ever faithful wife. As such, this paragraph is a quick thematic sketch of the first half of Master Of The House.

The most radical part of the film is the second half, which dares to suggest that the wife need not tolerate her husband's bad behavior &, indeed, can do something to improve it. Because throughout this film, right to the end, the wife is the ever compliant door mat, it is the intervention of interested third parties that causes a moral reform in the husband's domestic behavior. Thusly, although it is a radical, feminist film, it stops short of actually inciting disgruntled wives in the audience to openly rebel against their authoritarian husbands, although drawing such a conclusion wouldn't be difficult for any viewer. Most significantly, this film has a "happy ending", thereby suggesting that attempts to reform boorish authoritarian husbands can actually lead to a happier marriage; this is definitely a subtle prompt for wifely rebellion among females in the audience.

This film is also a not so subtle indictment of the traditional, patriarchal nuclear family. Basically, it attempts to show that at least some aspects of the traditional nuclear family structure are not good. This is a very radical message to deliver in a 1925 film.

Although this film is quite radical for its times, subtly inciting rebellion among oppressed housewives & attacking the traditional cornerstone of the nuclear family, the unchallenged moral authority of the male, the husband & father, who is the head of the family, Dreyer did constrain his ant-Establishmentism within certain limits. As already mentioned, the wife in this subversive tale never actually becomes a true feminist. She is the compliant door mat from the start to the end & the feminist "dirty work" is delegated to "wiser & older" third parties who, not coincidentally, are women. This film shows no physical abuse in the home. This film shows no hint of adultery by either the husband or the wife. Although the wife does depart the household for a time, she does, in fact, return; as poorly as the husband is initially portrayed in this film, the ultimate cohesion of the nuclear family is not questioned in this film.

It is significant that the wife's mother, to whom the wife retreats, is show to have financial means. Her large home is much better furnished than her daughter's small apartment. The mother is even shown to have a maid. The mother can even afford to summon a physician to her home to examine her daughter, the worn out wife. In the final scene, the wife's mother is even shown giving her now reformed son-in-law a bank check for 10,000 Danish dollars to start a new business in another province. So, from all indications, the wife's mom is "loaded".

Yet, as financially well off as the wife's mother is in this film, there is no suggestion by any character that the mother use her money to facilitate a permanent break up of her daughter's marriage. Surely, if the wife's mother can give her son-in-law 10,000 bucks to open a new business, then she has the money to make her daughter similarly financially independent of her once abusive husband by facilitating a permanent break up of the marriage, a divorce. But because this film is quite careful, after all is said & done, in affirming the unity & cohesion of the nuclear family, such a consideration is never even entertained.

So this is not only a thought provoking, even radical anti-Establishment film, but it is also a very well considered & well thought out film because it only goes so far in its revolutionary feminist trumpet call to the females in the viewing audience. Dreyer surely realized that he could only go so far with his revolutionary zeal & kept this film within certain boundaries.

There is no doubt in my mind that this film was the cause of many domestic disputes in the 1920's. I am quite certain that word of this film spread among the female population & that many a wife dragged her husband to see this film , hoping that he could learn something about being a more considerate & appreciative husband. I am quite sure that this film caused many marital arguments & perhaps some divorces.

Every mother everywhere should be able to identify with this

[jordondave-28085 · 10/10 · 18 April 2023]

(1925) Master of the House/ Du skal ære din hustru SILENT DRAMA

Co-written and directed by Carl Theodor Dreyer adapting the play "Tyrannens fald" by Svend Rindom. Straight forward story line that centers on a family of a husband, Viktor Frandsen (Johannes Meyer ) berating and belittling his wife, Ida Frandsen (Astrid Holm) in terms of a house maker, and at times he also berates his two older children as well. Motivating Victor's elderly former nanny, Mads (Mathilde Nielsen) to convince Ida to leave him with their three kids to move closer to her mother so that Victor can fend for himself.

It is 2023 and there are still women or mothers labelled as only homemakers, either by their respected spouses or by society itself, doing the cooking and the cleaning, and are not permitted or capable to doing anything else, If there husbands are the breadwinners, that poses the question, how well can the men do at home without there respected spouses! Do the women get paid to do any type of housework. "Master of the House" is in some ways way ahead of it's time, and for some strange reason,I prefer Carl Theodor Dreyer's silent movies than his talking ones.

Funny and Touching

[davidmvining · 8/10 · 28 July 2021]

It's been wonderful to discover Dreyer's comedies. He only made three, but each is amusing and touching in their own way. Master of the House, his last comedy, is the story of a man who learns that he has become a tyrant in his own home, degrading his wife and children every day no matter what they do. It seems like a setup for a simplistic story, but Dreyer's cinematic adaptation of the play by Svend Rindom draws the characters so well that despite some late stage generalized moralizing manages to stick the ending with a surprising amount of pathos.

Viktor (Johannes Meyer) is the patriarch of a family of five including his wife Ida (Astrid Holm), and their three children, most particularly their eldest daughter Karen (Karin Nellemose). Ever since Viktor had lost his shop some months before, he's turned bitter and angry at home, severely criticizing his wife for every little thing wrong he sees, barking at the children as they play around him, and pointing out every infraction against his sense of home he sees. The film starts with Ida getting the entire household ready for the day as Viktor sleeps in. It's an extended sequence that's really made by the small moments of comedy that populate it. The little ways that Ida predicts all of Viktor's needs and desires like his warm slippers or the butter on his toast, all while managing a young boy who needs to practice his times tables and a young woman who needs to help all around.

None of it is any good, though. Viktor awakens and feels like nothing is right, often barking contradictory orders to the point where Ida gives him all of the butter from her own bread without him realizing it just to make him happy. The final round of thoughtless cruelty is witnessed by his nanny from his youth, Mads. Played with wit and stern cunning by Mathilde Nielsen, she recalls Hildur Carlberg's performance in The Parson's Widow. As she sees Ida nearing the end of her rope, Ida knows exactly what will turn the house around, and it's treating Viktor like the misbehaving little boy he is. Together with Ida's mother, Mads convinces Ida to retreat from the house, leaving Mads there in her place.

Confronted with life without his wife, Viktor has no choice but to power through the situation after Ida's doctor tells him outright that he cannot see Ida until she recovers, having completely broken down separated from the routine of her daily life. So begins the morphing of the film from a light and predictable comedy to a story with real emotional weight. It's here, in this middle section, that we begin to learn the reasons for Viktor's frustrations as well as his lack of realization that he had been subjecting his family to them. It's also here that we see how much more Ida has sacrificed for the family in an attempt to keep Viktor in the kind of life he had come to expect to lead. It's a humbling experience, directed by Mads.

Mads throws Viktor's life into chaos by treating his home like she would her own as she begins to run it. Instead of the politely spare main room to the two room apartment, she hangs up the washing to dry where Viktor must duck underneath to pass through. He begins to take part in the household chores including taking out the ashes from the wood oven and feeding the canaries by the window. Overall he becomes a happier man, and he begins to long for his wife's presence despite Mads and Ida's handlers conspiring together to keep the two from contacting each other.

When Viktor reaches the predictable conclusion of a man filled with renewed love and dedication to the woman he had originally wooed as a princess but ended up treating like a maid it's the performances that really carry the day. Dreyer had started his directing career by essentially letting the actors do whatever they wanted, allowing for occasionally wildly disparate types of performances within single scenes. As time had gone on, and definitely by Der var engang, there was a subtle realism dominating his actors' performances, and this more subtle approach really ends up having an effect, especially here. Meyer doesn't treat his final transformation like he's in a play making sure the crowd in the rafters can figure out that he's a new man. Instead he plays it smaller, with more intricate facial cues to do the same thing, and in film that tends to carry a lot more weight. His look as he sees Ida again for the first time in over a month, having walked that time in her shoes at the guiding hand of his old nanny, is a wonderful moment. It gets a little undermined a bit earlier when he makes a grand declaration about how all men are stupid and don't appreciate their wives, pushing the focus away from the story at hand and moving it explicitly into social commentary that doesn't really fit, but not enough to undo it all.

I will say that of all the silent films Dreyer made, this is the most obvious one that would have benefited from being a sound picture. There are a lot of intertitles that are just simply dialogue back and forth. Being adapted from a play, this makes sense, but I do wonder if this might have played better, especially early in the film, as a talkie.

Still, this is a delightful and warm comedy. It's appealing and focused with a lot of heart and some very nice performances.