I Like Money

(Based on a play) Mister Topaze is a poor but honest schoolteacher with an avaricious boss (Leo McKern) and chased by his boss' daughter (a very funny Billie Whitelaw).

When he loses his job after not changing the grades of a student from a good family Topaze is taken in by a couple of crooks (Herbert Lom, Nadia Gray) who use the honest teacher as a front man for their underhanded schemes.

After that the teacher goes on a learning curve.

This is Sellers' sole directoral effort and that's too bad because he has a good eye for framing the wide screen, especially out in Paris and its environs. Sellers is surrounded by talent (including also Michael Gough and John Neville) and he's happy to take on the quiet role anchoring the movie and leave the flamboyance to others (especially Lom, Whitelaw and McKern).

Unfortunately, the role of Topaze is an actor-killer. The same play was filmed before with the great John Barrymore and he was surprisingly dull. I can't imagine employing that word for Barrymore, nor for Sellers. Yet it is true.

The thing about Sellers is his amazing ability to be quiet. Watch the first two Clouseau movies or "Being There." Sellers' being both fascinating and hilarious in stillness is a revelation.

Sellers is also, arguably (or I'd say not so arguably), the best slapstick artist since the Silent era. His subtle strengths (and, yes, his slapstick could be amazingly subtle), especially in the early 1960s, were wonderful. But he gives himself little to do in that direction. He might have thought it a betrayal of the character, but making Topaze a trifle clumsy in the patented Sellers way, working his special magic with inanimate objects so the simplest thing is menacing, would have been a boon to the character, making him at least a tiny bit interesting.

"Mister Topaze" fails in two areas. First, the lead character is simply uninvolving, even with Sellers playing the part. Second, the ending, while realistic, is too bleak.

Sellers always pretended there was no he. Actually, if only half the stories about him are true, he probably feared introspection. Mister Topaze (the character) is possibly a reflection of the way he visualized himself: a man who is invisible if he's not playing a part.

Or is that over-analyzing a movie I find well-directed with a superb cast but which I thought dull? Am I trying to justify finding Peter Sellers (Peter Sellers!) uninvolving?

This movie is a must for Sellers buffs, but that's as much as I can say for it.

I liked the song "I Like Money." And I liked Sellers' direction. But if I find the movie sad it's more because it's such a beautiful failure.

It's maybe not a masterpiece, but it surely is an enjoyable watch.

This is the fourth film version of Marcel Pagnol's play, the third of which was directed by Pagnol himself and here Peter Sellers as the title character is following in the footsteps of luminaries Louis Jouvet, John Barrymore and Fernandel. This would be a daunting enough task for the best of actors but Mr. Sellers alas does not fall into that category. He has furthermore made a rod for his own back by attempting to direct the piece. A handful of actor/directors have managed to pull off the double but he is certainly not one of them.

He has to his credit cast the film well, notably Herbert Lom, Nadia Gray and John Neville and the film perks up a little when they appear. Georges van Parys' idiomatic score is a delight whilst the excellent art direction is by Peter Murton, best known for his work on the Bond films.

The film is weakened however by the confounded Cinemascope format, plodding direction, dire pacing and one would have to say, Seller's performance. We are again witnessing brilliant mimicry with utter emptiness behind it although those who consider Sellers a great actor will no doubt consider this view to be heretical.

One critic has suggested that Sellers' sole directorial effort is in need of reappraisal.... No sir, it is not!

Marcel Pagnol wrote many wonderful stories and his films of the 1930s are among my favorite movies. In this case, "Mr. Topaze" ("I Like Money") is a remake of one of these terrific films...a film originally made in the US and France back in 1933. I loved these films....and also enjoyed this remake by actor/director Peter Sellers.

Surprisingly, this wonderful film was a box office bomb back in 1961...which is why the movie was renamed to "I Like Money" and released in the USA...where it also apparently bombed. In fact, Sellers apparently tried to buy up all the prints...probably because he was embarrassed by this failure. But, fortunately, the British Film Institute found a copy....and it's been released to the Criterion Channel and on DVD.

When the story begins, Mr. Topaze is a poor but immensely honest school teacher. He is the epitome of decency and ultimately it brings him nothing but poverty and he finds himself fired because he refuses to set aside his strong moral compass.

Later, Topaze is approached by a well respected businessman and is offered a job. Topaze is so guileless that he doesn't realize that he is actually being hired as a front. Mr. Benac (Herbert Lom) is a well respected crook...and wants to use Topaze's good name to do his dirty business. What's next...especially after Topaze eventually realizes the ruse?

While I think I prefer the earlier versions of this story, Sellers' version is most respectable and enjoyable. It really is sad that the film did poorly, as it deserved much better. Well acted and clever....and most enjoyable.

This obscure Peter Sellers film directed by himself begins poorly. We are introduced to the self righteous small town schoolteacher, played by Sellers, and it seems to go on and on without being amusing, or if occasionally vaguely amusing, certainly not funny. An amazingly young Billie Whitelaw doesn't help, seeming unable to rid herself of her theatrical bent. And here perhaps lies the basic problem in that this was a stage play and much of the activity would have probably been acceptable on the stage whereas it probably needed someone with greater experience than Sellers to shake this up and give it more life. As it happens things are never as bad as at the start and gradually things get less bad. By the very end we have a gloriously presented Sellers in complete cynic mode ready to go and it ends. Masses of extras n the Blu-ray and the prospect of seeing it again without fear of it sinking into the mire make me look back just a little more favourably and feel a bit sorry for Sellers who apparently felt so bad at the films reception that he thought he had bought up all copies and destroyed them. Clearly the BFI had a copy stashed away.