Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians"

"Derek Gee" (dgeeSPAMSUCKS@twmi.INVALID.rr.com) writes:
> "Feuillade" <Feuillade DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1135956655.722693.65620@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> James Neibaur wrote:
>>
>>> Feuillade 12/30/05 8:56 AM
>>
>>>> Concerning Laurel and Hardy he writes: "The magic of the films is drawn
>>>> from more than one source, which is surely why they are so much funnier
>>>> than the monchrome mimetic Chaplin -- whom Stan Laurel had
>>>> understudied..." (p. 370).
>>
>>>> "Chaplin seems eerily unfunny today, as do back numbers of supposedly
>>>> funny magazines like Punch." (p. 231)
>>
>>> I may also laugh more at Laurel and Hardy, but to dismiss Chaplin as
>>> "monchrome mimetic" is preposterous.
>>
>> I don't laugh at all at the sound films of Laurel and Hardy, but I like
>> their silent work. I think "Two Tars" is one of the funniest
>> two-reelers ever made -- up there with the best of Chaplin and Keaton.
>>
>> I find their sound work amiable but not particularly funny.
>
> Are you on downers or something? SONS OF THE DESERT is one of the funniest
> films ever made! :)
>
> Derek

Some people enjoy it. It didn't do anything for me, and I'm
definitely not on downers. It's certainly one of their best
soundies, but their sound films simply lack something that's
essential for me to enjoy a film. Verve, maybe. Their best
silents have plenty of that. They always seem to me to be
coasting in the sound films.

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians" 

"Shush" (shushfilmseznospam@yahoo.com) writes:
> Feuillade wrote:
>
>> I don't laugh at all at the sound films of Laurel and Hardy, but I like
>> their silent work. I think "Two Tars" is one of the funniest
>> two-reelers ever made -- up there with the best of Chaplin and Keaton.
>>
>> I find their sound work amiable but not particularly funny.
>
>
> I always enjoy seeing Laurel and Hardy (well, except for that STAN
> VISITS OLLIE clip). But there are some films of theirs that just run
> their formula into the ground:
>
> 1. Stan does something dumb
> 2. As a result, Ollie gets conked on the head by something
> 3. Ollie sighs heavily and glowers at the camera
> 4. Stan looks embarrassed
> 5. Repeat endlessly.
>
> Don't get me wrong, up to a point even this is very funny. But their
> best films work at a more personal level than when Ollie's just falling
> down or getting conked over and over. My favorites are things like COME
> CLEAN, BLOTTO, LIBERTY, PACK UP YOUR TROUBLES and BABES IN TOYLAND.
>
>
> --Shush-

Their work in general is much more formulaic than Chaplin's or
Keaton's. That's why I don't care much for _Big Business_, though
it's one of their more polished silents. _Two Tars_ uses the same
formula, but introduces more variety in the cycle of destruction,
and offers a prelude in a different key.

Given the quantity of their output, the formulas were probably
necessary, but they do wear thin.

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians" 

"Feuillade" (Feuillade@aol.com) writes:
> Constance Kuriyama wrote:
>
>> Just another one of those Chaplin-hating Brits. Ho-hum. A prophet is
>> received everywhere but in his own country, and his own house.
>
>> And as you must have noticed, one doesn't have to be intelligent to
>> publish a book.
>
> George Shelps has published a book? :)
>
> Tom Moran

Not to my knowledge, but Milton and Lynn have. :-)

Connie K.
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians" 

James Neibaur wrote:

> Feuillade 12/30/05 1:32 PM

>>> And as you must have noticed, one doesn't have to be intelligent to
>>> publish a book.

>> George Shelps has published a book?

> Ah, I thought I was the one you were going to hit.

No one has ever accused you of being unintelligent, Jim. :)

Tom Moran
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians" 

The Hallmark DVD that has Sons of the Desert and some shorts has less
than perfect editions, for instance SOTD has fades for commercials in
it, but jeez, for a low price you get a pretty primo bunch of shorts.
That'd be my recommendation as a starter on the sound titles, before
you go investing in R2 boxed sets.

Among the silents, I'd suggest The Lost Films of... Vol. 1, just
because, if Big Business doesn't do it for you, there's not much point
in exploring further.
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians" 

Shush 12/30/05 2:59 PM

> Their stuff only gets
> stale for me when they're just doing their two-man slapstick act
> (ANGORA LOVE, HOG WILD, DIRTY WORK, TOWED IN A HOLE, etc.). Of course,
> for a lot of L&H fans, those films are their best!

Hog Wild might be my candidate for funniest two-reeler.

JN
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians" 

greta de groat 12/30/05 5:30 PM

> A couple years ago they showed some Laurel and Hardy's at the Niles Essanay
> festival. I thought, oh well, i'd seen them all before but i'd stick
> around--and i ended up laughing harder than i have in years. I was talking
> with friends the other night, and we were just in stitches recounting Big
> Business to each other. One of my friends is a teacher who showed it to
> some of his students last month. Though only a dozen or so kids showed up
> at the screening, they loved it and spent the next day telling all their
> friends "oh, you really missed a good one!"

When I show the old comedies to my students as a treat, Laurel and Hardy
always go over particularly well. This includes all of the various types of
classes I have taught over the years, from accelerated high schoolers to
special needs middle schoolers.

JN
 >> Stay informed about: Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin in "After the Victorians"