Skip to main content

Laurel and Hardy - The Collection

I recently splashed out on a box set of 21 Laurel and Hardy DVDs. As they haven't been on TV nearly as often as they were in my childhood, I've enjoyed reminding myself why I love them so much.

In case anyone reading this has never heard of Laurel and Hardy (unlikely but possible) they were a comedy film double act who started in silent movies in the 1920s around the same time as Charlie Chaplin, had their greatest successes with their sound short films of the 1930s and ended their joint career in the 1950s with stage tours of the UK. While Chaplin's films have dated fairly badly and now come across as clever but very rarely funny, L&H's films are still hilarious for people with a certain sense of humour.

At their best (which means in the 1930s Hal Roach films, almost all of which are included here) they aren't just funny - behind the slapstick is a warmth, somehow an affection for each other and the viewer. This also comes across in Stan Laurel's replies to fan letters, being collected and shown on line in the fascinating Stan Laurel Correspondence Archive Project. The films are also fascinating as social history, painting a vivid picture of life in the early 1930s and offering some bizarre insights into Stan Laurel (the thin one and the "brains" behind the act) and his relationships with women. Almost without exception, the women in Laurel and Hardy films are suspicious battleaxes, vengeful when deceived (which they frequently are) and liable to attack the duo with axes and guns!

Laurel and Hardy - The Collection contains perhaps 80 short films (20 or 30 minutes, probably around three quarters of them with sound) and approximately 7 feature films. It's difficult to be specific about the numbers as there are foreign language versions of a few films that duplicate the content, and some of the silent films are incomplete.

There are a few niggles about this box set. The animated menus feature the same scene (from Way out West) on every disc in the set. Why? This very quickly becomes annoying. The crudely colourised versions are also a waste of disc space, and the final disc contains a shoddy documentary. This runs around an hour and a half and is very lazily produced, including large chunks of the colourised films and featuring clips of various US TV personalities praising the duo. None of the films and none of the interviewees (apart from the presenter, Dom DeLuise) are identified! Worst of all, at the end, DeLuise says "Stan Laurel was holding Hardy's hand when he died in the hospital". I can only think the filmmakers made this up - by all accounts, 'Babe' Hardy died at his mother-in-law's house in the early hours of the morning. Stan knew that the end was near but didn't hear that his partner had died until some hours later.

Despite all this, at its current very low price (I think I paid £40 from HMV) the box is a must for lovers of Laurel and Hardy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

New Who

The name at the top of the bookmakers' lists this summer for the next Doctor Who was Peter Capaldi. I was interested to see the list but pooh-poohed this, as it seemed the production team were set on casting only young actors - I think it was even said at one point that only someone in their 20s could keep up with the pace of production. I was delighted to hear back in August that the rumours were, in fact, true. The choice pleased me for two reasons - firstly, as a long-term fan of the programme (except for the awful period in the 1980s when the production went badly astray) I wanted to see a Doctor with the authority that only an older man could have; secondly, I knew Peter back in the 1970s as a fellow fan - we're the same age and I've followed his career since the 1980s. I had met Jon Pertwee a couple of times, during the making of Death to the Daleks and Planet of the spiders , and got to know Peter through the Jon Pertwee fan club (started by an old school friend, ...

PODcasts

It's amazing how many producers of these seem to forget the name. As podcasts are (by definition) for mobile devices and therefore meant to be listened to on the move, the likelihood is that there will be background noise from traffic, etc. For safety reasons, the volume shouldn't be turned up so loud that this is drowned out. If the listener is on a bus or train, things are often no quieter. For these reasons, it's essential that the volume of a podcast should be "normalised" (i.e. the peaks should be at the maximum allowed undistorted level) and its dynamic range should be severely curtailed - that is, there should be very little difference between the quiet and the loud bits. I probably have hearing that is just below average in efficiency and I've lost count of the number of times the podcast was so quiet that I couldn't hear most of it (even when turned up to full volume on my phone), or had a section with various speakers muttering inaudibly in t...

Who can do better (2015)

Not since Tony Blair joined forces with George "Dubya" Bush have I been so disappointed in a person's misguided choices as I have since Steven Moffat took over the reins of Doctor Who. What happened to the genius who gave us the hilarious Coupling, and wrote Who stories like The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances and Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead ? If you look back through this blog you'll see that I've sung his praises . By writing Who and Sherlock simultaneously, it seems he just bit off more than he could chew. Good storytelling is the bedrock of a programme like this and, for me, that has just not been there. This season (and, sadly, most stories since Mr Moffat took over) have fallen into two types: "edited highlights" (the plot escaped the writers, and the episode came over as a series of extracts - more like a trailer than a coherent story. Examples: Before the Flood, The Woman Who Lived ) and Laboured centre pieces (instead of a plo...