Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy's appeal, as has been said quite a number of times, has always been completely understandable. They had such great comic timing and memorable contrasting and distinct personalities. The chemistry was considered legendary, seeing them in their prime there is a very good reason for that. Their best material, both verbal and particularly physically, was amusing to hilarious, with quite a fair share of classics.
Unfortunately, Laurel and Hardy had a drastic decline in the post-Hal Roach period post-1940 (know that a few of the late 30s films were less than great but not to this extent). A period when Laurel and Hardy became underused, they and their material on the most part were tired, they were put in settings that they didn't gel in, the films seemed to forget what made Laurel and Hardy's prime period as great as it was, a lot of the verbal humour was dumb and trite, the supporting casts were variable and a few were too plot-heavy and the plots were far from great. Some of that can be seen in one of the lesser films from this period 'The Dancing Masters'. As one can see from my average/mixed feelings rating, it is not a terrible film but it could have been much better.
Laurel and Hardy are the best things about it. They have great comic timing that makes one remember what made them so great in their prime, they actually feel like leads instead of being underused and too sidelined amidst less interesting material, their personalities are interesting and entertaining and most importantly they are a lot of fun to watch. They also seem to be enjoying themselves and their chemistry sparkles. Their material here is also great fun, none of it classic but it amuses and it doesn't veer too much into silliness. Also liked that there is more emphasis on the physical comedy than them utterly trite and insultingly dumb one-liners heard in some of their other post-Hal Roach films. The locked safe, rhetorical angle and the hiding from Margaret Dumont scenes fare the best.
Dumont and the cameo from Robert Mitchum are the supporting cast standouts, the only ones who stood out for me. Some of the film is nicely photographed.
However, 'The Dancing Masters' is lacking elsewhere. The worst thing about it is the story, which is a muddled mess, with too much going on over-complicating the action and some of it adds nothing. The bus chase sequence, as well as looking particularly cheap, is utter illogical chaos.
Too much of the dialogue is trite and other than some of the photography 'The Dancing Masters' is one of the worst looking Laurel and Hardy films, not just from this period but throughout their filmography. Especially the editing, with the rollercoaster scene inducing nausea, and some blatantly obvious back projection in the bus chase. Other than Dumont and Mitchum, the rest of the supporting cast don't stand out in any way.
In conclusion, watchable but lacking in a lot of areas. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Unfortunately, Laurel and Hardy had a drastic decline in the post-Hal Roach period post-1940 (know that a few of the late 30s films were less than great but not to this extent). A period when Laurel and Hardy became underused, they and their material on the most part were tired, they were put in settings that they didn't gel in, the films seemed to forget what made Laurel and Hardy's prime period as great as it was, a lot of the verbal humour was dumb and trite, the supporting casts were variable and a few were too plot-heavy and the plots were far from great. Some of that can be seen in one of the lesser films from this period 'The Dancing Masters'. As one can see from my average/mixed feelings rating, it is not a terrible film but it could have been much better.
Laurel and Hardy are the best things about it. They have great comic timing that makes one remember what made them so great in their prime, they actually feel like leads instead of being underused and too sidelined amidst less interesting material, their personalities are interesting and entertaining and most importantly they are a lot of fun to watch. They also seem to be enjoying themselves and their chemistry sparkles. Their material here is also great fun, none of it classic but it amuses and it doesn't veer too much into silliness. Also liked that there is more emphasis on the physical comedy than them utterly trite and insultingly dumb one-liners heard in some of their other post-Hal Roach films. The locked safe, rhetorical angle and the hiding from Margaret Dumont scenes fare the best.
Dumont and the cameo from Robert Mitchum are the supporting cast standouts, the only ones who stood out for me. Some of the film is nicely photographed.
However, 'The Dancing Masters' is lacking elsewhere. The worst thing about it is the story, which is a muddled mess, with too much going on over-complicating the action and some of it adds nothing. The bus chase sequence, as well as looking particularly cheap, is utter illogical chaos.
Too much of the dialogue is trite and other than some of the photography 'The Dancing Masters' is one of the worst looking Laurel and Hardy films, not just from this period but throughout their filmography. Especially the editing, with the rollercoaster scene inducing nausea, and some blatantly obvious back projection in the bus chase. Other than Dumont and Mitchum, the rest of the supporting cast don't stand out in any way.
In conclusion, watchable but lacking in a lot of areas. 5/10 Bethany Cox