Stan, who has remained faithfully at his World War I post for twenty years, finally comes home where his best friend, Ollie, takes him in, thus allowing him to discover the many conveniences of the modern world.
Oliver is heartbroken when he finds that Georgette, the inkeeper's daughter he's fallen in love with, is already married to dashing Foreign Legion officer Francois. To forget her, he joins ... See full summary »
Laurel and Hardy work for sickly heir Dan Forrester, who has been diagnosed with a myriad of debilitating allergies. However, when the draft board sees things differently and he seems very happy to leave the confines of his sick room, his loyal employees join him in the U. S. Army. He seems to thrive on Army chow and regimen and even becomes a rival to the growling Sergeant Hippo for the affections of beautiful post employee Ginger Hammond . The bumbling Stan and Ollie also get a chance to redeem themselves when they participate in the all-important war game maneuvers.Written by
Gabe Taverney (email@example.com)
When Stan and Ollie signed with Fox Stan asked to be consulted on the scripts and he was assured that all would be okay. On completion of the film there was an option for them to make more. Fox was a much bigger operation than that of Hal Roach, the technicians had none of the dedication that the Roach employees had and they had no idea of the kind of comedy the Boys did. There was also the problem that Fox considered the Boys to be in the 'B' film category which meant smaller budgets. While the writer of the film, Lou Breslow happily consulted with Stan and Ollie on the script, this didn't happen with their other Fox films and despite the consultation they are depicted as a couple of dopes which had never happened with Roach. Production meetings were held without Stan and Ollie and the film was the first and last directed by Monty Banks, who had no feel for comedy and was best known for being married to Gracie Fields. The director of photography was Glen MacWilliams, a friend of Ollie's from the old days, who was involved with all areas of production and while he pointed out that their facial make up made the Boys look ten years older than what they were nothing was done about it. Further problems were that Stan wanted the film shot in sequence, which was what they were used to and with no rehearsals so that they had spontaneity and creativity but all this was refused. Further more the director did not respond to their innovations and Stan was not allowed to take part in the editing. Despite all this the film became one of the biggest commercial successes of their career. See more »
The "dud" they find is a complete round. It could have been a misfire/hang-fire but not a dud. A dud would have only included the shell. Not the brass too. See more »
What did I ever do to deserve a couple of yaps like you?
Maybe you were good to your mother.
Now at 10:00 you're all going over for an IQ test, and according to the answers you give, you'll be classified in a job.
Swell! We're good at quizes, aren't we, Ollie?
Maybe they'll put me in the intelligence "corpse".
See more »
By 1941, the boys - Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy - were getting "long in the tooth" and their films showed it. Sadly, they kept going for awhile after this movie.
This film simply wasn't funny, and these guys were supposed to provide laughs. That is what I learned to expect from them, having watched a few of their 1930s efforts. That's why I purchased this on tape. However, I never found one thing to laugh in the first half of this film, got discouraged and brought the tape back to the video store.
The physical slapstick is okay, not too bad but all the one-line jokes are horrible, just not funny, nor are a number of the skits. Neither are the "fat" jokes, which are overplayed. Those are at Ollie's expense and one might have been good once or twice, but you hear it throughout the movie. I did laugh early on as Stan was trying the mow the lawn with a pair of scissors, but there weren't enough crazy-funny scenes from that point to make this be a recommended film.
11 of 22 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this