The Dancing Masters (1943) User Reviews

The Dancing Masters (1943) ***

[JoeKarlosi · 7/10 · 5 February 2007]

I just can't see for the life of me why these enjoyable latter Fox movies have gotten such a bad rap all these years, as they actually hold up well now and I think they've suddenly become appreciated in a new light with the advent of new superior-looking DVD releases. THE DANCING MASTERS has a bunch of things going on all over the place and the plot is not very focused. Laurel and Hardy are only dance instructors for the first 5 minutes, and then that's that as they get involved with a young man, his girl, and an invisible ray invention. Meandering plot lines don't matter in the least because we're here to laugh at Stan and Ollie, and everything they do in this one is pretty funny. They're on screen a lot and this is a joy. Look out for a young Robert Mitchum (who's uncredited early on in a scene). *** out of ****

Badly underrated film

[rbendernyc · 7/10 · 17 January 2007]

Up until Fox released these two three-disc sets of Laurel and Hardy's later films, I had only seen the three that had been previously available on video - and "The Dancing Masters" wasn't one of them. I have to say that as a life-long Laurel and Hardy fan I was very pleasantly surprised.

Even taking the considerable negatives into account: rock-bottom production values, chop-shop editing, and an incoherent "narrative," it's downright astonishing to behold this pair so effortlessly mining genuine laughs from such old and cast-away material.

From the "safe combination" routine near the opening to the "wet pants" bit with co-star Bob Bailey, I found this film to be a real treat - and I screened it with a friend who is not a big L&H fan - he loved it. It's the little things Stan and Ollie did - the gestures, the expressions, the glances - that made their style of comedy absolutely unique in film history. Like "The Bullfighters," my favorite among the L&H Fox films, this one has plenty of those moments, and has such a short running time that you can stick it in your player again right away and savor what you missed the first time around. I can't speak for the legions of other L&H fans, but I personally experienced a higher laugh count from this film than from many of their more minor Hal Roach shorts (sorry, Fox-haters).

The only thing I did not like or understand about "The Dancing Masters" was the print quality. As released in this two-volume DVD set, the other five Fox films look to have been pressed from the actual masters, thus providing superlative picture and sound quality. But, this film suffers from a grainy, scratchy picture that even at times grows blurry and somewhat undefined. And, there several jarring "pops" and a lot of low-volume crackling on the soundtrack. Is there anyone out there who knows why Fox couldn't find a better print for release with this otherwise outstanding set?

Though generally regarded as one of their weakest films, this has a fair quota of laughs.

[tom.hamilton · 5/10 · 3 May 2000]

Though generally regarded as one of their weakest films, this has a fair quota of laughs. Stan's "dancing" at the beginning is amusing and Robert Mitchum has a good cameo "selling" the boys insurance. Best scene is where they try to hide from Margaret Dumont, eventually launching her husband into the swimming pool.

The Dancing Masters is pretty entertaining, if uneven, Laurel and Hardy comedy

[tavm · 6/10 · 7 August 2007]

In a remarkable coincidence, I found out in the morning paper that today is the day Oliver Hardy died 50 years ago. That made me want to watch The Dancing Masters right away since I checked that out of the library last Sunday. Since this was one of Hardy's and partner Laurel's latter-day features they made for, in Stan's words, "those Fox people", there isn't much in the way of logic in the comic set pieces that are depicted here but for the most part the movie is pretty amusing with many laughs and smiles from me when the boys are by themselves or whenever they have someone new, like leading lady Trudy Marshall, participate in one of their routines. In fact, Ms. Marshall recounted to one L & H biographer how she told Stan and Ollie how she'd love to do comedy so they let her in the "Mixed Hats" routine in which she also incorporated plates. She became known as "One-Take Marshall" from that incident in her cherished memory! Also appearing, without credit, was Robert Mitchum in one of his early thug roles, here talking a little fast for his usual character. Also, Margaret Dumont, usual Marx Brothers foil, provides some amusing moments. Alas, the movie falls apart at the end with a really illogical bus chase that mixes obvious back projection scenes with obvious model scenes to uneven results. Stan's line at the end does partially make up for that. So while The Dancing Masters is not an L & H classic, it's certainly worth a look for die-hard fans of the boys. Rest in eternal peace, Mr. Hardy.

along with THE BULLFIGHTERS, their best since Roach

[beauzee · 7/10 · 1 November 2014]

crazy storyline, disjointed scenes..but that never stopped them before.

they run a Dance Studio and the opening scenes are good: Hardy kicking up his heels in a beautifully lit sequence, Stan defying gravity doing his trademark "Pelican dance". their best scene in years involves Robert Mitchum and hood buddy sellin' 'em insurance or ELSE! too bad, and how depressing, though, to watch opportunity after opportunity go by..and here they are even given a cast! Margaret Dumont! Charles Rogers! Daphne Pollard! (the lady who played Hardy's wife in THICKER THAN WATER)...even the guy who later did the voice for Mr. Ed! newcomer/model Trudy Marshall is a-OK, too. why not have Dumont the owner of the studio, constantly confused and exasperated by the decidedly unmethodical Stan and Ollie? all L & H fans should watch this once in a while, despite the flaws.

Darling dancing!

[HotToastyRag · 7/10 · 18 August 2018]

I love Laurel & Hardy movies. They're so darling! In The Dancing Masters, they're roommates and partners who own a dance studio. Ollie likes ogling the girls in his hula dance class, and Stannie dresses in drag as he teaches his ballet class. It's very funny, and all their classic gags are alive and well in this movie: the eye rolling, looking in the camera, crying and scratching his head. The pair is a tad older, but just as lovable as ever. They're the perfect blend of absurdity and relatability, making any one of their movies a perfect afternoon treat.

If you rent this charming comedy, be on the lookout for a very young Robert Mitchum. He's part of a gang who sells "protection" to different businesses, and while he only has two scenes in the movie, it's very cute to see him in his early days.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. There's a scene towards the end where Ollie goes on a rollercoaster and the camera loops up and down the tracks, and it will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

A Veneer of legitimacy

[bkoganbing · 5/10 · 6 July 2013]

It's been remarked by some critics that Laurel and Hardy on the screen played it gay. I think most are reading too much into that, but in the case of The Dancing Masters this might be the exception.

Meet Stan And Ollie proprietors of a dance studio and seeing them at the beginning in costume, especially Stanley in ballerina drag might just make you wonder. It was quite a treat to see them as dance instructors especially Ollie. For such a big guy he moved pretty good.

They've got themselves in a situation. Already owing a lot of back rent to landlord Matt Briggs who has only been staved off from throwing the boys out by wife Margaret Dumont and daughter Trudy Marshall. Stan and Ollie get intimidated into buying insurance from some shady characters. The old protection racket with a veneer of legitimacy.

They are also guardians to Marshall and her boyfriend Robert Bailey who apparently years ahead of his time has perfected laser technology. The invention works, but in Stan and Ollie's hands only too well.

Although not up to the standards of their work with Hal Roach, Stan and Ollie do recapture some of the magic of those previous films. Best scenes are an auction where Ollie is suckered into buying some useless junk and the climax on a runaway bus. That final scene is more like an Abbott&Costello sequence, but it works for Laurel&Hardy.

Allan 'Rocky' Lane plays a favorite of Briggs whom he'd like to match up with his daughter. And Robert Mitchum plays one of the 'insurance' salesmen. Speaking of Lane, Briggs does a rather unconvincing 180 degree turn in regard to Lane and Bailey for the hand of his daughter. That does weaken the film somewhat.

Still die-hard fans of Stan and Ollie should like The Dancing Masters.

Very little dancing,or humour

[BJJ-2 · 11 January 2003]

Another unfortunate chapter in Laurel & Hardy's post-Hal Roach efforts,this is a desultory,poorly-constructed comedy which tries to compensate by reworking much material from the boys' Roach days.Such films as COUNTY HOSPITAL(1932),THICKER THAN WATER(1935) and THE BATTLE OF THE CENTURY(1927) have revamped sequences in this film.THE DANCING MASTERS plot however,makes little sense and the scenes from the above earlier,better films seem to have been lazily added as an afterthought,almost as though screenwriter Scott Darling realises he has no funny ideas.This is probably correct,but sadly the reworkings don't work as they are pointless.Darling's own material is woefully hackneyed.The scenes where Ollie tries to cause an accident on Stan are at least of some interest,as these scenes reworked from THE BATTLE OF THE CENTURY are lost.The supporting cast has some interesting names;Robert Mitchum in one of his earliest film roles;A former Roach Mrs.Hardy,Daphne Pollard,has a bit part;former Keystone Kop and Charlie Chaplin foil Hank Mann,in his only Laurel & Hardy film;and Margaret Dumont,The Marx Brothers perrenial leading lady.But they,like Stan & Ollie,can only do so much out of a banal screenplay.The best moments come from Stan's 'rhetorical strangle' and a locked safe;beyond that,there's little else.

Messy and not that funny.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 6/10 · 18 January 2006]

Problem with this movie is that nothing in the movie really feels connected to each other. The story feels messy and weak. On top of that the supporting actors were also quite horrible in their roles.

No, this is not the best Laurel & Hardy movie. It still is good for some laughs certainly but overall it's a disappointing movie to watch. The movie already begins weak and unfunny. The movie does get better as it progresses but it never reaches the same level as any of the other Laurel & Hardy movies.

Another disappointment was Stan Laurel. He didn't seem to play his character with as much joy as he used to do and his acting was to be honest poor at times.

Still watchable but not really recommendable, even though the movie does have its moments.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

The bumbling masters

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 8 January 2019]

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

Is It A Crime To Get Older?

[boland7214 · 8/10 · 30 July 2014]

One reviewer wrote to the effect that: "The 1940's (transferring from Roach Studios to 20th Century Fox) was a sad time for Laurel And Hardy."

I don't think it was such a "sad time". In 1940 Laurel and Hardy were freed from their contract with Roach Studios. They could put some of their own ideas into their films. As far as I know they were still in good health. They looked good for their age. IT'S NOT A CRIME TO GET OLDER as I wrote above! Were their movies in the 1940's as good as in previous years? No. But we're talking about comparing their output in the '40's to some VERY CLASSIC FILMS done before. So, it's only by comparison that these 1940 films were "lacking" in relation to the genius of earlier efforts. I would prefer to watch these later Laurel and Hardy films any day rather than some of the other comic films by, say, Abbot and Costello or The Marx Brothers or The Three Stooges. Speaking for myself alone , I'd prefer "the boys" to any of the others!

This film, "The Dancing Masters" is almost as good as "Great Guns" which is my favorite film from this era. There are NOT "constant laughs" like in some earlier films... the story is silly but interesting...it doesn't "drag" in other words...and "the boys" look VERY CUTE in their "dancing master costumes"! You won't roll on the floor but you'll be entertained....so..why not give the "senior citizens" an hour of your time...I think you'll enjoy yourself if you have a positive attitude! "The Boys" did!!! :o) [e-mail]

Another Laurel and Hardy classic, if a little weaker than some others

[I_Ailurophile · 7/10 · 7 November 2023]

Icons that they were, not all the films of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy were equal. Quite across the board, however, one could be assured of having a good time with the duo, for they illustrated much the same keen mind for comedy as contemporaries like Harold Lloyd, Buster Keaton, and The Three Stooges. If anything Laurel and Hardy's brand was just a little lighter and gentler as they consistently gave us a cavalcade of gags, physical comedy, situational humor, and witty repartee and one-liners - all topped off with the incredible lockstep dynamics of the stars themselves. Gratifyingly, more than not 'The dancing masters' stands shoulder to shoulder with much all the rest of their works as the silliness kicks up in no time at all. The approach here is so soft that there are times where it almost seems like the pacing is a tad lax, though as the proceedings mostly offer one hearty laugh after another, it's more that some moments are built chiefly to lay the groundwork for the next bit. All told this isn't necessarily one of their premier titles, but if you're looking for something fun and lighthearted, it's really hard to go wrong here.

Some facets of the story come off a little differently in 2023 than they must have eighty years before, and one might also observe that the story is a tad less cohesive and a tad more scattered than some other examples. That's no mark against the feature, mind you; we saw this elsewhere, too, as with The Marx Brothers, where sometimes the narrative tightly centered a piece, and at others the plot threads were mere vehicles for the gags. In any event, between George Bricker and screenwriter Scott Darling the tale does come full circle, and throughout these sixty-three minutes the scene writing offers one scenario after another to supply the laughs. All along the way 'The dancing masters' is wonderfully enjoyable: the stunts and effects that are employed look terrific, and even an instance of visuals added in post-production comes off well. The sets are a joy in and of themselves as they lend to the frivolity, and the costume design, hair, and makeup are lovely. With all this said, I'm also of the mind that the last major sequence and the ending are a little weak and strained - they go on too long, aren't as strong and do not look as good in the first place, and conclude with a whimper. Still, even then this isn't a case so severe as to wholly ruin the viewing experience.

When all is said and done there are other Laurel and Hardy movies that are distinctly better, and which one should prioritize when reviewing their oeuvre; among others, I'm an especial fan of 'Saps at sea' and 'Our relations.' At the same time, aside from their regrettable swan song 'Atoll K' (a.k.a. 'Utopia'), the level on which the pair operate means that to one extent or another entertainment is guaranteed. Even at its lowest point this 1943 picture is still enjoyable, and there are some flicks to have followed in all the decades since that can't say the same. One may not need to go out of their way for 'The dancing masters,' but the stars' legacy remains intact, and if you do have the chance to watch then it's a splendid way to spend a bit of time.

Sadly, very bland indeed

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 27 November 2007]

For those fans of Laurel and Hardy, the 1940s and beyond were a very sad time for the team. Their contracts with Hal Roach Studios had expired and now they were "free agents"--able to work for any studio who offered them a job. Unfortunately, Fox, RKO, MGM (without Roach) and even a French film company who hired the boys had absolutely no touch for their comedic talents. Plus, Stan and Ollie were a lot older and seeing these geriatric men taking pratfalls seemed sad, not particularly funny. Stan looked very ragged and Ollie's weight had ballooned up to the point where he could barely walk--and so it made me feel uncomfortable laughing at their very, very sedate antics.

In addition to their age, this particular film suffers because Fox Studios oddly cast them in a supporting role and created a parallel plot involving a young couple--something that reduced their time on screen AND turned them into insipid "hangers on" instead of just being themselves. A cute and cuddly Stan and Ollie is very foreign to the old Laurel and Hardy of the 20s and 30s--and just seemed awfully strange and suited them poorly.

Now even with their age, this COULD have been a decent movie if it had been given decent writing and if it appeared the studio cared--and it's quite obvious they were using the "B unit" here--with, at best, second class support. In particular, there are very few laughs and the last 10 minutes of the film is simply dreadful--relying exclusively on a sloppy rear-projected screen for the stupid chase scene--which might just rank as one of the worst of its kind in film history.

For mind-numbed zombie lovers of Laurel and Hardy, it's probably a film they will love. But, for lovers of the team who are willing to honestly evaluate this film relative to their amazing earlier films, it simply comes up wanting indeed. In fact, of all their full-length films pre-1940, I can't think of one I liked less than DANCING MASTERS. Unfortunately, of the post-1940 films, this might just be one of their better ones. Sadly, it got a lot worse--with wretched films like THE BIG NOISE and NOTHING BUT TROUBLE. I just wish the boys had just retired after SAPS AT SEA.

Finally, I wonder if all the generally positive reviews for this film on IMDb might reflect the reviewers' love of the team more than it's an indication that this is a good film? For an audience who are NOT already in love with the team, I don't know HOW this film will do anything but bore the audience--it certainly WON'T convince anyone that Laurel and Hardy were comedic geniuses. But even comedic geniuses need material worthy of their talents.

Lesser L&H

[Michael_Elliott · 28 February 2008]

Dancing Masters, The (1943)

** (out of 4)

Later day Laurel and Hardy has the boys working as dance instructors but they decide to help a friend try to sell a new invisible ray gun. This film wasn't as bad as I had heard but it's still one of the lesser films that the boys made. There are plenty of laughs throughout the film but for the most part the jokes fall flat on their face. We get several sequences, which we've seen in earlier L&H films and these include the entire ending when Laurel is trying to get injured so that they can collect some insurance money. The highlight of the film has to be seeing a young Robert Mitchum trying to sell the boys some insurance. Again, the film isn't that bad and it's mildly entertaining for 63-minutes but we've seen these jokes in better shorts before.

Another Fine Mess Fox Has Gotten Us Into

[zsenorsock · 3/10 · 10 February 2007]

I suppose bad Laurel and Hardy is better than no Laurel and Hardy at all, but just barely. It's sad that the Fox films are the ones getting a big release on DVD, exposing people who may not be too familiar with L&H to their WORST stuff rather than their classic comedies.

Once again the boys are saddled with a dumb romantic plot about a guy who's invented an invisible ray. He's in love with the bosses' daughter, who hates him and prefers some slick guy. It's incredible to think the geniuses at Fox thought THIS is what L&H needed in their films.

Without their pancake makeup the boys look tired and old. The only scenes that work for them in this picture is when they try to sneak out of a bedroom window at night and the rather bizarre scene where Robert Mitchum, being a classic noir bad guy tries to sell Oliver Hardy "insurance" on Stan.

Otherwise, this script is just a mess. Forget this and see if you can find a copy of "A Chump at Oxford" or "Bohemian Girl" or "Sons of the Desert" instead.

Funny gags, predictable story, but mis-titled late L&H.

[mark.waltz · 3/10 · 17 February 2010]

I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the worst Laurel & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as close to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite huge flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3".

Ollie: "An inventor of the first rank" Stan: "What's rank?" Ollie: "You are!"

[weezeralfalfa · 8/10 · 10 December 2018]

Of the 4 Fox-sponsored Laurel and Hardy films I've seen, I enjoyed this the most, and it most reminded me of their characters in theiir Hal Roach-directed comedies. Verbal humor was more evident than in the other films, while sight gags and slapstick abounded. I noticed that they recycled several gags from their Hal Roach shorts.......The title suggests that the boys are master dancers. Of course, they aren't, but they teach dancing in their 'Arthur Hurry Dancing School',: in an obvious reference to the famous Arthur Murray dancing school. Stan looks perhaps his most convincing ever impression of a female, in his ballerina outfit, with wreath on his head, and his professional-looking dancing. Ollie, too, is prancing around. However, their school is in deep financial trouble, as most of their students are behind in paying their fee. Trudy Harlan, daughter of the owner of the building where they hold their classes, is trying to convince her father to give them more time. Her boyfriend, Grant, is an inventor, working at her father's war materials plant. However, her father is trying to promote another suitor: one of his executives named George Worthing. When Grant 'accidentally' burns Worthing's butt, in an inspection, Grant is fired. Worthing then suggests to Mr. Harlan that they steal Grant's blueprints for his revolutionary destructive ray gun, make a few changes, apply for a patent, and start building it. This turns. Harlan against Worthing, and he rehires Grant, and promises to support his work. The boys don't know about this development, so go about trying to raise some money to help Grant. Previously, they had been practically forced to buy some accident and building insurance from a gang of crooks, headed by a young Robert Mitchem, who normally collected 'protection money' from businesses. Now, if one of the boys should happen to 'accidentally' break a leg, for example, they might wind up with some extra cash from their policy. But, they don't know that their policy is worthless. Ollie tries to make Stan break his leg, by throwing a banana peel on the sidewalk . But Stan keeps missing it, although a policeman does slip on it. Ollie then throws the remainder of his banana on the sidewalk, then later slips on it! Ollie then talks to a man on crutches. He got his broken leg from standing up in a rollercoaster. Thus, Ollie takes Stan on a bus toward the amusement park. Unfortunately, the driver and all passengers ,except the boys, flee in panic at the sight of an apparently mad dog on the bus. The bus continues on it's way, as if it's a driverless bus. Eventually, Stan is flung off near the rollercoaster, and his head becomes a target for ball throwers, in an arcade. Meanwhile, the bus somehow gets on the rollercoaster, and makes several passes around, before it is flung off. In the next scene, we see Ollie in the hospital, with his leg in traction, perhaps still believing he will get insurance money for his misfortune.......One of Grant's inventions is a pint-sized vacuum cleaner. The boys have one and want to demonstrate it to Trudy. Thus, they throw lots of various materials in a pile on the rug: far more than the little vacuum could hold. But the cleaner won't start. Then Stan remembers that the electrician turned off the lines to all the outlets, to repair something. Thus, they are left with a big mess!.... In a repetition of a gag they did in the short "Thicker than Water", the boys are walking to pay$300. toward their back rent due. However, they are sidetracked when they see an auction. They don't plan to buy anything, just curious. However, they sit down next to a woman who wants the grandfather clock being bid on. She asks the boys to bid for her while she goes home to get more money. Ollie dutifully bids for her, until he is bidding against just Stan. The bidding between the two stops at $300. Unfortunately, the woman never returns. Thus, they have to pay their rent money for the clock, which they carry along the streets toward home. Unfortunately, Stan's hat blows off while they are crossing a street. They set the clock down in the middle of the street, while Stan retrieves his hat. Predictably, a truck comes along, and smashes their clock to bits.........See it at YouTube.

LAUREL AND HARDY HAVING A BALL

[tcchelsey · 10/10 · 30 August 2022]

For all those critics who DO NOT know what they are talking about, Laurel and Hardy's later films WERE very funny. True, they were not Hal Roach material, but this was a different studio, different decade. THE DANCING MASTERS, like the much criticized BIG NOISE (1944), was one of the studio's biggest money makers, raking in a cool million bucks. It has also been noted that Laurel and Hardy had many fans at 20th Century Fox, so much that studio artists drew classic cartoon sketches of them. Everyone enjoyed working on their movies, had fun and it showed. What the boys did here was very smart. They brought in some of their early material, such as dressing up in wild costumes (as the Dancing Masters). There are also many gags and one liners, likened to Abbott and Costello, whose films actually had a lower budget! The best of the best is the climactic bus ride with Laurel and Hardy on an empty double decker, eventually hitching onto a roller coaster. Special nod to the great Margaret Dumont, again playing a society matron. Recommended no matter what critics say, who really have nothing to say! This is generally sold in a dvd box set.

Classic, one of the best

[manoffeeewwords · 9/10 · 25 December 2022]

Polictics and ethics aside which a lot of reviews seem to focus on. One of the best Laurel and Hardy movies. Excellent scenes and jokes which some may see as disconnected but I personally find it only adds to the unexpected turn of events that had me on the floor. The movie is not meant to be about dancing but rather them funding their dance instructor business which as you can imagine only exacerbates. Ending is hilarious, the vacuum cleaner scene, hiding in the mansion, and the bus trip just to name some of the highlights. Stan Laurel as always, saying the most ridiculously stupid phrases that drive Oliver Hardy nuts. Highly recommend, watched many times since a child and literally just watched again while writing this. Holds up very well and just as funny. 9/10.