Der starke Mann

The film begins in WWI and Harry is a Belgian soldier who has an American pen pal. After the war, he comes to America as a sideshow strong man's assistant. However, he thinks it will be easy to find a girl named "Mary Smith"--which it naturally isn't. Eventually, he and the act arrive in a small town where Mary happens to live, but she is avoiding meeting Harry and it looks bad for our intrepid hero.

Years ago, I saw a compilation film about silent comedians (WHEN COMEDY WAS KING) and the film said there were "three truly great comedians of this age--Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin and Harry Langdon". Well, I knew this wasn't true, since Arbuckle (before the scandal) was much more famous and during most of the twenties, the most successful (and possibly best) comedian was Harold Lloyd. I truly think the film made this assertion because back in 1960 when it was made, Lloyd's films were not available--being owned by Lloyd and were locked in his safe.

As for Langdon, I've not seen tons of his films, though most are no longer in existence today. However, I've seen enough to know he wasn't one of the greats--perhaps a near-great. This film is supposed to be one of his best films and at no point did it approach the great work of Lloyd, Keaton or Chaplin. In fact, I much prefer Langdon's short films more than his full-length ones because the pacing is much better. In THE STRONG MAN, the film is 75 minutes long, but could easily had 10 minutes snipped off without harming the film at all. Plus, there are a few really good gags, but only a few. Now this doesn't mean that I must have a silent comedy that is constantly funny (after all, the other three greats I mentioned did make some wonderful character-driven full-length films). However, poor pacing undid the film and with this slight trimming, it would have probably earned a 9.

A very good comedy, just not one of the great ones.

I must respond to Bob Pr.'s comments below - I can't let such a slander against Frank Capra go unchallenged. :)

******** Quoting Bob's Review: Frank Capra was the director and I understand from our discussion that Capra's autobiography thoroughly "dissed" Harry, apparently in revenge for Harry having fired the young Capra from directing any more of his films. The two originally had been close until that point but had frosty relations after. Our discussion leader said many people are now beginning to re-evaluate Capra's revengeful pique, the significance of Langdon's contribution, and appreciate him much more. *********

Wow, I really didn't get that sense from Capra's autobiography at all. Capra praised Langdon's talent very highly, saying he was as brilliant as Chaplin etc. The thing is, according to Capra, Langdon didn't really understand what made him (Langdon) so special and wanted to BE more LIKE Chaplin, instead of being himself and being equally great in his OWN way. Apparently Langdon didn't "get" the character that Capra helped to create, the persona that was so beloved by the public. Like many people, he wanted to be something he was not.

Capra claims that Langdon let stardom go to his head once the films they made together became big hits. That Harry started taking all the credit, not acknowledging (and actively insulting) Capra and the others who had helped him along the way. That's not so very hard to believe - success/fame (especially if it comes all at once) tends to affect most people this way and swell their heads. Capra tried to warn him about the swelled head and bring him back down to earth, and was fired. Too bad Harry lacked humility and succumbed to typical Hollywood Diva behavior (my words, NOT Capra's.)

If you want to cast Frank Capra as the Villain here, because you find it hard to believe that someone as guileless and innocent on-screen, as Langdon appeared to be, could be an ambitious and egotistical jerk in real life (again, MY interpretation, not quoting Capra here!)...well, that only proves Harry's abilities as an ACTOR, eh?

I recommend reading Frank Capra's book for yourself, instead of relying on second-hand information. I'm sure you'll see the genuine sorrow he felt after Langdon proved he *couldn't* do it all on his own, the quality of his films dropping fast when Capra was no longer involved. If you doubt how important Capra was in their partnership, ask yourself: after they stopped working together, which of the two continued to achieve greater and greater success, and whose film quality & career went to the dogs? Langdon obviously needed Capra more than Capra needed Langdon.

I really believe Frank Capra was heartbroken over the way things turned out, and about Langdon's wasted potential. It didn't seem to me he took any vengeful pleasure in seeing Harry fail and fall into obscurity. There's one particular anecdote Capra remembers - passing by the set of one of Langdon's later films, where the director was treating him like crap and clearly didn't understand Harry's strengths as a performer, trying to make him do things that just didn't come naturally to him (ironic since Harry had previously wanted to be like other comics). I wouldn't have blamed Capra if he HAD gloated a bit in his autobiography, but instead he sounded upset about this incident.

Personally I don't have as much sympathy for Harry as Frank seemed to - Harry treated "the little people" (behind the scenes writers & directors) like dirt, and made the decision to turn his back on those people he should've been grateful to. Pride comes before a fall, and all that jazz.

I saw this movie tonight at the 11th annual Kansas Silent Film Festival at Washburn Univ., Topeka, KS. Organ music was provided by Dr. Marvin Faulwell with percussion by Bob Keckeisen.

I'd never seen Harry Langdon before and, on the basis of this, would rate him in the company of Chaplin, Keaton, and Lloyd. He has great timing, poignant facial expressions that are somewhat Chaplinesque, with great body control to fit physical comedy.

Frank Capra was the director and I understand from our discussion that Capra's autobiography thoroughly "dissed" Harry, apparently in revenge for Harry having fired the young Capra from directing any more of his films. The two originally had been close until that point but had frosty relations after. Our discussion leader said many people are now beginning to re-evaluate Capra's revengeful pique, the significance of Langdon's contribution, and appreciate him much more.

Not all comedies are made equal. Even as this picture is directed by acclaimed filmmaker Frank Capra, and star Harry Langdon gets mentioned in the same breath as other stars of the silent era, it doesn't necessarily strike the same chord as films of his brethren. Some scenes run a little long in the tooth, and in the first place some gags or story beats rely on a concatenation of circumstances that may be a little too contrived or forced. Sadly, some bits just don't inspire much of a reaction at all, and to be frank, in 2022 the "god-fearing" folks don't come off any better than the ruffians. I suppose all this is the risk one carries with making comedies, of course. On the other hand, even if this specific title isn't perfectly, robustly funny, it's still mildly enjoyable. The root premise is full of great potential, and much of that potential is borne out with situational comedy, sight gags, and physical comedy, earning a few solid laughs. "Strong" is maybe too charged a descriptor, yet 'The strong man' is sufficiently well made to offer a good time.

Langdon demonstrates a swell sense of physicality and expression that shows why he may get mentioned alongside Chaplin, Keaton, or Lloyd. Gratifyingly, not least under Capra's guidance, his co-stars illustrate a like capacity, and their lively displays and willingness to sacrifice their bodies lends to some swell humor. Though some moments may lag at one point or another, more so than not the scene writing is duly stimulating to orchestrate the silliness, or in quieter moments to propel the story. That narrative is perhaps a tad more uneven still - at the same time that the core concept could have been teased out a little more to greater comedic effect, some aspects of the plot that we do get languish in the more dramatic elements, or constitute middling, blasé plot advancement. And, again just to emphasize - call it pacing by way of the feature overall, or timing in regards to where would-be laughs should fit into a scene: there were at least as many instances while I watched in which I thought to myself "Okay, well, moving on I suppose," as instances that sparked joy.

If it seems like I'm being more critical of 'The strong man' than not, well, I guess that's not incorrect. To be clear, I don't dislike it: broadly speaking it's well made, the cast perform admirably, and some moments are especially well done, including the climax. Only - this is a title that suggests "passive amusement" more than "active fun," and I say that as someone who loves silent movies. Some of the best movies ever made hail from the silent era, and this just isn't one of them. I appreciate the work put into it; would that the result were more consistent, and I'd like it more than I do. When all is said and done there are a lot worse things you could spend 75 minutes on, and if you happen across 'The strong man' it's a fair way to pass the time. Just don't go out of your way, and keep your expectations in check.

"Corny"is a word that seems to have gone out of use. Never a sterling compliment, corny meant something homespun & sentimental manufactured to manipulate our nostalgia for "the good old days". Probably the reason the word is now extinct is that people under forty don't seem to have any "good old days" to look back on. That is an issue not to be dealt with here. Rather, let us recall the corny glory that was Harry Langdon in The Strong Man. Sexless & guiless, he can muster nothing more intimidating than petulance. A true child of comedy, his white face is rather more round than Stan Laurel's but just as vacant. That face is an inconstant tabla rasa, on which external events can impress fear, joy, and love for a moment. The storyline fits Langdon like a glove; it is Evil versus Good, with Harry the Good triumphant at the end more by slapstick grace than any wit or daring on his part. You have to have a corny mindset to enjoy this movie; to wit, there are bad & bullying people in the world who deserve an antic comeuppance & extinction. If you can hold that naive thought while watching this beautiful comedy you may find yourself, as I have, actually crying through the laughter at the loving watchcare the God of comedy gives great clowns like Langdon in their most threatening pickles. The most wondrous moment of the film occurs during the rally at the end, when with barbells, cannon, and a huge fire curtain, Langdon subdues an insolent, drunken crowd. Langdon begins walking over the curtain,which is covering the writhing crowd beneath it, and suddenly dozens of hands pop through the curtain, twisting like serpents in Dante's Inferno. It is a hilarious visual gag and an apt summary of the consequences of the crowd's evil hubris. This silent gem cannot be ignored by anyone who loves cornball pantomime -- a genre apparently as dead as our ideals. Woe is us!