The Lucky Dog

Oliver Hardy was a character actor who had played in dozens of movies, mostly villains, when he first appeared in the same movie as the British comic Stan Laurel. The 31-year-old Laurel had recently changed his name from Stan Jefferson because it contained an unlucky 13 letters on the advice of his girlfriend and sometimes stage partner, Mae Dahlberg. Gilbert 'Billy Bronco' Anderson had sold his partnership in Essanay Studios and was looking to begin a comedy serial headlining the up-and-coming Laurel. His new small studio produced a pilot, December 1921's "The Lucky Dog," in an attempt to sell to sponsors the series 'Stan Laurel Comedies.'

It was simply happenstance Hardy was brought in to play a robber and the bad guy in "The Lucky Dog." He was freelancing for several studios and was hired to play the foil for Laurel's character. In the short film, Laurel plays a homeless person who befriends a dog and first meets Hardy robbing his victim. Hardy then robs Laurel of the money he had taken from his initial victim. Such are the roustabout frivolities taking place throughout the remainder of the movie.

Anderson's dream of a serial with Laurel didn't materialize, but the two did collaborate on several shorts afterwards. As for Hardy, he eventually signed with Hal Roach Studios in 1924 before appearing in a handful of films directed by none other than Stan Laurel in the mid-1920's.

A far different Oliver Hardy, but essentially the same Stan Laurel we know and love did their first short film together The Lucky Dog. The voice and mannerisms that went with the Ollie we know from the talkies just are not there in this short subject.

Stan, a little younger, but the same innocence just gets tossed out of his roominghouse and he and a little pup make friends. Later on a rather bulky crook played by Hardy tries to rob him, but when all you have is a pooch to your name there's not much point. In the end Hardy's very bulk gets him in trouble.

An interesting bit of historical silent film, but the short subject in and of itself is no great shakes. Stan would be doing some nice solo short subjects. Ollie would be a supporting player until Hal Roach teamed him with Stan.

For the fans of Stan and Ollie.

This is the very first movie with Laurel & Hardy as a comical duo, even though the two appear as enemies in this movie instead as friends. So I don't really consider this movie as a Laurel & Hardy picture.

The first halve of the movie is the best. Stanley Laurel plays the maim character in the movie and he yet again gets himself into some silly trouble. Ironicaly from the moments Oliver Hardy makes his entrance the movie goes downhill. The movie starts to get incoherent and messy, especially in the final few sequences.

Of course this movie is historically still an interesting to watch, since its the first movie in which Laurel & Hardy appear together in sequences. So for fans this still remains a sort of a must-see. Also fans of the early slapstick humor will still find plenty to enjoy in this movie. The movie is certainly better than the most other slapstick movies, made from the same period. For everyone else this movie probably remains a messy, incoherent silent comedy short that isn't really worth watching.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

In Jess Robbins' The Lucky Dog, Stan Laurel plays a recently-evicted man who is left to wander the streets alongside a stray dog. After being robbed by another wayward stranger (Oliver Hardy), Stan and his dog get acquainted with another older woman (Florence Gillet) who clings to her trusty poodle. She suggests that Stan enter a dog show with her and her poodle. He proceeds with that idea only to be denied entry and, following a misunderstanding with the lady's boyfriend, Stan becomes the target for a grave misunderstanding.

The Lucky Dog marks the first short where Laurel and Hardy appear together, despite working as individual characters and not a duo. With that, The Lucky Dog is a noteworthy piece simply because it features two souls that would later go on to be unfathomably beneficial to the comedy community, leaving an indelible watermark on the field that couldn't be replaced. The short is also quite noteworthy for its technical pieces, like the early scene where Stan stands on the tracks of a train, oblivious to the fact that the train comes within about an inch of him. We see this shot exist in a symmetrical state, with Stan facing us, evenly centered on the tracks, with the train approaching us as well as the character.

In addition, one will take notice of Laurel's heavy-eye makeup, which is due in part to Stan's light blue eyes and the belief that light-colored eyes wouldn't show up well on screen, hence making Laurel look as if he's a crossdresser without all of his garb applied. The Lucky Dog makes an interesting case for cinema history, so much so that we forget the short isn't consistently funny, but just pleasant enough to remind us about what was made of a long, prosperous career for one of the greatest duos in comedy.

Starring: Stan Laurel, Florence Gillet, and Oliver Hardy. Directed by: Jess Robbins.

Context is important. The first time I saw this film, it was part of Image Entertainment's "Lost Films of Laurel and Hardy" DVD series years ago. In that set, the film was presented alongside their repertoire of better-known, far superior work that they produced several years later at the Hal Roach lot as a team. It's important to keep in mind that in this film they are not at Roach, and years ahead of their official teaming.

At this point in his career, Laurel is an up-and-coming vaudeville performer, a veteran of Fred Karno's English music hall troupe and understudy for Charlie Chaplin prior to his film career. He has appeared in relatively few films. Hardy, conversely, is a seasoned and professional film comedian, having spent most of the previous five or six years in hundreds of films, probably all comedies. Often he played the villain, sometimes another supporting role, and, in his "Pudge and Runt" comedies with Billy Ruge, the star.

I just saw "The Lucky Dog" in sequence with many of the other films that either Laurel or Hardy appeared in during that time. In that context, one has to marvel at the amazing coincidence of this film's mere existence. For example, the false mustache Hardy sports in this film is larger but otherwise similar to the real one he bore in his later appearances with Laurel, after they teamed. It was the only time that I've seen at this point in his career that he wore a smallish, square mustache.

Laurel proves to be a competent and charming comedian on his own, but the film comes to life when the two appear together. Their screen relationship is apparently from the start. Hardy plays a burglar who resolves to wipe out Laurel once the latter turns in defiance of him. Unlike his many other roles as the heavy during this period, Hardy comes off as bumbling and oafish a bully as he does years later, Laurel is as blithe and unintimidated in the face of this imposing man as we remember him from the team's heyday.

When the two appear together, they appear as two kids playing, and we in the audience share in their delight. It does seem like the appearance of Hardy in the second, more rare half of the film, seems to have been inserted as an afterthought, as though the director realized how funny and natural the two of them were together, and decided to use Hardy in another scene with Laurel. One can imagine a scene in real life, just as the one depicted in the film, where Hardy, in his burglar outfit, appears to be leaving the film when the director (or, in the context of the film, the villain) cries out to him - "hey you -- get back here!"

It is worth noting that for all of the times Hardy becomes frustrated with Laurel's character in the team's heyday, this is the only film in which we get to see Hardy literally beat the crap out of Laurel. One scene briefly features Hardy thrashing about a Laurel stuffed dummy to comic effect.

One has to wonder if producer "Bronco Billy" Anderson spent the last 40some years of his life kicking himself for not having teamed these two back in 1919 when this film was produced. It appears someone must have noticed how well the two worked as a team. It seems tragic that we lost so much potential work with them, but we can also be thankful for what they did leave us. It's no slouch by any standard.