Do Detectives Think?

Although by no means a comedy must-see, "Do Detectives Think?" is a worthy movie from Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, who in 1927 just began working together as a comedy team, for the Hal Roach studio's.

It's a movie that is good thanks to its little comical moments. It's not the sort of movie that is hilarious constantly but it has some great original and funny moments in it that are good for a couple of laughs. It's certainly not the most consistent Laurel & Hardy silent comedy short around but it's an enjoyable one nevertheless, which is also thanks to its fun simple story. It makes "Do Detectives Think?" an above average early Laurel & Hardy movie.

Problem of the movie really is that the comical moments in it are rather stretched out. If only the movie was about halve its running time shorter, perhaps the movie than would had been a better and even more enjoyable one. The movie its flow would at least had been better if that had been the case.

The cast is good. Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy (who was looking quite thin by the way) already seem to be in their element as the famous comical duo. Also really good was James Finlayson in a great comical role. He steals the show in most of his sequences. Just his looks alone and some small actions is enough to provide the movie with some great laughs and comical moments. Also Noah Young is well cast, as a psychotic killer who tries to kill the judge (the James Finlayson character) who convicted him. The boys play two detectives, with odd names, who are send by their agency to protect the judge but of course everything goes wrong and the boys really mess things up again.

Of course everything about the movie is predictable but it's a well made and originally directed movie. The timing is nice and the movie is well edited which makes most of the comical moments work out really well.

A good enough enjoyable early Laurel & Hardy comedy short, that uses a bit too many stretched out comical moments to prevent this movie from being one of their best works.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

When Laurel and Hardy are on the case, you don't expect Sherlock Holmes-quality deductions, but you know there will be some laughs. This comedy is a bit uneven, but pretty good overall. Stanley and Oliver are detectives who are hired to protect a judge whose life has been threatened, and they get some reasonable mileage out of this simple situation. They are helped out by frequent supporting player James Finlayson as the judge, and by Noah Young, who is suitably menacing as an escaped convict. It's not among their best comedies, but it has some good moments, and is certainly worth watching for any fan of Laurel and Hardy.

This is one of their faster shorts. Finlayson is a judge who sentences a murderer to death. The murderer promises to escape and murder the judge. He escapes forthwith. In a panic, Finlayson calls the police and begs them to send their two smartest detectives. Laurel and Hardy show up, but not before the killer has managed to enter the house and pose as the butler.

Some of the gags were later used by other writers -- Finlayson hiding by lowering himself beneath the bathwater only to accidentally pull the plug with his toe. If it was, in fact, copped from this short, it's because it's pretty funny.

The straight narrative is interrupted by a graveyard scene that's as amusing as anything else.

Perhaps Laurel and Hardy's most visual experimental work. I know, the story is uninteresting, the gags are basic, the mood is dated, and the duo's personalities are far from fully development. Still "Do Detectives Think?" is worth remembering for its nocturnal, expressionistic scenes around the graveyard, where a goat's shadow suggest a scary demon; also for its moving camera, a rare James Finnlayson's close-up underwater, a keyhole's point of view, mirror reflections and some other few technical devices not very frequent at the time that provides this little film an unusual freshness and a sense of unlimited creative freedom.

To paraphrase the fellow, "even not very good Laurel and Hardy is still better than almost everything else". This early L&H silent is one of the first to show the boys as a team, that is, as pals in the same general situation, on the same side, rather than working against each other. Their personalities can be seen developing nicely: Ollie the bully, Stan in his shadow, with his instant crying; however, here Stan still maintains a bit more independence and aggressiveness and willingness to defy or even abandon Ollie than we will be used to seeing later on. The gags are too simplistic and predictable, so the film is not going to be a memorable one; however, it is always a joy to see the boys on the screen, no matter what they are doing.

To be honest, the funniest moments are enjoyed by James Finlayson; I laughed loudest when, in a sudden cut, Finlayson is seen sitting in his bathtub, his body and entire head completely covered with soap bubbles, with only his face showing through. And the water he is bathing in is, in certain shots, completely filthy and black. Very bizarre!

A quick note about Hardy's character's name, Sherlock Pinkham; while "Sherlock" is obvious, the name "Pinkham" seems more obscure. I assume this is meant to spoof the famous "Pinkerton" detectives of Civil War and post-Civil War fame.

Let us recognize this is L&H at the beginning of a process, one that would lead to a partnership that they themselves could never have imagined would captivate the world. Then we can enjoy this film for what it is, without being disappointed.