The Passionate Plumber

THE PASSIONATE PLUMBER (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1932), a Buster Keaton production directed by Edward Sedgwick, stars Buster Keaton in his second "farce" comedy, the first being PARLOR, BEDROOM AND BATH (MGM, 1931). With screen adaptation by Laurence E. Johnson, and uncredited material lifted from the play "Her Cardboard Lover" by Jacques Deval, THE PASSIONATE PLUMBER, its new title, certainly improves over Keaton's previous screen sound efforts for MGM (1930-33). Though not quite a cinematic masterpiece as one could have hoped for, it's basic flaws tend to be placed on certain gag and story material as being undeveloped with resolutions left unresolved. Overlooking these minor aspects, the finished product generally blends in nicely with its basic comedy premise, even for Keaton.

Set in Paris, France, with the Arch of Triumph captured in full view for its opening, the story introduces Julius J. (J. for Julius) McCracken (Jimmy Durante) coming to Paul Le Maire's (Paul Porcasi) shop in need of a plumber for his employer to fix a leak in the shower. Julius gets Elmer E. (E. for Elmer) Tuttle (Buster Keaton wearing beret), an American from Yonkers, working on his latest experiment, a spot shooting pistol. After these strangers get introduced, next scene has Elmer escorted into the mansion of socialite Patricia Alden (Irene Purcell) where he goes to work on her shower. In the meantime, plot development introduces Alhine (Polly Moran), the household maid whom McCracken is crazy about, and how much Miss Alden is crazy about Tony Lagorce (Gilbert Roland), a handsome gigolo, whose Spanish speaking wife, Nina (Mona Maris), refuses to grant him a divorce. Unaware to Miss Alden, Tony is actually carrying on a romance with Nina, using Patricia as his excuse for a wife, too, refusing to grant him a divorce. Hoping to make Tony jealous, Patricia hires Elmer as her lover decoy, or better yet, her passionate plumber, resulting to a series of mishaps for all concerned.

Previously filmed at the tail-end of the silent era as THE CARDBOARD LOVER (MGM, 1928) starring Marion Davies,and Nils Asther, and remade again as HER CARDBOARD LOVER (MGM, 1942) starring Norma Shearer and Robert Taylor, the Keaton carnation proves most interesting due to how its writers revamped a sophisticated comedy to fit with the opposite comedic talents of deadpan Keaton and over zealous Durante. Though their characters start off as complete strangers, only minutes into the story does it give the impression of they being lifelong pals. Even before the store comes to the halfway mark is it forgotten that Keaton's character is a plumber. It's a wonder if he ever got to finish fixing the shower and make up the bill for his time?

Of the several comedy highlights, including Keaton's gambling mishap at the Casino de Paris and the gigolo's attempt of keeping his two mistresses from getting together, the best known and/or most admired happens to be the dueling sequence between Keaton and Roland, with Durante in amiable support. Though it has its moments, it's obvious how this burlesque style pistol dueling would be recycled by future comedians as Bob Hope, Danny Kaye, or even one of the Three Stooges as prime examples. Keaton's frequent glove slapping Frenchmen to duels and correcting those who constantly mispronounce his last name, along with Mona Maris' constant Spanish speaking outbursts (done more favorably by Mexican actress Lupe Velez in later years) to Mexican born Gilbert Roland in saying in her accented English, "If you could only speak Spanish," are agreeable run-on gags. It's also a wonder how Velez might have handled such similar scenes had she been selected to play the spitfiring wife instead of Maris?

Others featured in the cast are Maude Eburne (Aunt Charlotte); Henry Armetta, Jean Del Val and Edward Brophy (Keaton's frequent co-star during his MGM years) in a cameo appearance as the man outside the beauty parlor. Irene Purcell, a not so well known actress with so few movies to her credit, makes an acceptable foil for Keaton's buffoonery. Closely resembling Joan Blondell in physical appearance and Genevieve Tobin in both mannerism and speech, she takes part in some good scenes involving Keaton, one where she gets served breakfast in bed (in the silent film tradition with limited dialog), and another where she constantly tries losing him so she can have a secret meeting with her lover. Polly Moran, better known for her screen partnership opposite Marie Dressler, has some funny bits here, too, few and far between, but mostly with Durante.

As much as Keaton and Durante are as compatible as Stan Laurel and Harpo Marx, MGM would pair them again in SPEAK EASILY (1932) and WHAT, NO BEER! (1933) before ending their screen partnership. Virturally forgotten over the years, this and other Keaton MGM comedies can be seen and studied whenever broadcast on cable television's Turner Classic Movies. Keaton's Elmer may not be the greatest plumber in Paris, but certainly is passionate, in a funny sort of way. (***)

This movie marks the darkest period for Buster Keaton and his fans. While the transition to sound for Keaton was very poor (after all, MGM studios tried to make this great mime a talking star), the PASSIONATE PLUMBER marks the beginning of the end of Keaton's career. That's because this was the first of three films that paired Keaton with Jimmy Durante--a "comedian" whose style was the exact opposite of Keaton's. Keaton's humor was physical and sweet, while Durante was extremely loud and overbearing and the two styles meshed like oil and water. It was obvious that the execs at MGM had no idea what to do with Keaton and pairing him with Durante was a sign that they had "jumped the shark"--in other words, they were trying desperate measures to try to salvage a career that had already peaked.

Now this isn't to say that Keaton couldn't have been funny. Had his films remained true to his strengths (physical humor and a general likability), he could have remained a viable star. Chaplin did this by refusing to immediately switch to sound films--making CITY LIGHTS (1931) and MODERN TIMES (1936) as silent movies even when everyone had switched to sound long before these films. It's really too bad that MGM didn't do what they did with Laurel and Hardy. This team did work for MGM technically speaking, but MGM allowed the affiliated Hal Roach Studio almost complete independence to do what they knew how to do best. Perhaps if Keaton had been sent to Roach, his sound career would have been a success. But with the gag writers at MGM, he was sunk.

This film is worse than his previous sound outings because Keaton is given almost no physical gags at all. The few that he does have are among the best moments in the film because they are genuine--gags that suit Keaton's style. But the rest of the film is so talky and forgettable that it will most likely make Keaton fans (like myself) wince. And, while I know some Durante fans might take offense, he came off as just obnoxious and annoying!

The film is called the PASSIONATE PLUMBER, though Keaton spends very little time plumbing. The beginning of the film involves more scenes with Durante and Keaton--while the last half of the film they don't appear in that many scenes together (thank goodness). During this phase of the film, Keaton mostly annoys those around him and is invited to a series of duels due to his incessant and annoying bumbling. For the remainder of the film, he tags along with a young woman as her aide. She has gotten him to promise never to leave her side because she's afraid she'll lose control and allow Gilbert Rolland to make love to her. So, through over half the film, you see Keaton essentially following her and that's all there is to the plot.

Sadly throughout all of this, there are almost no laughs at all--a serious problem with a comedy! Only at the very end, when it degenerates to slapstick, does the film show any promise--but then the final credits roll and you are left thinking "is that all there is?".

I have never seen nor want to see a silent Buster Keaton film so came to this without any preconceptions or anti-talkie prejudice. To me this very much has the feel of a Laurel and Hardy picture. Well made silly gentle slapstick.

When you read that this was adapted from a stage play, you're right to approach with caution but you don't need to worry about this. It's not one of those awful filmed stage plays - this was properly adapted into a proper film with a cinematic rather than a theatric script.

If you're ok with the somewhat acquired taste of American 1930s comedy acting and like Stan and Ollie, you'll probably enjoy this. Unlike many early thirties comedies, the characters are, although not realistic, actually engaging. You're interested in them, you want to know what happens to them. So often that acting style creates characters so unbelievable that you can't accept them as real people. The protagonists here however, like you find in L&H films, manage that perfect balance of absurdly with likeability.

Buster Keaton purists don't like this - it's not their Buster! Like when The Marx Brothers went to MGM and became what MGM wanted them to be, Buster Keaton became Thalberg's neutered befuddled pet. I've no problem with that. As a stand alone picture, to someone who doesn't watch silent movies, this Buster is perfect for a film like this.

His co-star is the acclaimed stage actress Irene Purcell and like Keaton, she is perfect in this too. It was, and still is rare to find an actress in the movies who is allowed be genuinely as funny as the male comedian, not just his pretty foil. She completely captures your attention and that's not just because she's so stunningly and staggeringly attractive, she has real comedy talent and this picture allows her to demonstrate this without the usual constraints of the time.

...just like in his silent days. Unlike most of his MGM talkies, here he is not cast as the hapless bumbling butt of jokes, but instead he shows grace under pressure and ingenuity when in a tight spot.

This was the first of his three teamings with Jimmy Durante, and even that odd pairing doesn't distract too much from the film's enjoyment. Keaton here is playing Elmer Tuttle, who for some unexplained reason is an American plumber choosing to live in Paris. He enters the story as chauffeur Julius (Jimmy Durante) has been tasked by his employer to find a plumber to repair a leaky shower, and Elmer is the lucky plumber chosen for the job. Julius' employer is Patricia Alden (Irene Purcell), also an American living in Paris, who is trying to pull herself away from her married lover Tony (Gilbert Roland) since she sees there is no future in the relationship.

Patricia decides to drive the proud Tony away by claiming that Elmer is her lover, and she also hires Elmer to make sure she doesn't give in to temptation and go crawling back to Tony. The problem is, shortly after she gives Elmer the job she decides to go back to Tony, but Elmer won't take "you're fired" for an answer. He protects her in spite of herself. Keaton shows that old inventiveness at every turn here. When he needs money to rent formal attire to get into a Paris night spot he finds a way to make the night spot pay for it, every time Patricia thinks she has lost Elmer and is on her way back to Tony, Elmer finds a way to outsmart and stop her, and finally when Patricia's aunt Charlotte comes to visit and Patricia is afraid of what she'll think if she finds a man - Elmer - in her room, Keaton hilariously turns his plumbing toolkit into a doctor's bag and makes aunt Charlotte believe he is Patricia's physician.

Some of the plot lines hit unexplained dead ends and the ending for sure doesn't make much sense, but yet I find myself pulling this one out and watching it pretty often just because it is a good example of the old Keaton magic at work.

I thought this was a light, fun romp, 1930s style. Of course Keaton is the scene stealer in this one. I know he didn't like to do so much talking in these films, but I like his voice and delivery. I feel this film also utilizes his wide range of facial expressions more than the other MGM films. Jimmy Durante is as irritating as ever, but for some reason he hit it off with 1930s American audiences. His pairing with Keaton however, was a poor choice. I also feel Keaton did a remarkable job in this film as his life had begun to fall apart about this time. He could have made a successful go at these sort of screwball type films, but as an artist, he felt they were ridiculous and a waste of time. If MGM had let him take control of his own films, then we would have something revolutionary to watch. That being said, This one is enjoyable. Sure, it's not a classic or well thought out film, but it made me laugh, and I saw the old Keaton in there, just a little.