Sottozero

Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy were comedic geniuses, individually and together, and their partnership was deservedly iconic and one of the best there was. They left behind a large body of work, a vast majority of it being entertaining to classic comedy, at their best they were hilarious and their best efforts were great examples of how to do comedy without being juvenile or distasteful.

Although a vast majority of Laurel and Hardy's previous efforts ranged from above average to very good ('45 Minutes from Hollywood' being the only misfire and mainly worth seeing as a curiosity piece and for historical interest, and even that wasn't a complete mess), 'Two Tars' for me was their first truly classic one with close to flawless execution. Didn't find 'Below Zero' as one of their best and a bit disappointing compared to their late 1928 and the best of their 1929 efforts, which were among their best and funniest early work. It is still very good and has much of what makes Laurel and Hardy's work as appealing as it is.

The story is extremely slight and the first part takes a little bit too time to get going and is a little formulaic.

When 'Below Zero' does get going, which it does do quite quickly, it is great fun, not always hilarious but never less than very amusing, the best being classic hilarity. It is never too silly, there is a wackiness that never loses its energy and the sly wit is here, some of the material may not be new but how it's executed actually doesn't feel too familiar and it doesn't get repetitive.

Laurel and Hardy are on top form here, both are well used, both have material worthy of them and they're equal rather than one being funnier than the other (before Laurel tended to be funnier and more interesting than Hardy, who tended to be underused). Their chemistry feels like a partnership here too, before 'Two Tars' you were yearning for more scenes with them together but in 'Below Zero' and on the most part from 'Two Tars' onwards we are far from robbed of that. Their comic timing is impeccable.

'Below Zero' looks good visually, is full of energy and the direction gets the best out of the stars, is at ease with the material and doesn't let it get too busy or static. The supporting players are solid, but it's Laurel and Hardy's show all the way.

Overall, very good. Not essential or classic Laurel and Hardy, but a very good representation of them. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Amusing short comedy with Laurel and Hardy as two street musicians in the cold winter of 1929.

While they don't deserve much entertaining the people on the streets their luck changes when Laurel finds himself a filled wallet. They're almost robbed but a cop comes to their rescue. To thank him, they take him to dinner.

When the check is due though they find out that the wallet they found is actually the cop's, so in the end they're thrown out of the place.

Amusing short from this funny couple, though a bit slow at times, in particular in the first part. 6/10.

Below Zero (1930)

*** (out of 4)

Street musicians Laurel and Hardy find a wallet full of money in the street so they offer to take a policeman to dinner. After eating they discover that the wallet belongs to the cop. Here's an entertaining short, which doesn't rank as one of the duos best or funniest but it remains fun throughout.

Tiembla Y Titubea (1930)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Spanish version of Below Zero has the same storyline of the American version but this one here features a few additional scenes as well as an extended ending, which was cut from the American version. Like other Spanish L&H films, this here doesn't quite work because you can tell the two aren't really comfortable speaking Spanish. The added joke at the end however is the best gag and it's a shame it was cut from the American version.

This is a rather enjoyable short Laurel & Hardy picture with again a story divided in two parts, that are both good and enjoyable in their own way.

Problem with some of the Laurel & Hardy pictures is that the movies that are divided in two separate parts are not the best or most consistent ones, due to the fact that often the one part is better than the other. In this case both parts of the movie have their own certain charm and entertainment value and they go very well together.

The first part is fun and a bit slapstick like and features some good old fashioned snowball fights. To be honest in the second part nothing really happens but it's hilarious nevertheless, due to the very fine comedy execution from director James Parrott and actors Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy. It makes both parts solid and should more than please the fans.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Laurel and Hardy are busking on the cold streets during the cruel winter of 1929. They are making very little money out of it but there luck appears to change when they find a wallet loaded with cash. A thief tries to steal it from them but a kind policeman helps them out. In return for his help the duo take him for a big steak lunch.

This film starts quite well with the duo out in the cold playing music for cash. However the jokes are repeated even if a quite short period of time and this causes it to stall a little early on. The latter stages are funny and (although it is quite obvious) I didn't see the ending coming quite like it did! The snowball fights are amusing but just do go on for too long in my opinion.

The cast are good and feature quite a few Laurel and Hardy regulars. Laurel and Hardy themselves are good but Hardy overdoes his `looks to camera' by wasting them on minor things rather than holding them back for the bigger laughs. Laurel is good but has less to do.

Overall this is an enjoyable short in two parts – both of which are funny albeit one is easier to enjoy than the other.