Xadrez para Dois

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 'The Hoose-Gow' as one of their best and a bit disappointing compared to their late 1928 and previous 1929 efforts, which were among their best and funniest early work. It is still good with a lot of great merits.

It may not be "new" material as such, some rather familiar material here and the first part takes a little bit too time to get going.

Compared to the late 1928 and previous 1929 output, it is a little on the subdued and bland side, contrary to the insane craziness and wacky slapstick that was properly starting to emerge.

When 'The Hoose-Gow' does get going, which it does do very quickly, it is good enough fun, not really hilarious but never less than amusing. It is never too silly, the energy is there 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 'The Hoose-Gow' we are far from robbed of that. Their comic timing is impeccable.

'The Hoose-Gow' looks mostly good visually (even if the polish is not always there), has 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.

Overall, very good. Not essential or classic Laurel and Hardy but hardly disgraces them either. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Despite their protestations of innocence, Laurel and Hardy find themselves on a prison working on a prison road crew where they make a shambles of an inspection visit by the governor.

"The Hoose-gow" was Laurel & Hardy's sixth talkie short and a step in the right direction in recovering the energy and verve of their best silent shorts. Shot almost entirely outdoors, this film doesn't have the claustrophobic, studio-bound feel that hindered some of their earlier talkies. The sound mix must have had some level of sophistication. Look at some of the road crew scenes. The wind is whipping up the branches on some of bushes right behind them. With the microphones of the time, that dialogue must've been unusable. The dubbing was fine.

The plot of the film is simple but serviceable. Nothing new, but nice. It works its way to a nice, rice throwing battle, which, if not on the level of "Two Tars" or "Big Business," is certainly adequate. The supporting cast is good, featuring the always reliable Tiny Sanford and James Finlayson.

Not a classic, but worth watching. Up to this point, their best talkie with the possible exception of "Men O'War."

This is an okay Laurel and Hardy film--about average overall. While the plot is a bit different than most of their films, the team did do several films where they were convicts (such as LIBERTY and PARDON US). And, of these films, this is perhaps my least favorite. It isn't because the film is really bad, but a lot of the humor isn't all that memorable and the rice throwing at the end seems very derivative--throwing pies, etc. is almost a cliché since it's been seen a lot already in older comedies. I just don't see why throwing food is funny--it just seems like a cheap laugh. If you are a die-hard fan, then this IS a film for you. For others who are not familiar with the duo, find another film first--this film isn't magical or a must-see film.

Everyone has heard that famous phrase. But what about imitating yourself? Is that still flattery? Laurel and Hardy recycle not one, but two recently-used comedy routines in this short.

Plot In a Nutshell: Two innocent bystanders (Stan Laurel, Oliver Hardy) are swept up in a police raid and sent to prison, where they wreak their usual havoc.

Why I rated it a '5': Overall this is not among L&H's best efforts. When you recycle multiple gags in a 20-minute film, it speaks to a lack of imagination and hints at churning just to get in their quota of 10 shorts a year. For those not aware, the 'loose-top-on-the-salt-shaker' bit was already used in "You're Darn Tootin'" and the 'soggy rice fight' was already used (in the form of pies) in "The Battle of the Century."

Perhaps if you have not seen either of those earlier shorts, "The Hoose-Gow" may seem fresh; but once you realize this, however, one can't help but be less than impressed with this effort. Add to this is the fact that the soggy rice fight isn't particularly hilarious and it just kind of falls flat. Hey, it's still Laurel and Hardy, so it's not a total loss. But in their entire catalog of work, "The Hoose-Gow" is decidedly run-of-the-mill.

5/10. Would I watch again (Y/N)?: Probably not. They did much better work elsewhere.

Despite claiming to be innocent bystanders when a raid occurs, Laurel and Hardy are sentenced to jail time along with the criminals themselves. Despite trying to reason with a guard they find themselves working a gang digging ditches all day every day.

Any short film that needs a great deal of set up before it actually starts going anywhere, is asking for trouble. On the surface that may not totally be the case here but I suspect it is one of it's weaknesses. The plot here sounds good but it has a few little unnecessary things that are needed to get it to it's original idea (I assume) which is the prison gang.

Once it reaches this stage it is funny but never feels like it reaches a peak. Individual moments are good but it doesn't have any really good sequences – I found the rice fight to be so-so rather than hilarious I'm afraid.

Laurel and Hardy are good of course but they seem to be hampered by a film that requires them to do things that aren't funny just to set up a joke that is funny. This split of time is almost 50/50 so the result is that the film doesn't seem to be as full and lively as their shorts are normally. Finlayson is usually my favourite support actor in the Laurel and Hardy shorts but here he doesn't get to do his trademark moves and is more of a straight man than a part of the comedy.

Overall this is still worth watching but I thought it was one of those rare occasions where the duo simply couldn't stretch the central idea to cover the whole short.