Mestres de Baile

In a remarkable coincidence, I found out in the morning paper that today is the day Oliver Hardy died 50 years ago. That made me want to watch The Dancing Masters right away since I checked that out of the library last Sunday. Since this was one of Hardy's and partner Laurel's latter-day features they made for, in Stan's words, "those Fox people", there isn't much in the way of logic in the comic set pieces that are depicted here but for the most part the movie is pretty amusing with many laughs and smiles from me when the boys are by themselves or whenever they have someone new, like leading lady Trudy Marshall, participate in one of their routines. In fact, Ms. Marshall recounted to one L & H biographer how she told Stan and Ollie how she'd love to do comedy so they let her in the "Mixed Hats" routine in which she also incorporated plates. She became known as "One-Take Marshall" from that incident in her cherished memory! Also appearing, without credit, was Robert Mitchum in one of his early thug roles, here talking a little fast for his usual character. Also, Margaret Dumont, usual Marx Brothers foil, provides some amusing moments. Alas, the movie falls apart at the end with a really illogical bus chase that mixes obvious back projection scenes with obvious model scenes to uneven results. Stan's line at the end does partially make up for that. So while The Dancing Masters is not an L & H classic, it's certainly worth a look for die-hard fans of the boys. Rest in eternal peace, Mr. Hardy.

Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy's appeal, as has been said quite a number of times, has always been completely understandable. They had such great comic timing and memorable contrasting and distinct personalities. The chemistry was considered legendary, seeing them in their prime there is a very good reason for that. Their best material, both verbal and particularly physically, was amusing to hilarious, with quite a fair share of classics.

Unfortunately, Laurel and Hardy had a drastic decline in the post-Hal Roach period post-1940 (know that a few of the late 30s films were less than great but not to this extent). A period when Laurel and Hardy became underused, they and their material on the most part were tired, they were put in settings that they didn't gel in, the films seemed to forget what made Laurel and Hardy's prime period as great as it was, a lot of the verbal humour was dumb and trite, the supporting casts were variable and a few were too plot-heavy and the plots were far from great. Some of that can be seen in one of the lesser films from this period 'The Dancing Masters'. As one can see from my average/mixed feelings rating, it is not a terrible film but it could have been much better.

Laurel and Hardy are the best things about it. They have great comic timing that makes one remember what made them so great in their prime, they actually feel like leads instead of being underused and too sidelined amidst less interesting material, their personalities are interesting and entertaining and most importantly they are a lot of fun to watch. They also seem to be enjoying themselves and their chemistry sparkles. Their material here is also great fun, none of it classic but it amuses and it doesn't veer too much into silliness. Also liked that there is more emphasis on the physical comedy than them utterly trite and insultingly dumb one-liners heard in some of their other post-Hal Roach films. The locked safe, rhetorical angle and the hiding from Margaret Dumont scenes fare the best.

Dumont and the cameo from Robert Mitchum are the supporting cast standouts, the only ones who stood out for me. Some of the film is nicely photographed.

However, 'The Dancing Masters' is lacking elsewhere. The worst thing about it is the story, which is a muddled mess, with too much going on over-complicating the action and some of it adds nothing. The bus chase sequence, as well as looking particularly cheap, is utter illogical chaos.

Too much of the dialogue is trite and other than some of the photography 'The Dancing Masters' is one of the worst looking Laurel and Hardy films, not just from this period but throughout their filmography. Especially the editing, with the rollercoaster scene inducing nausea, and some blatantly obvious back projection in the bus chase. Other than Dumont and Mitchum, the rest of the supporting cast don't stand out in any way.

In conclusion, watchable but lacking in a lot of areas. 5/10 Bethany Cox

One reviewer wrote to the effect that: "The 1940's (transferring from Roach Studios to 20th Century Fox) was a sad time for Laurel And Hardy."

I don't think it was such a "sad time". In 1940 Laurel and Hardy were freed from their contract with Roach Studios. They could put some of their own ideas into their films. As far as I know they were still in good health. They looked good for their age. IT'S NOT A CRIME TO GET OLDER as I wrote above! Were their movies in the 1940's as good as in previous years? No. But we're talking about comparing their output in the '40's to some VERY CLASSIC FILMS done before. So, it's only by comparison that these 1940 films were "lacking" in relation to the genius of earlier efforts. I would prefer to watch these later Laurel and Hardy films any day rather than some of the other comic films by, say, Abbot and Costello or The Marx Brothers or The Three Stooges. Speaking for myself alone , I'd prefer "the boys" to any of the others!

This film, "The Dancing Masters" is almost as good as "Great Guns" which is my favorite film from this era. There are NOT "constant laughs" like in some earlier films... the story is silly but interesting...it doesn't "drag" in other words...and "the boys" look VERY CUTE in their "dancing master costumes"! You won't roll on the floor but you'll be entertained....so..why not give the "senior citizens" an hour of your time...I think you'll enjoy yourself if you have a positive attitude! "The Boys" did!!! :o) boland7214@aol.com

I just can't see for the life of me why these enjoyable latter Fox movies have gotten such a bad rap all these years, as they actually hold up well now and I think they've suddenly become appreciated in a new light with the advent of new superior-looking DVD releases. THE DANCING MASTERS has a bunch of things going on all over the place and the plot is not very focused. Laurel and Hardy are only dance instructors for the first 5 minutes, and then that's that as they get involved with a young man, his girl, and an invisible ray invention. Meandering plot lines don't matter in the least because we're here to laugh at Stan and Ollie, and everything they do in this one is pretty funny. They're on screen a lot and this is a joy. Look out for a young Robert Mitchum (who's uncredited early on in a scene). *** out of ****

Up until Fox released these two three-disc sets of Laurel and Hardy's later films, I had only seen the three that had been previously available on video - and "The Dancing Masters" wasn't one of them. I have to say that as a life-long Laurel and Hardy fan I was very pleasantly surprised.

Even taking the considerable negatives into account: rock-bottom production values, chop-shop editing, and an incoherent "narrative," it's downright astonishing to behold this pair so effortlessly mining genuine laughs from such old and cast-away material.

From the "safe combination" routine near the opening to the "wet pants" bit with co-star Bob Bailey, I found this film to be a real treat - and I screened it with a friend who is not a big L&H fan - he loved it. It's the little things Stan and Ollie did - the gestures, the expressions, the glances - that made their style of comedy absolutely unique in film history. Like "The Bullfighters," my favorite among the L&H Fox films, this one has plenty of those moments, and has such a short running time that you can stick it in your player again right away and savor what you missed the first time around. I can't speak for the legions of other L&H fans, but I personally experienced a higher laugh count from this film than from many of their more minor Hal Roach shorts (sorry, Fox-haters).

The only thing I did not like or understand about "The Dancing Masters" was the print quality. As released in this two-volume DVD set, the other five Fox films look to have been pressed from the actual masters, thus providing superlative picture and sound quality. But, this film suffers from a grainy, scratchy picture that even at times grows blurry and somewhat undefined. And, there several jarring "pops" and a lot of low-volume crackling on the soundtrack. Is there anyone out there who knows why Fox couldn't find a better print for release with this otherwise outstanding set?