Buster s'en va-t'en guerre

This film seems like no one was sure of what to do now that they had to include sound. Keaton shares a number of scenes with Cliff Richards, an odd talent who most reminds me of Charlie McCarthy. Much of the dialog is spoken by the drill Sergent as he screams at Keaton. Keaton's gags are reduced to the sort that would have been throw-aways in his silent films. Many of the pratfalls are forced as you can see Keaton set himself up for another mishap. The entire cast seems unrehearsed. Some of the film is so oddly edited that I wonder if the print we have now was chopped up after the initial release. Compare this film with "Spite Marriage" from a year before and you'll wonder too how the same crew could have made both films. Not recommendable.

Keaton had more control over this film than he had on the previous "Free and Easy". MGM had tried to portray him as a sad clown, but happily they left him alone on this feature. Buster based this film on his experiences in the army during World War I. It is obvious from this movie that Buster was a peace loving man who really detested war. In his social satire, he is more subtle than Chaplin, but it's there. Buster is closer to his silent character here, but he does have to handle dialogue. He's still a little aprehensive, but remember, this was only his second sound film! The gags in this film are as clever as anything he did in his silent features and there is even a little, charming, impromptu musical interlude with Buster and Cliff "Jiminy Cricket" Edwards fooling around on ukeleles. This film was partially remade by Buster as a Columbia two-reeler called "General Nuisance". It is one of his better Columbia efforts.

Buster Keaton stars in this very early sound picture of MGM, and shows all of the pratfalls, trips, stumbles, bumps, falls, and other physical mishaps for which he was known. I rate "Dough Boys" seven stars for two reasons. First is that characteristic for which Keaton became famous as one of the three top male comedians of the silent film era. Second is because of the considerable screenplay in which the MGM lot must have dedicated a great deal of workers and time to build the sets and staff this picture. The portrayals of Army training and then the drudgery of Army service in World War I is quite realistic and impressive. I can't think of any other film about the First World War that showed the conditions of the weather and trench warfare any better.

Of course, this is a comedy, but it's also a romance and a war picture. This was no doubt MGM's experimenting with Keaton to see if he would continue to go over in sound pictures. What most of Hollywood didn't realize at the time - which movie fans of later times knew in hindsight, was that antics with lots of pratfalls and other physical miscues wouldn't have the same weight once sound came to the picture. Screenplays then needed some dialog to go with antics to build the comedy. I think MGM learned quickly, because the very next year, Keaton starred in "Parlor, Bedroom and Bath" which has a rip-snorting hilarious screenplay. And the usual Keaton falls were fewer but other physical antics were used for great effect. That screenplay overall was very good, with a very good cast.

Also aiding in this film are Edward Brophy as Sergeant Brophy, and Cliff Edwards as Nescopeck. Keaton plays Elmer J. Stuyvesant Jr., a wealthy bachelor who tries to get a date with a showgirl, Mary. She rebuffs him until she encounters him again after he has mistakenly enlisted in the Army. A number of comedians made comedies about service during the early years of World War II. Probably the best known of those would be "Buck Privates" of 1941 that starred Bud Abbott and Lou Costello. That is a very good film with some top musical performances as well in the Andrews Sisters and others.

But, for what Abbott and Costello went through in training and otherwise had to do for the comedy, that movie is a picnic compared to what Keaton and others did in this film The trudging through rain and ankle-deep mud goes on and on, and the physical settings here could just as realistically have been taken right out of the front lines in France in 1917.

Keaton fans especially, should enjoy this film. After a couple more feature films with MGM, Keaton made many shorts that went with features to theaters, and he had minor parts in some other films and later, on television.

Buster's talkie years get a bad rap but this one is solid. It's fascinating to watch Buster's take on WWI, especially now that I know he actually was a WWI veteran and saw combat. There's some genuine movie magic here. If you're a Buster fan, it's worth a watch.

After "Free and Easy", I was seriously starting to wonder if I could bear to stick out the rest of Buster Keaton's MGM talkies. But in fact I not only managed to tolerate this; I actually enjoyed it.

"Doughboys" is never going to be anybody's classic, but it's a perfectly decent little picture. The quality of the contents is not great, but pretty consistent; its best moments never quite reach the heights of the best of "Three Ages" or "Spite Marriage", let alone, say, "Steamboat Bill, Jr"... but quite frankly, its worst moments are actually better than the more tedious sections of the former two movies. MGM's script department have, apparently, finally got their act together, and the dialogue is far more fluid -- and funnier -- than the laboured humour of "Free and Easy". Such a benchmark scarcely implies, of course, that the scenes necessarily sparkle in any way, but they're entertaining and seldom outstay their welcome. The cardinal virtue of this film in comparison with its predecessor is that it's rarely an embarrassment to watch.

Keaton himself appears much happier with his material here, and -- again unlike "Free and Easy" -- "Doughboys" clearly bears his stamp. This may be a talkie, but it's recognisably a Buster Keaton film, and allegedly one with autobiographical elements, as when he asks for a smaller pair of Army boots! We see the welcome return of Buster's trademark range of deadpan reactions, and revisit a couple of silent-era gags -- funnier when seen for the first time, but still old friends. The balance of visual versus verbal humour is much more even overall in this film, and it's better for it.

Sadly, given the age-distorted soundtrack of the print one problem this non-American viewer faced was considerable difficulty with some of the actors' accents. Buster himself is fine, but there were a couple of scenes -- including, unfortunately, the finale -- where I completely failed to understand what had just happened because a vital line was delivered in what appeared to be thick dialect.

My other principal dialogue issue is that (apparently gratuitous) line about Buster's being twenty-three, when he is quite evidently ten years older! Since the character is represented at both start and end of the film as being in a fairly senior position in the firm, and since his father and namesake is apparently old enough to have retired, I simply can't see any script logic in wrong-footing the audience in this way.

"Doughboys" doesn't have anything like the inventiveness or laugh quotient of Keaton's own early short films, or the depth of his great silent features, but there's nothing too much wrong with it bar a few mildly tedious stretches. An inoffensive lightweight comedy that no-one -- studio included -- need be ashamed of; as an apprenticeship in the technique of talkie humour this is fine, and it's nice to see places where Keaton is clearly enjoying himself again. Personally, I'd rather watch this than, say, "The Love Nest": at any rate it really doesn't deserve Leonard Maltin's dismissal as "one of Buster's worst films".