Topic: The Stage Hand (1933) - Harry Langdon

[Paul Pain]

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0024608/

FYI, this is a movie that was made in 1932, hence why the odd cast and the odd jumps.  When Harry Langdon signed with Educational, they also bought the rights to this film.  It was cut down from likely movie length to this, and that's why we have an inexplicable girlfriend and prospective father-in-law and a confusing plot.

Written by Harry Langdon.  Directed by Harry Langdon.  Starring Harry Langdon!  Yes, folks, he did all three in this, I believe the only time he was credited as such.

Well, Harry gets some great moments for his personality here.  The speakeasy scene is a classic Harry moment; he just... Harry drunk is funny even if he's not a convincing drunk, if that makes sense.

The following scenes are just... Weird.  It's supposed to be a parody in the overarching sense, but still the crowd in the theater is just weird.  There are for certain some jokes that I don't get because of a lack of understanding of theater tropes, but it still is disjointed because this portion of the film has more sudden jumps than the rest of it.

Just sit down and enjoy a series of disjointed vignettes and have fun watching Harry do the things he does best.

[Umbrella Sam]

Very disjointed for sure; not sure why the people behind the play are OK with Harry messing up the opening or even why the audience knows who he is, not to mention the women in the play randomly just fall for Harry at some point. And then there’s also the suddenly thrown in ending with Harry’s girlfriend(?) suddenly announcing he saved her father’s job. I have to admit, that last part actually did get a pretty good laugh out of me; the sheer randomness of it made it funny. It felt like it was parodying those kinds of plots you often see in movies where the main character has to save a theater or something along those lines, but it’s usually kind of in the background while other story elements take precedence. It surprisingly kind of works in that context, even though I’m pretty sure that wasn’t the intention. It’s just a bad editing job.

This sounds like it should be a recipe for disaster, but this short is actually really funny. I love the opening where Harry is pretending to do the doorbell effects and the actress in the scene gets angry at how unprofessional she considers his imitations. The speakeasy scene is one of those great moments where Harry gets to just mess around with a small set; it’s bizarre, but Harry has that ability to carry a scene like this, even when it basically just amounts to him deciding between drinks. The actual theater part is, again, odd for how disjointed it is, but the obvious overacting from the stage actors gets a laugh from me and Harry gets some fun moments trying to keep everything all together; he literally just drags the leading man’s body on to the stage and doesn’t seem to care that the audience can clearly see him doing that. For some reason, that got a larger laugh out of me than I was expecting. The audience aspect is odd at times, but I do like how they make fun of the villain when he has to repeat his lines.

A very odd short, but knowing it was cut down helps give a better understanding and even in this bizarre, cut down form, a really funny film actually shines through. I enjoyed it and think it’s kind of a shame we probably won’t ever be able to see it in its full form.

[Paul Pain]

Very disjointed for sure; not sure why the people behind the play are OK with Harry messing up the opening or even why the audience knows who he is, not to mention the women in the play randomly just fall for Harry at some point. And then there’s also the suddenly thrown in ending with Harry’s girlfriend(?) suddenly announcing he saved her father’s job. I have to admit, that last part actually did get a pretty good laugh out of me; the sheer randomness of it made it funny. It felt like it was parodying those kinds of plots you often see in movies where the main character has to save a theater or something along those lines, but it’s usually kind of in the background while other story elements take precedence. It surprisingly kind of works in that context, even though I’m pretty sure that wasn’t the intention. It’s just a bad editing job.

This sounds like it should be a recipe for disaster, but this short is actually really funny. I love the opening where Harry is pretending to do the doorbell effects and the actress in the scene gets angry at how unprofessional she considers his imitations. The speakeasy scene is one of those great moments where Harry gets to just mess around with a small set; it’s bizarre, but Harry has that ability to carry a scene like this, even when it basically just amounts to him deciding between drinks. The actual theater part is, again, odd for how disjointed it is, but the obvious overacting from the stage actors gets a laugh from me and Harry gets some fun moments trying to keep everything all together; he literally just drags the leading man’s body on to the stage and doesn’t seem to care that the audience can clearly see him doing that. For some reason, that got a larger laugh out of me than I was expecting. The audience aspect is odd at times, but I do like how they make fun of the villain when he has to repeat his lines.

A very odd short, but knowing it was cut down helps give a better understanding and even in this bizarre, cut down form, a really funny film actually shines through. I enjoyed it and think it’s kind of a shame we probably won’t ever be able to see it in its full form.

This review should be pasted on every website ever in place of the useless reviews found therein.

[metaldams]

      First off, if this is indeed cut down from a feature, it goes a long way in describing the disjointed nature of this short.  I think you two did a great job of describing this one.  I will certainly echo the fact Harry and the girl at the last shot is indeed funny because it just seemed to come out of nowhere!  I’m creeping up on Harry’s age in this short, so it’s good to know it’s possible some random twenty something will declare her love for me.     All kidding aside, that aspect does add an extra layer of humor the older I get - one Langdon probably wasn’t looking for.

      The speak easy scene was indeed funny.  I really like the idea at first there’s the impression Harry is some teetotaling innocent when in actuality, he’s more a beer guy instead of a liquor guy.  I got a kick out of the scene where they had to repeat the scene on stage and the second time, it was the audience who said the line before the deflated actor walked off stage.  The other point I want to make is that I think Harry playing a stage hand really works.  Again this plays into the idea of Harry being kind of separate and off to the side from the rest of the world.  Everyone else acts in the play, Harry just tags along and doesn’t feel 100% in the crowd.

      Overall, pretty disjointed but fun anyway.

[metaldams]

….just a random thought.  I’m thinking about the age difference between these comedians and their on screen girls and then thinking about the difference with W.C. Fields.  Fields had the Kathleen Howards of the world breathing down his neck and it adds a layer of realism in the humor that perhaps Langdon, Lloyd, Keaton and Chase could have incorporated a little more as they got older.

[Umbrella Sam]

….just a random thought.  I’m thinking about the age difference between these comedians and their on screen girls and then thinking about the difference with W.C. Fields.  Fields had the Kathleen Howards of the world breathing down his neck and it adds a layer of realism in the humor that perhaps Langdon, Lloyd, Keaton and Chase could have incorporated a little more as they got older.

Even though she was about a decade younger than him, I feel like this could apply to Betty Blythe and Langdon in MISBEHAVING HUSBANDS; at least to me, they seem very convincing as an older couple in that film. What’s ironic, though, is that just two years later, Blythe ended up playing the mother to Langdon’s (kind of) love interest in HOUSE OF ERRORS!

[Dr. Mabuse]

The great Langdon makes this strangely edited short (filmed in Grantwood, New Jersey — where Harry planned to direct and star in a series of two-reel comedies for Royal Studios) well worth seeing. Choppy but enjoyable. 

I came across this clipping in a February 1932 issue of "The Film Daily."

[Dr. Mabuse]

More information about "The Show Goat/The Stage Hand" from Chuck Harter and Michael J. Hayde's "Little Elf: A Celebration of Harry Langdon" (2012).  According to the trade publications, Royal Studios folded after two years — taken over by independent producer-director Bud Pollard in September 1933.

[metaldams]

The great Langdon makes this strangely edited short (filmed in Grantwood, New Jersey — where Harry planned to direct and star in a series of two-reel comedies for Royal Studios) well worth seeing. Choppy but enjoyable. 

I came across this clipping in a February 1932 issue of "The Film Daily."

Interesting.  “Show Goat” sounds like a parody of the musical “Show Boat.”  The film version was made in 1936, directed by James Whale and it’s my understanding that it’s failure caused the Laemmle’s to sell Universal.

[Dr. Mabuse]

“Show Goat” sounds like a parody of the musical “Show Boat.” The film version was made in 1936, directed by James Whale and it’s my understanding that its failure caused the Laemmles to sell Universal.

The 1936 version of "Show Boat" was a tremendous gamble for the cash-strapped Laemmles. They were forced to seek a $750,000 loan from Standard Capital Corporation in November 1935 — using their controlling interest in Universal as collateral. The lavish production went $300,000 over budget, costing $1.2 million. Standard Capital called in the loan (which the Laemmles could not pay) and seized control of the studio in March 1936.

Released two months after the Standard Capital takeover, "Show Boat" was one of 1936's biggest hits, but the Laemmles would not benefit from its success. Carl Junior's extravagant spending finally caught up with the family . . . and they never made another film.