June 7, 2019
Stan & Ollie –
2018, UK
Throughout Jon S. Baird’s 2018 film, Stan & Ollie, there’s frequent reference to a movie referred to
as “the elephant film.” Realistically, the film elects not to have any of the
characters explain the reference, as who, in real life, stops to clarify what they
are talking about when both parties are already in the know. The film does show
us a short scene from it, and even gives us the first name of its co-star –
Harry. Again, the film omits the last name because everyone around Harry knows just
who he is, so there’s no need to add a moniker. I, however, was not in the
know, so after watching the film, I looked it up. “The elephant film” actually had
three titles: Zenobia, Elephants Never Forget, and It’s Spring Again. It was released in
1939, when Oliver Hardy was under contract with Hal Roach, but Stan Laurel was
not. The film was a financial failure. Eventually Stan Laurel, after initiating
legal action, was rehired, and he and Oliver Hardy made two other films for Hal
Roach, A Chump at Oxford and Saps at Sea.
The incident, according to Stan & Ollie, left a permanent chasm between the two of them,
with Laurel regarding Hardy’s role in the film as a betrayal and a sign of
weakness, and Hardy looking back at it with regret, yet also thinking that his
long-time friend should be more understanding. In the film’s opening scene, set
in 1937, during the filming of Way Out
West, we see the ease with which they relate to each other and the concern
they have for each other’s welfare. Laurel (Steve Coogan) gently comments on
Hardy’s gambling and number of marriages (and costly divorces), and Hardy (John
C. Reilly) advices baby steps when approaching Roach about getting ownership of
their films, as Chaplin did, as well as higher salaries. The advice is not
taken, and the result of the ensuing blow-up between Laurel and Roach is the
aforementioned disaster, the elephant film.
The film flashes forward sixteen years to a time when the
comic pair found themselves on a tour of the U.K. in preparation for a parody
of Robin Hood that Laurel and Hardy were hoping to make. The tour starts off
poorly: cheap hotels with hardly any services, less than half-filled houses, a
manager whose other acts seem to be getting priority over them. It is suggested
that they do pro-bono promotional appearances, a request that is both a
reminder of their diminished status and an insult to people of their fame. Yet
they have their desired effect. Soon their faces are all over the news, and
fans are showing up in droves. Happy times are here again, for a little while
at least.
To really appreciate Stan
& Ollie, it helps to remember what Hollywood was like for celebrities
in the 1930s. Laurel and Hardy made films at a time when movie studios had most
of the power in Hollywood, and if a studio head wanted you to make a film, you made
the film. Your contract stipulated it. It was also a time when the competition
was fierce, and a downturn in one person’s career gave his rival an opportunity.
We see this in an interesting moment when Laurel stares a poster for Abbott and
Costello’s latest film, Abbott and Costello
Go to Mars. It was also a time when there was less access to older movies.
If a movie wasn’t felt to have an audience after its initial release, it simply
disappeared. If you woke up one day wanting to re-watch a particular movie, you
were most likely out of luck.
Perhaps this is why Laurel and Hardy’s live act was so loved
by those who saw it. Their act was akin to a greatest hits album, and seeing
them perform it onstage brought back memories of dates, movie plots, and much
more innocent times. In watching them perform the dance from Way Out West, the audience was recalling
not simply a movie, but a time before war, death, and, for some, adulthood and
its many responsibilities reared their ugly heads. Without that nostalgic power,
the number would have been just two people dancing together, and they were
admittedly not the greatest of dancers. But just listen to the applause.
Years ago, I read that Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy did not
spend much time together off camera. Hardy loved fishing and golf, and during
lulls in shooting, he would leave the studio to get in some extra rounds.
Laurel was said to be the creative force behind the act, spending long hours
writing and choreographing many of the bits we see Laurel and Hardy perform in
the film. What we see onscreen, especially during a heated argument midway through,
bares this out. However, it also reveals something that is likely true of most
creative partnerships: their longevity is likely due to love and distance –
love for someone both professionally and personally and distance from each
other when off work. Perhaps it’s the former that was damaged when Oliver Hardy
went along with Roach’s decision to pair him with Harry Langdon. In Laurel’s
eyes, Hardy could have stuck up for him, but chose not to.
Admittedly, the first half of the film sticks too closely to
the tried and true narrative of a celebrity trying to make a comeback, with all
of its bumps and hiccups. There are the many obligatory remarks about hearing
that the two of them had retired, the reenactments of their performances go on
a tad bit too long, and I could have done without the montage of tour stops and
newspapers headlines announcing the increased popularity of their shows. There
are more original ways of expressing this. However, the film hits its stride
upon the arrival of the comic duo and their wives in London. In a way, the film
is about three relationships, that of Laurel and Hardy, and those of their
marriages, for each marriage is a portrait of love and support. The wives, played
by Nina Arianda (Ida Laurel) and Shirley Henderson (Lucille Hardy), keep the
pair going as much as anything else, and I was fascinated by the varying
personalities and styles of the two women.
A film like this lives and dies on the performances of its
cast. We must see in them the embodiment on these cherished figures, and Coogan
and Reilly do not disappoint. In fact, these may be my favorite performances of
theirs, and that’s saying something. From their movements during their
re-enactment of Laurel and Hardy’s most famous cinematic moments to the subtle physical
gestures that each called his own, they embody the Laurel and Hardy we know
from the screen. However, where they are most effective is in showing us Laurel
and Hardy offscreen. We see the differences in their personalities, yet also we
see the way they play off each other during the creative process. What’s more,
we see their failings, for example, Hardy’s gambling and Laurel’s stubbornness.
Perhaps what Coogan and Reilly most excel at is at demonstrating that the love that
Laurel and Hardy shared onscreen – the way every argument or mistake was followed
up by glances of forgiveness and affection – was true when the camera stopped rolling.
Sure, the make-ups we see are not like the ones they exhibit in their movies,
but they are no less sincere and touching. Perhaps this is part of the reason
why the film’s finale works as well as it does. We don’t want anything to end,
either. (on DVD and Blu-ray)
3 and a half stars
No comments:
Post a Comment