When silent comedian Harry Langdon foolishly decided that he could be the next Chaplin by directing himself in his films (firing brilliant people like Frank Capra in the process), his career went into the toilet at an unprecedented speed. After lovely films like LONG PANTS and THE STRONG MAN, his three self-directed efforts were critical and financial failures and led to Harry lingering in Hollywood in 3rd rate comedy shorts that were a shadow of his glory from 1924-1928. However, eighty years later, fans of Langdon are left to wonder if the three disastrous self-directed films from 1927-1928 are really that bad or were the fans just fickle or foolish to dismiss his genius? Fortunately for the curious, two of the three films in question do exist and are available on DVD. I just watched both of them and think that the truth isn't as bad as legend would have it BUT the films are far from genius.
The first of these films, THREE'S A CROWD is indeed a very grim and pathetically unfunny film. It might just be the most maudlin silent comedy ever made and makes Chaplin's THE CIRCUS seem positively upbeat and a barrel of laughs by comparison. I love THE CIRCUS but it is an extremely sad and downbeat film--THREE'S A CROWD is light-years worse and unlike THE CIRCUS isn't so beautiful or artistic--plus, THE CIRCUS had laughs.
However, THE CHASER isn't filled with pathos nor is maudlin--at least not to the degree THREE'S A CROWD is. Aside from the suicide aspect of the film (that is played strictly for laughs), it's a somewhat conventional domestic comedy and isn't all that different from Harry's earlier films. While it's not quite as funny, there are still lots of cute scenes and laughs so that fans of Langdon should enjoy it. Unlike one review (which gave it a 2), it IS a good film and worth seeing but it's NOT like another review (which gave it a 10). Both reviews, in my opinion, seemed to have an agenda--to either bust or prove the notion that all the Langdon-directed films were bad.
The plot, though silly, was also rather cute. Harry is a carousing husband (something he was in several of his previous shorts) and when his wife seeks a divorce, the judge instead sentences Harry to spend 30 days dressed like and acting like the housewife!! This is all pretty cute to watch as he tries, in vain, to do his wife's many household duties. About the only serious negative is that you never really get to see the nosy mother-in-law get her true comeuppance. This left the film with a bit of an unsatisfying ending.
A few nice laughs and an avoidance of career-destroying pathos, this film isn't great but certainly cannot be legitimately blamed for wrecking Langdon's career. That award squarely belongs to THREE'S A CROWD!
The first of these films, THREE'S A CROWD is indeed a very grim and pathetically unfunny film. It might just be the most maudlin silent comedy ever made and makes Chaplin's THE CIRCUS seem positively upbeat and a barrel of laughs by comparison. I love THE CIRCUS but it is an extremely sad and downbeat film--THREE'S A CROWD is light-years worse and unlike THE CIRCUS isn't so beautiful or artistic--plus, THE CIRCUS had laughs.
However, THE CHASER isn't filled with pathos nor is maudlin--at least not to the degree THREE'S A CROWD is. Aside from the suicide aspect of the film (that is played strictly for laughs), it's a somewhat conventional domestic comedy and isn't all that different from Harry's earlier films. While it's not quite as funny, there are still lots of cute scenes and laughs so that fans of Langdon should enjoy it. Unlike one review (which gave it a 2), it IS a good film and worth seeing but it's NOT like another review (which gave it a 10). Both reviews, in my opinion, seemed to have an agenda--to either bust or prove the notion that all the Langdon-directed films were bad.
The plot, though silly, was also rather cute. Harry is a carousing husband (something he was in several of his previous shorts) and when his wife seeks a divorce, the judge instead sentences Harry to spend 30 days dressed like and acting like the housewife!! This is all pretty cute to watch as he tries, in vain, to do his wife's many household duties. About the only serious negative is that you never really get to see the nosy mother-in-law get her true comeuppance. This left the film with a bit of an unsatisfying ending.
A few nice laughs and an avoidance of career-destroying pathos, this film isn't great but certainly cannot be legitimately blamed for wrecking Langdon's career. That award squarely belongs to THREE'S A CROWD!