Soitenly
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Restless Knights (1935)  (Read 4378 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline metaldams

  • Global Moderator
  • Egghead
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,095
  • Gender: Male
  • Sugar Daddy in waiting
    • View Profile
Restless Knights (1935)
« on: June 01, 2013, 07:46:41 AM »
  • Publish
  • http://www.threestooges.net/filmography/episode/6

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0026925/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

    The best part of RESTLESS KNIGHTS is the wrestling match.  Minus the parts where there are obvious dummies involved, one can picture this as what it must've been like to watch the boys on stage.  All three get fairly involved in this scene, with Larry as the ref and Moe and Curly as the wrestlers, and the slapstick is consistently entertaining.  That scene where Moe rips off Curly's chest hair hurts!

    The rest of the short to me is a fairly average Stooge short.  A good short overall but nothing else that really stands out.  Well, the hot stake/steak - cold chop pun is one of my favorites, but I think the pace of he series picks up a bit more when Del Lord is the director, which starts next short. 

    Not that plot is all that important in Stooge shorts, but I find it a bit strange this short ends with the boys and the queen knocked out and the abductors just regaining their conscious about to find them.  A bit of an uncomfortable ending there.

    6/10
    « Last Edit: November 29, 2014, 10:15:28 PM by metaldams »

    Offline Shemp_Diesel

    • Bunionhead
    • ******
    • Posts: 2,242
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #1 on: June 01, 2013, 08:26:03 AM »
  • Publish
  • Restless Knights I might say is the first hiccup by the stooges. Not to say it's a terrible short, but it could have been so much better. The opening scenes with Walter Brennan as the stooges father are a keeper, as is the wrestling match mentioned by Metal.

    After that wrestling match though, the short falters & struggles to the finish line & the ending just leaves you kind of hanging. Fortunately though, the stooges would be bound for greater achievements as the next short is when the great Del Lord began directing their films, but I'm sure we'll get into that later on next week.

    Overall, I rate "Restless" a 5 out of 10.
    Now you ask me if I believe a man can become a wolf. Well, if you mean can he take on the physical characteristics of an animal, no, it's fantastic. However, I do believe that most anything can happen to a man in his own mind.

    Offline Squirrelbait

    • Puddinhead
    • ***
    • Posts: 257
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #2 on: June 02, 2013, 03:43:43 AM »
  • Publish
  • ...And their days ain't too hot either! Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk!

    Seriously, this one has never been one of my favorites. As mentioned, the wrestling scene and their first multi-corridor chase scene are some of the few bright spots.

    Set in the Kingdom of Anesthesia, the Stooges set out to protect the Queen from the dastardly Prince Boris and his henchmen.

    Highlights:
    The aforementioned wrestling/chase scene
    'That's a fowl bet' *BONK*
    'I'll take care of myself! Woo Woo!'
    'We'll throw the other one to the dogs!'

    Again, watch for Walter Brennan (this time as the Stooges' Father). Also, the ending is kinda cheap. The Stooges knock each other out, but we never really see what finally happens to the bad guys.

    My Rating: 4.5/10

     [3stooges]
    If there's no other place around the place, I reckon this must be the place, I reckon.

    Offline falsealarms

    • Bunionhead
    • ******
    • Posts: 2,296
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #3 on: June 02, 2013, 04:56:44 PM »
  • Publish
  • RESTLESS NIGHTS isn't one of my favorites. It isn't without its moments (wrestling scene, chase scene) but for the most part it falls flat. There were no shortage of great Stooge shorts from this period, but this just wasn't one of them. It's kind of slow in spots.

    The next one after this, POP GOES THE EASEL, more than makes up for RESTLESS KNIGHTS.

    Offline metaldams

    • Global Moderator
    • Egghead
    • ******
    • Posts: 6,095
    • Gender: Male
    • Sugar Daddy in waiting
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #4 on: June 02, 2013, 08:56:58 PM »
  • Publish
  • Is anybody else participating watching a short a week like I am as we go along?  I find it's a fun way to keep The Three Stooges in regular rotation without overdoing it.  I'm enjoying this review thing so far.

    I can also tell by comments here next week's entry should be a good one with POP GOES THE EASEL, but we'll get to that next week.

    Offline Big Chief Apumtagribonitz

    • Numbskull
    • ****
    • Posts: 766
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #5 on: June 03, 2013, 11:58:53 AM »
  • Publish
  • The opening scene in this one is terrific:  thunder and lightning, howling wind, energetic young stooges, good jokes ( Baron of Greymatter ), and a resounding triple-slap by Walter Brennan, who is forty here and looks ninety-five.  Then it gets - what ? - claustrophobic?  A bit too slow?  The swordfight is good,                  " Strongest feet in the kingdom " is good, and one can forgive the poor guy who has to say that "...Duke of Mixture " line, the references have just become dated and no longer funny.  Despite these individual highlights, they still seem to fall out of their groove somehow.

    Offline Lefty

    • Birdbrain
    • ****
    • Posts: 705
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #6 on: June 03, 2013, 03:05:53 PM »
  • Publish
  • Is anybody else participating watching a short a week like I am as we go along?  I find it's a fun way to keep The Three Stooges in regular rotation without overdoing it.  I'm enjoying this review thing so far.

    That must be quite tempting for you to watch more episodes.  My wife and I view three on Sunday evening before sack time, and maybe once in a while as a 17-minute filler.

    As for Restless Knights, I agree with the majority that it wasn't one of the better shorts of the "Early Curly" era.  Maybe Queenie should have given the Stooges wrestling lessons.  "Now in order to become wrestlers, you must follow me closely and do exactly what I do."

    Offline metaldams

    • Global Moderator
    • Egghead
    • ******
    • Posts: 6,095
    • Gender: Male
    • Sugar Daddy in waiting
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #7 on: June 03, 2013, 09:16:52 PM »
  • Publish
  • That must be quite tempting for you to watch more episodes.  My wife and I view three on Sunday evening before sack time, and maybe once in a while as a 17-minute filler.

    As for Restless Knights, I agree with the majority that it wasn't one of the better shorts of the "Early Curly" era.  Maybe Queenie should have given the Stooges wrestling lessons.  "Now in order to become wrestlers, you must follow me closely and do exactly what I do."

    Sounds like you have an awesome wife.  An old girlfriend once watched A PLUMBING WE WILL GO with me and looks at me like I was insane because I enjoyed it.  It wasn't even an "this is not my thing but I can respect you for liking it," reaction, it was literally like there was something wrong with me.  Needless to say, the older and wiser (?!) I get, the more I realize she's not for me.

    For now I'm cool with the one short a week thing, as I have plenty else to watch like oh, say 20 Bowery Boys features, to hold me over that I've yet seen.  But in the next few years I have a feeling my brother will dub my nephew old enough to watch The Three Stooges.  When that happens, a short a week won't be possible.

    Offline Kopfy2013

    • Puddinhead
    • ***
    • Posts: 308
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #8 on: June 04, 2013, 12:04:38 AM »
  • Publish
  • This is an OK short.

    As mentioned the wrestling scene is the highlight.

    Question: Has Geneva Mitchell ever been discussed on this sight?

    She seems to have a story.  She died young but cannot find the reason.  Here is what Wikipedia says about her:

    Mitchell's circumstances often made the news. She impulsively married and quickly threw over a scion of the prominent industrial Savage family, was often seen with actor/director Lowell Sherman, and reported her brother as having been kidnapped by gangsters. She became entangled in legal wranglings involving Sherman's estate, and her publicist was sentenced to jail over a stunt she reportedly instigated.

      [3stooges]
    Niagara Falls

    Offline metaldams

    • Global Moderator
    • Egghead
    • ******
    • Posts: 6,095
    • Gender: Male
    • Sugar Daddy in waiting
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #9 on: June 04, 2013, 07:31:17 AM »
  • Publish
  • This is an OK short.

    As mentioned the wrestling scene is the highlight.

    Question: Has Geneva Mitchell ever been discussed on this sight?

    She seems to have a story.  She died young but cannot find the reason.  Here is what Wikipedia says about her:

    Mitchell's circumstances often made the news. She impulsively married and quickly threw over a scion of the prominent industrial Savage family, was often seen with actor/director Lowell Sherman, and reported her brother as having been kidnapped by gangsters. She became entangled in legal wranglings involving Sherman's estate, and her publicist was sentenced to jail over a stunt she reportedly instigated.

      [3stooges]

    Be it real life or the ending of RESTLESS KNIGHTS, no one knows what happens to poor Geneva.  I have no clue either, but sources say she was in bad health for a few years.  That's all I know.

    Offline stooge1029

    • Bonehead
    • **
    • Posts: 116
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #10 on: June 04, 2013, 09:05:11 AM »
  • Publish
  • Highlight of this short for me is Curlys name "Baron of Grey Matter" Love the pun there. As a kid I didnt understand it but one day once I found out what grey matter was it clicked and I thought it was hilarious.

    Offline Liz

    • Donald O'Connor's and Gene Kelly's #1 Fan
    • Puddinhead
    • ***
    • Posts: 259
    • Gender: Female
      • View Profile
      • The Psycho Ward's Classic Film Reviews - Request a film to be reviewed!
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #11 on: June 04, 2013, 10:56:42 AM »
  • Publish
  • Best parts of this short were the beginning with the Stooges' father and the wrestling match.
    IT'S ALIVE!!!!

    Offline JazzBill

    • Knothead
    • *****
    • Posts: 1,316
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #12 on: June 04, 2013, 08:13:19 PM »
  • Publish
  • That must be quite tempting for you to watch more episodes.  My wife and I view three on Sunday evening before sack time, and maybe once in a while as a 17-minute filler.



    The only thing my wife likes about the Three Stooges is that once a year I take off for a few days to attend the fan club meeting. Shes going to be really disappointed when she finds out that we don't have the meetings every year now. But then again I might just take off and go somewhere else just to make her happy. That's just the kind of loving husband I am.
    I have to agree with Metal. I too have been watching them before posting and was just marveling at how talented Curly was in his prime. He is so vibrant and quick on his feet. It's a pleasure to watch him. I like this short but like most everyone else I don't seem to care for it as much as the previous ones. One thing I do like about this short is that I believe this is the first short with Stanley Blystone.  He ended up being one of my favorite supporting players. I give this one a 7.
    "When in Chicago call Stockyards 1234, Ask for Ruby".

    Offline Kopfy2013

    • Puddinhead
    • ***
    • Posts: 308
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #13 on: June 04, 2013, 11:27:21 PM »
  • Publish
  • This is an OK short.

    As mentioned the wrestling scene is the highlight.

    Question: Has Geneva Mitchell ever been discussed on this sight?

    She seems to have a story.  She died young but cannot find the reason.  Here is what Wikipedia says about her:

    Mitchell's circumstances often made the news. She impulsively married and quickly threw over a scion of the prominent industrial Savage family, was often seen with actor/director Lowell Sherman, and reported her brother as having been kidnapped by gangsters. She became entangled in legal wranglings involving Sherman's estate, and her publicist was sentenced to jail over a stunt she reportedly instigated.


    Here is more information on Geneva.  Remember, all this drama came before she was on Stooge shorts. Still what she died of is a mystery and with all her drama you wonder if there is more to the story.

    http://www.glamourgirlsofthesilverscreen.com/show/689/Geneva+Mitchell/index.html
     
     
    Niagara Falls

    Offline Kopfy2013

    • Puddinhead
    • ***
    • Posts: 308
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #14 on: June 04, 2013, 11:28:31 PM »
  • Publish
  • p.s. need some help on how you get the blue box from a previous post ... sorry, I have issues on formatting.  Please forgive. [pie]
    Niagara Falls

    Offline falsealarms

    • Bunionhead
    • ******
    • Posts: 2,296
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #15 on: June 05, 2013, 02:10:58 PM »
  • Publish
  • I'd be interested to see Geneva Mitchell's lone comeback short, the Andy Clyde entry ANDY PLAYS HOOKEY (1946). It was her first film appearance in 10 years.

    She married four times with the last marriage occurring in Feb. 1948, just over a year before she died. When she tied the knot for the fourth time, she was working as a bookkeeper in the manufacturing industry. Her fourth husband was industrial engineer Daniel Tuttle.

    Her full name was Geneva Doris Mitchell.

    Her signature:


    Offline JazzBill

    • Knothead
    • *****
    • Posts: 1,316
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #16 on: June 05, 2013, 03:35:08 PM »
  • Publish
  • p.s. need some help on how you get the blue box from a previous post ... sorry, I have issues on formatting.  Please forgive. [pie]

    Up on the right top hand corner it says "quote" hit that first.
    "When in Chicago call Stockyards 1234, Ask for Ruby".

    Offline JazzBill

    • Knothead
    • *****
    • Posts: 1,316
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #17 on: June 05, 2013, 03:42:45 PM »
  • Publish
  • I didn't realize Geneva Michell had so much drama going on in her life. She certainly didn't look like the type. This is pretty interesting stuff.   
    "When in Chicago call Stockyards 1234, Ask for Ruby".

    Offline Kopfy2013

    • Puddinhead
    • ***
    • Posts: 308
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #18 on: June 06, 2013, 02:25:51 PM »
  • Publish
  • Quote
    Up on the right top hand corner it says "quote" hit that first.

    Thanks!
    Niagara Falls

    Offline archiezappa

    • Numbskull
    • ****
    • Posts: 910
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #19 on: June 08, 2013, 04:37:58 PM »
  • Publish
  • She may have died from being hit in the head with a blunt instrument.  This is just speculation.   ::)

    Offline Mr. Umpchay

    • Grapehead
    • *
    • Posts: 12
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #20 on: August 18, 2013, 08:42:53 PM »
  • Publish

  • "Restless Knights" features some good bits and although it lacks energy, it doesn't fail to entertain up to the wine cellar scene. Louis Silvers should have had to pay royalties to the estate of Italian opera composer, Giuseppe Verdi. That title music sounds like it came straight out of Aida, Act 2. Nevertheless, it is appropriate for any scene which features three zany characters of noble blood. The opening scene in the midst of a tempest (How Shakespearian!) features the great Walter Brennan in an early role as the father of three young fellows who still sleep in their parent's bed. Its a great scene with a well-executed triple slap. Geneva Mitchell is appropriately regal in temperament as the Queenie and Stanley Blystone as the Captain of the Guard makes his first of many appearances in the shorts.

    The second scene begins promising as the boys enter the royal court accompanied by some of the worst trumpeting ever recorded. The boys have some great material here. The whole "parisites" dialogue is really funny. The wrestling match is entertaining and is used as a distraction for Prince Boris (George Baxter, who was born a parisite) as he abducts the Queenie. Curly's joke about trumping the Queen is marvelously funny, unless you aren't into card games. Of course, the boys are blamed for the Queen's disappearance and are arrested and sentenced to death. Curly's "an arrow escape" comment is the best part of this sequence of dialogue. The boys end up escaping thanks to some distracting female eye candy. Thus ends the entertaining portion of this short.

    The final scene in the wine cellar is just bad film-making, and its not that funny. The short ends prematurely with no conflict resolution. There is a goof in that scene that has not been documented on the filmography. Can you find it in the last scene? I'll keep it to myself for a while to see if anyone finds it.

    All in all, this is a decent short, but I won't watch it much. There are just too many others that are better in every way. The wrestling scene is pretty much the only thing worth revisiting.

    Verdict: 6 pokes. This short gets a  [pie].

    Offline Larrys#1

    • Chucklehead
    • ***
    • Posts: 235
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #21 on: December 06, 2013, 04:04:34 PM »
  • Publish
  • Weak, but does have some funny moments here and there. The opening scene with the father was pretty funny and so were some parts of the wrestling bit. The sword fight wasn't bad, but not all that great either. The whole ending scene with the stooges saving the queen was a bit boring though.

    6/10

    Offline Paul Pain

    • Moronika's resident meteorologist
    • Moderator
    • Knothead
    • ******
    • Posts: 1,172
    • Gender: Male
    • The heartthrob of millions!
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #22 on: September 14, 2014, 11:39:18 AM »
  • Publish
  • A weak short overall for the era in which it was written, but not too bad.  6/10 for the weak second half after such a strong opening.
    #1 fire kibitzer

    Offline GreenCanaries

    • President of the Johnny Kascier Fan Club
    • Chucklehead
    • ***
    • Posts: 160
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #23 on: April 20, 2015, 10:07:03 AM »
  • Publish
  • The firing squad: the two guards leftmost to Blystone are Jack Hill and Charles Dorety.

    Also: I noticed Jack in the cast listings for Horses' Collars and Dutiful But Dumb, but I'm not sure it's him in either?
    "With oranges, it's much harder..."

    Offline Woe-ee-Woe-Woe80

    • Bonehead
    • **
    • Posts: 120
      • View Profile
    Re: Restless Knights (1935)
    « Reply #24 on: December 09, 2017, 10:25:50 PM »
  • Publish
  • I was never really big on this short and felt there were too many slow scenes that lacked excitement, I did like Larry's line about him getting a drink if something doesn't work out followed by Moe kicking his rear, the opening scenes with Walter Brennan and the stooges fighting the bad guys but that's about it, I didn't think it was until Uncivil Warriors when the stooges found their groove/niche.

    I give this episode a 5/10