Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - metaldams

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 219
General Discussion / Re: Shemp....
« on: January 20, 2018, 07:38:03 PM »
I would love to see the Monograms get an official DVD release.

Regarding THE BANK DICK, I tried watching it a couple times but just could not get into it. For some reason, Fields is the one comedian from that time period who I just never found funny.

I know Shemp appeared with Lon Chaney Jr. as a comedy duo in SAN ANTONIO ROSE. Does anyone know how prominently they appear in that film?

Shemp and Lon Chaney, Jr. as a comedy team?  Now that I gotta see!


Nothing against Kenneth MacDonald, of course.

First off, my review for THE PASSIONATE PLUMBER is up.

Secondly, next week's review, SPEAK EASILY, is public domain, so a YouTube link will be available for all to view.  Hope to see some thoughts, as by memory and reputation, it's the best of Keaton's MGM talkies.  It also has prime Thelma Todd in it doing her thing.  Interested to see if my latest viewing agrees with my memory of it.

General Discussion / Re: Shemp....
« on: January 20, 2018, 08:37:31 AM »
Agreed the Shemp role isn't much in THE BANK DICK, but if the Shemp role was played by any other character actor, nobody would care.  It's a perfect Fields movie and easily the best he made at Universal.  Shemp played supporting parts with Abbott and Costello too.  Sadly, Universall didn't see him as a star.

What I would be interested in seeing are the Monogram films where Shemp was part of a team that was top billed.  Monogram and Lugosi were magic, why not Shemp?


      Man oh man, another crazy one.  Remember the way PARLOR, BEDROOM AND BATH had all these crazy, unlikable characters in some garbled romantic jealousy plot that Keaton was caught in the middle of?  Well, it's almost the same thing this week, but with two differences.  One is there are at least less characters THE PASSIONATE PLUMBER, so it's not as confusing.  However, on the negative side, there is less of the Keaton physicality that made PARLOR a bit entertaining.  Tons of loud, screaming, jealous characters, and you know what?  Throw The Marx Brothers reacting to all the craziness in this plot and you would have a good film.  However, Keaton works at a much steadier pace.  Picture a blues musician working in a death metal band, that's what Keaton feels like in THE PASSIONATE PLUMBER.

      A classic Keaton film has Keaton in some chase or actually doing some action in the finale. Here, we have three lovers in a love triangle throwing dishes at each other while Keaton calmly hands out dishes.  In other words, Keaton is not part of the action.

      Jimmy Durante makes his first of three appearances with Keaton, and his role diminishes the second half of the film.  Eventually, he will share top billing with Keaton, but they're easing him in here.  Durante was a good comedian whose style clashed with Keaton, just like the majority of the MGM run.  He was a loud comedian who made corny jokes.  I dig that, just not with Keaton.  I'll take the inventing a banana with a zipper line or calling safe like an umpire as Keaton slides down the chair in a Stooge short versus a Keaton film.  At least in a Stooge film, you know a good slap is coming.

      Two good parts in THE PASSIONATE PLUMBER.  One is the duel, later done by Keaton is SHE'S OIL MINE at Columbia.  Actually, the whole gag of Keaton using the glove to slap people into challenging a duel is a nice little running gag.  The best bit is when he's confronted by his rival, wearing nothing but a towel, and after getting slapped by a glove from his rival, uses said towel to slap his rival.  The camera, of course, moves up so we don't see too much of Buster.  Clever gag.  Keaton finding ways to screw up taking paces before firing in the duel is also nice physical comedy.  I'd venture to guess Keaton had a part in this scene, especially since he used it again at Columbia.

      The other good part is at the casino.  After being told men kill themselves outside the casino after losing money and the casino puts money in the dead man's pocket to avoid scandal, Keaton faking death to get cash is another clever gag.  I also really like Keaton inventing the gun with a laser point for precision that he tries to show to the generals, but the way he takes the gun out in front of them makes it look like an assassination attempt.


This set is officially official, and ready to order for real now.

For Immediate Release


Volume One Contains 18 Rare Talking Comedy Shorts From The Golden Age of Hollywood

(Phoenix, AZ) The Sprocket Vault announces its latest DVD release: CHARLEY CHASE AT HAL ROACH: THE TALKIES VOLUME ONE: 1930-31, the first in a series and available exclusively on Amazon. These 18 comedy shorts on a 2-DVD set showcases this great but somewhat neglected comedian during some of his prime film days.

From 1924-1936, Charley Chase made hilarious short comedies for the Hal Roach Studios. He was one of their most popular comedy stars in both the silent and sound eras. His talkie shorts for Hal Roach have never been collected into a comprehensive collection before, and now THE SPROCKET VAULT brings them to the public in a planned multi-volume collection designed to reacquaint comedy fans to his wonderful short films.

Charley Chase was considered the leading man of comedians, a handsome, talented performer with strong comedy credentials on both sides of the camera. He became Hal Roach's number two star in terms of box office, second only to Laurel and Hardy during his stay at Roach. Chase utilized a style that incorporated classic visual comedy blended with more situational and screwball elements, his sound comedies also highlight his musical abilities. Chase was an accomplished singer and dancer as well.

The films in this 1930-31 collection are also complimented by the presence of Charley Chase's then-frequent leading lady, the lovely and vivacious Thelma Todd. She was a beautiful and statuesque blonde with great timing and comedy talent, whose work with Charley Chase and other comedians propelled her to stardom in her own Hal Roach comedy series. Her career as a lead comedienne was tragically cut short by her early death in 1935 at the age of 29.

The Sprocket Vault's new Charley Chase collection utilizes original Hal Roach Studio print materials for its digital masters, and each short on this collection is accompanied by a commentary track from noted film historian and Hal Roach authority Richard M. Roberts, who shines new light on the "Lot of Fun" and the people involved in making these classic comedies in an informative, clever, and entertaining manner.

CHARLEY CHASE AT HAL ROACH: THE TALKIES VOLUME ONE: 1930-31 contains -The Shorts - 1930: The Real McCoy, Whispering Whoopee, All Teed Up, Fifty Million Husbands, Fast Work, Girl Shock, Dollar Dizzy, Looser Than Loose, High C's

The Shorts - 1931: Thundering Tenors, The Pip from Pittsburg, Rough Seas, One of the Smiths, The Panic Is On, Skip the Maloo! What a Bozo! The Hasty Marriage

Extra: La Senorita De Chicago (1931) (Spanish-language version of THE PIP FROM PITTSBURG)


Retail: $34.99

Amazon Price: $24.93

Language: English

Running Time: 413 minutes

Color: Black & White

Year: 1930 & 31

Rating: Not Rated

Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1 - 4X3

Available Now!

The Sprocket Vault DVDs are sold exclusively through Amazon.

Social Media links:


Thank you!

Placed my order, will post my opinions when I view the set.  I've only seen one of these shorts, so I have a lot of new viewing ahead.

Well, once again we have Keaton playing a rich character and once again it produces a fine enough result. It is interesting to see just how Jules White’s style of directing translates to a feature film and I believe this was the only one he ever directed (I know he helped out on BROADWAY TO HOLLYWOOD, though he wasn’t the main director).

So the story of this one deals with Keaton falling in love with a girl while also trying to help out her brother, while her brother is secretly being put into a scheme pulling off robberies with some gangsters. This story is far different from the ones Keaton had done in the past and doesn’t even revolve on him entirely, which is a refreshing change of pace. It is interesting to see these two story arcs both going on at the same time and they actually do combine pretty well, unlike PARLOR, BEDROOM, AND BATH which just constantly throws characters at you.

It is true, though, that White did not know how to handle dramatic moments all that well, something that’s apparent with the apartment scene. The scene on the stage...I actually thought kind of worked. Keaton and Cliff Edwards’ obliviousness makes perfect sense and it’s not so much comedic outside of Edwards ending up shooting his own wife in the play.

The big problem with SIDEWALKS OF NEW YORK is that it tends to drag a bit. The boxing scenes in particular feel like they go on forever, despite being funny at first. The courtroom scene also was pretty hard to sit through, though that was mainly due to the fact that I know there’s a better version out there. Still, it does not come close to the version in DISORDER IN THE COURT and it also has an awkward shot of Keaton and Edwards pressing their faces up against glass.

The best scenes are the ones that feel a lot more controlled in length, more like something that could show up in a short subject. Keaton and Edwards making the record as well as performing the play are very funny moments. I also like how Keaton and Edwards’s wrestling at first very much looks like they’re dancing with each other as partners; a quick, but effective visual gag. Even the ending fight is actually pretty impressive, even if it is the kind of thing that is more in line with the Three Stooges than Keaton.

Cliff Edwards is upgraded back to Keaton’s sidekick for what would unfortunately be the last time. It’s true Edwards once again does not have a chance to sing in this, but he makes up for this with a genuinely funny performance. After seeing this, I kind of wished that Columbia would have given him his own series of short subjects; I feel he would have fit quite well in them. Anita Page also returns from FREE AND EASY and this time benefits from a much better script, getting a chance to show off several different moods.

Overall, SIDEWALKS OF NEW YORK still does not compare to Keaton in his prime, but does have an interesting style that makes it stand out from many of the other MGM Keaton films, something that can be mainly credited to White and Zion Myers (who occasionally wrote Three Stooges scripts such as HALF WITS HOLIDAY and HEAVENLY DAZE). I was legitimately surprised with how much I actually ended up liking this one.

7 out of 10

As far as Anita Page, night and day between this film and FREE AND EASY.  She was given a better role here.  Agreed with you completely.  FREE AND EASY is probably Keaton's worst film.

Glad you like this one as much as humanly possible.  This film normally gets trashed but obviously I'm not the only one who finds merit here.

Nooooooooo... I was going to start Keaton's Columbia shorts after my short tournament ends!  [pie]

I thought the Educationals would be first, but the Columbias will work. 

Is it available anywhere online?

Not for free since it's not public domain, but here's a free link from TCM of the courtroom gag for a Curly comparison.

Weekly Episode Discussions / Sidewalks of New York (1931) - Buster Keaton
« on: January 15, 2018, 07:31:08 PM »

      I think I'm starting to see the key to appreciating these MGM films.  I don't look at them as Buster Keaton's films, but comedies of the early 30's that happen to have Buster Keaton in them.  SIDEWALKS OF NEW YORK has the disctinction of being the highest grossing film Keaton ever made and also the one Keaton personally cared for the least.  If that's not an indication that this film has early 30's styling and little Keaton styling, I don't know what does.  It just happens to be I enjoy early 30's films, and I also happen to enjoy one other aspect on its own merits, an aspect not necessarily in line with making the kind of films Keaton makes.  That aspect would be the directors - Zion Myers and.....wait for it.....Jules White.  Yes, that Jules White, the guy whose films we discussed for several years and will be discussing again briefly within the next year once Keaton goes to Columbia.

      As far as early 30's, the gangster film came into prominence around this time with James Cagney and Edward G. Robinson at Warner Brothers, and there's a gangster in this one trying to run the neighborhood and influence some kids to pull off jobs.  While hardly on the level of THE PUBLIC ENEMY or LITTLE CAESAR (OK, not even close), the gangster element still comes across as a fascinating by product of its time.  The idea of impressionable tough talking kids living in a ghetto is both a reflection of depression America and a precursor to the Dead End Kids/East Side Kids/Bowery Boys.  I'll also state the atmosphere in the neighborhoods is wonderfully dark, dingy, and convincing on par with any classic gangster film, no doubt a testament to MGM's production values, at the time the biggest studio there was.

      Now for the Jules White thing.  The film starts out with a bunch of rough neighborhood kids getting into an argument over a baseball game.  This evolves into a giant neighborhood food fight.  At one point, one kid even tricks another kid to believing they're on the same side, only for the kid doing the tricking to throw food into the other gullible kid's face.  The kid doing the tricking then gets food from off screen smacking him in the kisser.  I can easily picture such a routine in a Stooge film. 

     A routine we all know from a Stooge film is Curly taking an oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth in DISORDER IN THE COURT.  Well, guess what?  Keaton did it first in SIDEWALKS OF NEW YORK.  The whole misunderstanding the fast talking oath, the raising of the right hand with object in the way, not swearing but knowing all the words, falling on your butt when trying to take the's all here, and Curly basically does it better.  This is no knock on Keaton.  His timing is superb, his delivery fine for his style, but this kind of routine works better with a frustrated comedian who slowly boils over, and that Curly's style.  Keaton is a toned down comedian and works best in a steady delivery.  Here's a fine example of humor probably not written by Keaton better suited for someone else, so I can understand Keaton's grievance.  Still, I enjoy seeing Keaton doing the routine nonetheless, and he does do one thing Curly doesn't do....take his own fall when falling on the chair on the witness stand.  Now that's by far Keaton own domain more than Curly.  One other Jules White gag....when Keaton wins the boxing match, he gets carried away on people's shoulders, only to have his head hit a bar above him, knocking him out.  This is similar to Curly and Besser is WHAT'S THE MATADOR and SAPPY BULLFIGHTERS.

      The main flaw of the film is also a Jules White trait, and one that stands out much more in a feature than a short film, and that's comic insensitivity.  Keaton and his girl, (played very well and assertively by Anita Page) throw her little brother a birthday party.  The little brother, who gets caught up in gang and mob activities, walks away from the party, only to have Anita Page crying.  Keaton acts completely oblivious to her sadness at this big dramatic moment, insists it's time to eat, and it is at this moment a gag involving a duck being wrongly sliced is used.  Not a good example of when to use comedy.  Later in the film, the younger brother, through orders of the gangster trying to mold him, is ordered to kill Keaton with a real gun in a play.  The kid is basically holding back tears, can't do it, and it is at this highly dramatic moment little comedy bits are thrown in.  The comedy feels on the side of the drama, not enhancing.  Jules White did not have the sensitivity of a Chaplin, Lloyd, Langdon, or even Keaton when he occasionally wanted to to mix drama and comedy, as these bits feel completely inappropriate and are the weakest parts of the film.

      As far as comedy, I do enjoy the boxing match and enjoyed watching Keaton deliver a dropkick on a few occasions.  During the chase at the end, there is one nice gag which screams Keaton.  Being chased in his house by gangsters, Keaton goes through all this trouble to make this huge pile of furniture blocking the door so the gangsters don't get in the room.  The irony is they are in the same room as he is!

      As an example of Buster Keaton's comedy, hardly a good example, but like I stated before, there are enough elements in this thing outside the realm of Keaton, including Stoogian elements, that fascinate and make me rate this as my favorite MGM talkie we've discussed so far.  One final point...the dim witted Elmer character is not on display much at all outside of the love sickness, and I find this very welcoming.  So a Keaton fan who could care less about Jules White, pre-code film and gangster movies should avoid this thing at all costs.  However, if you enjoy these elements, and want to see Buster Keaton enhance a film with all these things....




Here's the initial New York Times review from 1931

"In a riotous affair known as "Parlor, Bedroom and Bath," an adaptation of the play of the same title, Buster Keaton contributes an energetic performance, which yesterday afternoon elicited no little merriment from the audience in the Capitol.

This comedy is not notable for its keen wit, for virtually all the stunts done by the long-suffering and block-headed Reginald Irving (Mr. Keaton) belong to the Mack Sennett school. If there is water to fall in, it is there, and when Irving comes in out of the rain—which he does more by accident than design—the water from his hat and clothes causes a commotion that looks as if it might last for hours. Several persons are impelled to slip about the spot, until they seem to be having difficulty in carrying out the director's instructions. The same applies to other scenes where Mr. Irving is found in somewhat compromising situations with several comely women. This young man is so bashful that he is ignorant of the way to kiss a pretty pair of lips.

Prior to the hectic incidents he experiences in this rowdy yarn, he led an uneventful career as a man who tacks advertisements on telegraph poles. His experiences here arise through his being bowled over by Jeffrey Haywood's automobile. The reason for the feverish activities is that Virginia Embrey refuses to marry Haywood until her sister Angelica is affianced, for Angelica is five years older and it is feared that she might have to retire as a spinster. Considering that Angelica is played by the prepossessing Dorothy Christie, Virginia need not have been worried about her. Angelica, however, manifests an unusual interest in the numbskull Irving, so much so that it is thought that she will be jealous if she hears that any other woman has been flirting with him.

There are moments when one wonders that Irving still lives, for he is beaten over the head sufficiently to put an end to the strongest of mortals. Nothing daunted, however, he soon appears in a succeeding scene without the slightest sign of an injury. He has a turbulent time with Polly Hathaway, played by Charlotte Greenwood, who gives him an intensive training in the matter of approaching a proposal of marriage and a subsequent violent osculatory exhibition.

Like Mr. Keaton, Miss Greenwood displays marvelous energy and acrobatics. Reginald Denny is almost rational as Haywood. Natalie Moorhead is her usual stunning self. Sally Eilers portrays Virginia.

On the Capitol stage is an ambitious revue called "Manhattan Serenade." It has a wealth of color, graceful dancing and some jesting, but it is more than a trifle too long.

Mr. Keaton's New Farce.
PARLOR, BEDROOM AND BATH, an adaptation of the stage comedy of the same name; directed by Edward Sedgwick; produced by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. At the Capitol.
Reginald Irving . . . . . Buster Keaton
Polly Hathaway . . . . . Charlotte Greenwood
Jeffery Haywood . . . . . Reginald Denny
Bell Hop . . . . . Cliff Edwards
Angelica Embrey . . . . . Dorothy Christy
Nita Leslie . . . . . Joan Peers
Virginia Embrey . . . . . Sally Eilers
Leila Crofton . . . . . Natalle Moorhead
Detective . . . . . Edward Brophy
Frederick Leslie . . . . . Walter Merrill
Butler . . . . . Sidney Bracy"

Well, everybody's certainly trying hard.  It's just not funny.  Historical interest only.  How did this do on first release?  Did anyone ever think this was funny?

Keaton's MGM films in general were his highest grossing, with next week's film, SIDEWALKS OF NEW YORK, being the highest grossing of all.  With Keaton, art and commerce weren't always linked....THE GENERAL did not do well in it's day.

PARLOR, BEDROOM AND BATH review from Buster Keaton is now up with YouTube video attached, so please watch and review if you get a chance.  Definitely an interesting film.


Watch PARLOR, BEDROOM AND BATH in the link above

     Man oh man, what a bizarre film!  Plot wise, I'll try my best, but really, this thing loses all sense of character and story by the end.  Buster plays Elmer again and is a self admitted virgin who doesn't know what to do to get a woman.  He gets hit by a car, taken into a rich person's house on the property he's on to be nursed.  The girl he's attracted to won't marry because she can't find the bad boy of her dreams, and this prevents her younger sister from marrying her man because she won't marry before her older sister.  Said man wants older sister to marry and tries his darndest to convince older sister that virginal Elmer is a bad boy.  Are you following me so far?  No?  Neither am I.  Things just get crazier from here, and this is definitely not the normal logical comedy Keaton made when he was in control of his own films.  By the end of this thing, Keaton is in a hotel room doing some acted upon love making ritual to several different women, one jealous man is chasing him with a gun, there's a fake murder....oy vey!  Really fascinating that this kind of film could only be made between 1929 - 1934, as this style of film making completely died with the code, and I do love pre code films.  So as a pre code film, I'm strangely fascinated, but as a Buster Keaton film, not one of his best representations due to character and story, however......

      ....of all the MGM films, this by far has Keaton doing the most physical comedy.  There's him running around the property being chased, diving into pools, dodging men diving after him, being smacked on the head, then towards the end of the film, the way he swings women around and kisses them.  There's also several instances of Keaton being dragged around lifelessly, which does take skill, takes several falls, and the stunts he does with long legged Charlotte Greenwood are quite amazing to watch.  Can't help but wonder if they inspired W.C. Field's acrobatics in the dentist chair a year later with a long legged woman in THE DENTIST.  So yes, of all the MGM films, tons of physical comedy compared to the others.  Nothing that has the classic Keaton wit, but good physical falls nonetheless.

      The ten minutes or so of Keaton driving the girl to the hotel up to the point where he's in the lobby is the part of the film where I feel like Keaton stood up and said, "Enough of this screwball farce stuff, I want to make a Keaton comedy."  Amongst all this chaos and crazy, vapid characters there lies this ten minute pocket of vintage Keaton.  The train gag from ONE WEEK is revisited.  There's a wonderfully muddy hitchhiking scene, a hay ride with a very brief but funny bit of dialogue paying the driver, and a wonderful scene in the lobby of Keaton slipping and sliding all over the place.  Little dialogue, great sight gags...the way Keaton wanted to do talkies.  Too bad he could never do an entire MGM film like this.  Of course, there are some groaner dialogue scenes throughout, like the scene where neither character can spell, (c-h-a-m-p-a....make it wine), and several bits where Keaton is flat out treated and referred to as an imbecile, which his character is.  Again, fine for The Three Stooges, but Keaton's character in his prime was resourceful, and MGM did not understand this.

      Some notes is that the girl Keaton initially falls for that likes the bad boy is played by the very beautiful Dorothy Christie.  She's more famous for playing Mrs. Laurel in SONS OF THE DESERT.  Also, the extravagant house the film takes place was Keaton's real house, the Italian Villa.  Well, Keaton and his wife, Natalie Talmadge's house.  A couple of years after this film, it would be all her's. 

      As somebody fascinated by Keaton and pre code Hollywood, I give this a 10 on personal fascination.  However, on artistic merit, the film doesn't make much sense, but always moves at a quick pace so you don't think about the senseless characters too much and there's tons of physical comedy.  The Keaton characterization is also dim witted Elmer again, so I give this...


Weekly Episode Discussions / Re: Any Old Port (1932) - Laurel and Hardy
« on: January 06, 2018, 07:17:02 PM »
If you guys were around when I initially did these Laurel and Hardy reviews, I would have probably kept going.  I stopped at THE MUSIC BOX, and when we finish Keaton, I will restart Laurel and Hardy.  Thanks Umbrella and Tony, as well as Paul, for your thoughts.  I enjoy reading them.

Next Keaton review will either be Sunday or Monday night

      I watched mine once years ago, I'll put my copy in again and let you know what happens.  This does sound crazy.  Coincidentally enough, Abbott and Costello and Laurel and Hardy had similar double feature DVDs released at the same time from the same company.  I have the former and not the latter (the two Laurel and Hardy films I burned off TCM years ago and am in no rush to buy since they're not exactly Stan and Ollie's best).  If anybody has those other two sets, any issues there to report?

General Discussion / Re: What's your favorite Looney Tunes character?
« on: January 04, 2018, 05:45:57 PM »
DOUGH FOR THE DO-DO..,isn't that the Stooge one?  Too lazy to look up.

Got a gift card from Amazon, seriously thinking of spending a portion of it on that new Porky Pig set.

Just finished the final episode, and I want to thank anyone involved who created this documentary who may be reading this.  You've outdone yourselves.

Also, Moe's kids, Paul and Joan....they look fantastic.  What health tips do they have?  LOL

General Discussion / Re: What's your favorite Looney Tunes character?
« on: January 02, 2018, 10:36:45 PM »
I watched them a lot as a kid, and I honestly could say I loved them all, never developing a particular favorite.

I'll throw in HIGH DIVING HARE as my favorite cartoon, though I admit I'm far from bing as knowledgeable about Looney Tunes as I am Stooges.  Bugs and Sam crack me up in that short.

I've seen this one a few times over the decades, but I'll reserve my opinions until you post your PARLOR, BEDROOM, AND BATH (1931) review.

CHEERS!  [pie]

Thanks, looking forward to it!

      The behind the scenes color God!  Have a behind the scenes still from UNCIVIL WARBIRDS paused as I'm typing this, nice to see what the boys with the belles looked like in color, and Jules White in the background doing his thing.

       I think the title of this thing initially threw me off....I was expecting mostly home footage.  That kind of thing is OK for one viewing.  However, what this truly is is home footage combined with a real documentary, so there's a wonderful balance of the personal and professional, with no stone left unturned.  They give props to the directors, supporting actors, writers, as well as their upbringing - wonderful.  Yeah, I would have liked to hear Ted Healy tell his side of the story (understandable why he can't, obviously), but other than that, this is brilliant and up there with the Kevin Brownlow Lloyd and Keaton docs.  The Stooges deserved this.  On episode four now, can't wait to see the rest.

At least a couple Three Stooges books talk about it, but there’s debate over the validity of this claim. The blog I’m linking to below talks a little about this, going so far as to provide a lobby card for SPRING FEVER, though Moe and Shemp do not appear in it. He even mentions BeAStooge at one point.

I haven’t seen this documentary in a while, but I remember it being pretty good. What I thought was especially interesting to see was the footage of Shemp and his brothers on the set of THREE LITTLE PIRATES.

I suppose there is no absolute proof, but the fact SPRING FEVER lobby cards exist, the fact Moe refers to Wagner as "Hans" like on the lobby card  versus "Honus," as Wagner is more commonly known as, and the fact Moe would even mention films that are lost and so obscure decades after the fact means I believe Moe. I mean, who would actually remember these films other than obsessed Honus Wagner fans or someone who actually appeared in the film? Now whether the amount of films is correct, I don't know.  That said, I believe Moe when he says he appeared with Wagner.  More proof, of course, would be fantastic.

Thanks for the link.

Moe and Shemp made "six two-reel sport comedies" with Honus Wagner?  Man, lost film is tragic.  If I ever read that, it totally sailed over my head.  Great doc so far, getting towards the end of episode one.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 219