SilentComedyMafia.com

Well it certainly is a dramatic (bordering on melodramatic) response from Stan, in the French tradition. But perhaps Mr. Laurel was a little less reserved than usual, thinking the interview wouldn't be seen in the U.S. (just like ATOLL K!) But the article did come at a time when Stan felt fairly free to bemoan his fate at the studio's hands, probably to his ultimate detriment.

As for poor, pitiful, hard luck, has been Harry, that story made great press for well over a dozen years. He should've just had cards printed up that read "I know I can do great stuff, if I'm not licked".

Btw, I can email a jpeg of the original French article to anybody who's interested, I'm just not sure how to post it here. Any suggestions?

Chris

Chris Seguin wrote:

Hey Gary, don't be hatin' on ATOLL K... when's your next visit due? ;)

I think I'll be visiting "Gilligan's Island" before I go visit "Stroke Island."
(No offense stroke fans)

Gary J.

It's not "Stroke Island", it's diabetes, dysentry and prostate concerns. You're thinking of "Kook's Tour"..! ;)

That sounds like what I had for supper last night.

Gary J.

Laurel versus Roach (1963):
http://entertainment.ha.com/common/view ... _No=51253#


Roach versus Laurel (1967):
Amsterdam Recorder, NY, 22 September 1967

Oh for Pete's sake Hal, just get over it!

Rob Farr wrote:Oh for Pete's sake Hal, just get over it!

Well, Hal Roach's secret plan was to outlive all his comedians so he could tell the story HIS way. So he even outlived the majority of his Our Gang kids.

Oh, and there's some more proof for the folk who want to run silent films at 12 frames per second!

RICHARD M ROBERTS

This won't be a fresh observation, and I may have things skewed, but as a kid reading the various Roach interviews published and quoted from in the 70s, long before Randy Skretvedt's book appeared, I noticed that Roach made pointed mention of Stan Laurel's perceived failings as a story constructionist seemingly every time the name came up. On camera with TVOntario's Elwy Yost circa 1975, he said in exasperation, "Laurel couldn't develop a usable story to save his life...and I could never get him to admit it!" He even worked the same complaint into the tribute written for the McCabe/Kilgore/Bann pictorial. It was peculiar to me then that he would air this issue so often, that the axe would still be ground with Laurel and Hardy both long gone.

Ian Elliot wrote:This won't be a fresh observation, and I may have things skewed, but as a kid reading the various Roach interviews published and quoted from in the 70s, long before Randy Skretvedt's book appeared, I noticed that Roach made pointed mention of Stan Laurel's perceived failings as a story constructionist seemingly every time the name came up. On camera with TVOntario's Elwy Yost circa 1975, he said in exasperation, "Laurel couldn't develop a usable story to save his life...and I could never get him to admit it!" He even worked the same complaint into the tribute written for the McCabe/Kilgore/Bann pictorial. It was peculiar to me then that he would air this issue so often, that the axe would still be ground with Laurel and Hardy both long gone.

Thats because Roach was forever nursing a grudge about BABES IN TOYLAND, in which Laurel basically jettisoned Roach's storyline and made it into a more simplified and enjoyable film. This was the beginning of the end of good will between Roach and Laurel, and there were some serious rows to follow.

My impression though over the various Roach interviews I read (and several I did myself) was that Roach basically resented most of his star comedians in one way or another. This also ties in with the fact that in reality, Roach never wanted to be a comedy producer in the first place, but always wanted to be thought of more as a serious independent producer along the lines of Samuel Goldwyn or the like. As early as Rolin, he was spending more time and money on his Roy Stewart and Jane Novak pictures than he was the comedies he was making, until his star comic Harold Lloyd kept threatening to walk on him if he wasn't paid more. I think Roach felt that he was at the mercy of his comedians, and kept trying to break from being a comedy producer, but never succeeded. It must have galled him to only be remembered for his comedians in the end, and that resentment definitely seeped into his summations and opinions on his star comics, even if he did sometimes change the names on the same stories he told.

RICHARD M ROBERTS

Poughkeepsie Eagle-News, NY, Tuesday, 16 April 1935