Skip to main content

You’re a disgrace to the family name of Wagstaff, if such a thing is possible.

Horse Feathers
(1932)

(SPOILERS) After a scenario that seemed feasible in Monkey Business – the brothers as stowaways – Horse Feathers opts for a massive stretch. Somehow, Groucho (Professor Quincy Adams Wagstaff) has been appointed as the president of Huxley University, proceeding to offer the trustees and assembled throng a few suggestions on how he’ll run things (by way of anarchistic creed “Whatever it is, I’m against it”). There’s a reasonably coherent mission statement in this one, however, at least until inevitably it devolves into gleeful incoherence.

Wagstaff: Tomorrow we start tearing down the college.
Professor: But professor, where will the students sleep?
Wagstaff: Where they always sleep, in the classroom.

That mission being, Groucho is persuaded of the need to beef up Huxley’s athletic accomplishments by beefing up the college football team… by visiting the local speakeasy in order to secure some professional players. Inevitably, he actually secures Pinky (Harpo) and Baravelli (Chico) (“They must be football players. I got them out of a speakeasy”). Meanwhile, Connie Bailey (Thelma Todd, luxuriant), the “college widow” (carrying all the connotations that suggests) is being impressed upon to undermine Groucho’s plan, as local gambler Jennings (David Landau) is betting on Darwin College to win. Oh, yes, and Zeppo is Groucho’s son Frank, and he’s fooling around with the college widow. At least, when his brothers aren’t.

Wagstaff: I’m the plumber. I’m just hanging around in case something goes wrong with her pipes. (to audience) That’s the first time I’ve used that joke in twenty years.

Horse Feathers was original planned to be gangster-centric, but this was nixed in the wake of the Lindberg baby case; as a result, the brothers duly recycled some material from their 1910 vaudeville show, so when Groucho tells his plumber joke (above) he probably isn’t kidding about when he last used the gag.

Referee: What are you doing with that cigar in your mouth.
Wagstaff: Why, do you know another way to smoke it?

The picture’s also noted for having its share of subsequently deleted scenes, either for post-Hayes Code reasons of prurience or (more bizarrely) for a compilation of Harpo’s japes (these would have included – as reported by Michael Brooke in the Blu-ray release’s essay – dog catcher Pinky attracting canines with fake lampposts, trying it on with Connie, and persuading Groucho to jump into his dog-catching net from her upstairs window, inevitably removed at the last moment). There was also an original ending in which the college burns down while the trio play cards, and another scene with Harpo bowling grapefruits at bottles on the speakeasy bar (even with these gone, the running time is apparently only two minutes shorter than it was originally).

Bum: Say, buddy, could you help me out? I’d love to get a cup of coffee.

If a portion of Harpo material remains excised, there’s still more than enough that tickles. We first see him producing a cup of coffee from his coat for an itinerate (whether he actually wanted the money for something else is unclear), and proceeds to engage in a variety of dog-catching antics, including a run in with a police officer (“See that badge?” he is asked, before opening his coat to reveal a whole display of matching ones). He proceeds to trap said officer in his cage (pulling down a sign announcing “Police Dog for Sale”). 

Wagstaff: Why don’t you bore a hole in yourself and let the sap run out.

The speakeasy scene is awash with sight gags (giving the password by sticking a sword down a fish’s mouth, cutting cards with an axe, winning on the slot machine, then doing likewise with a telephone). Later, Harpo’s possessed with manic glee as he engages in a book-burning exercise, graduating from tossing tomes on the blaze to shovelling on trough loads of them. 

Wagstaff: And that reminds me of a story that’s so dirty, I’m afraid to think of it myself.

He’s relatively restrained in the sex-pest stakes this time, though; it’s Chico who, alarmingly, is providing Connie with unwanted advances (albeit, we know Harpo’s were excised, there’s something seedier and more unsettling about such behaviour with Chico, who’s generally quite chaste). The sequence is a flurry of slapstick and manic gags of the coming in and going out of rooms variety, including deliveries of ice (Baravellli is an ice man for the speakeasy) that go straight out the window (the ones not given to a reluctant Todd). Chico also has the usual misunderstood wordplay scene with Groucho, this time in their initial speakeasy scene (“What do you take for a haddock?”).

Receptionist: The dean is furious. He’s waxing wroth.
Wagstaff: Is Roth out there too? Tell Roth to wax the dean awhile.

Chico and Harpo’s best sequence, though, finds them kidnapped by the Darwin players they have been sent to kidnap (Harpo bursts into tears). Deciding to escape, they saw through the floor around them in circular fashion, first dropping in on the players below, and then, on second attempt, landing in a genteel ladies’ bridge game. Harpo promptly steals a scarf and runs out to a garbage cart, riding away on it as if in a retelling of Ben-Hur.

Wagstaff: Can you cash a cheque for fifteen dollars and twenty-two cents?
Bartender: Sure. Five, ten, fifteen and twenty-two.
Wagstaff: As soon as I get a cheque for fifteen dollars and twenty-two cents, I’ll send it to you.

Groucho is on peerlessly incorrigible form, recycling his “See this five-dollar bill?” gag from Monkey Business but with bells on (above). He provides students with an impromptu biology lecture, becoming distracted from white phagocytes to indulge in a peashooter fight with Harpo and Chico (“Have you got two empty dunce chairs? I’ve brought you two empty dunces”; Harpo also proves that the candle can burn at both ends). Then there’s his lascivious punishment of a student instead of Harpo:

Wagstaff: Just for that, you stay after school.
Female Student: But professor, I didn’t do anything.
Wagstaff: I know, but there’s no fun keeping him after school.

There’s particular fun to be had with Todd, of course. Much more preferable to Chico (“Oh yes, I was on your lap. And doing pretty well as I recall”) although the scramble of brothers for her attentions, literally all over her, is slightly unnerving.

Wagstaff: Did my son tell you you had beautiful eyes?
Connie: Why, yes.
Wagstaff: He tells me that too! He tells everyone he meets.

Of course, Connie is only using Zeppo, but the cheerful bawdiness of a scene in which Frank walks in on dad canoodling with his girlfriend is surprising even now; Todd’s best scene is probably the boating one, however, in which she attempts to extract information from Groucho by playing the little girl:

Connie: Is big stwong man going to tell ickle baby all about the football signals?
Wagstaff: Was that you or the duck?

Leading to Groucho’s “If icky girl keep on talking that way, big stwong man’s gonna kick all her teef wight down her fwoat”. There’s also the classic:

Connie: Oh, professor, you’re full of whimsy.
Wagstaff: Can you notice it from there? I’m always that way after I eat radishes.

Everyone Says I Love You is “sung” by all four brothers (Zeppo, denied even an effective romantic lead this time, sees his best line comes early, the irreverent “Hello, old timer!” when he first spies dad on stage). Chico and Harpo utilise their preferred supporting instruments and Groucho serenades Todd in the boat; it provides a strong thematic glue to the musical digressions. Plus, it helps that the song is a catchy one.

Jennings: I love good music.
Wagstaff: So do I, let’s get out of here.

The football match climax is the expected free-for-all, in which Chico somehow arrives at the game before charioteer Harpo (did the latter stop off on the way?). Who at one point puts a Darwin player’s finger between a hotdog roll and bites down on it. Another Harpo highlight sees him asked “Where’s your number?”; he’s assisted in removing his jersey to find it, only for the jersey to stretch the length of the field.

Wagstaff: I’ve got to stay here, but there’s no reason you folks shouldn’t go out in the lobby until this is over.

I find it difficult to choose an order of favourites in the run from Animal Crackers to Horse Feathers; they’re an embarrassment of riches for the brothers at their most unrestrained. Director Norman Z McLeod (returning from Monkey Business) and the writers (Bert Kalmar, Harry Ruby, SJ Perelman and Will B Johnstone) provide the necessary continuity of a streamlined machine. At this point, it looked as if they could keep on churning pictures of this quality forever, if not for the conflagration of elements that would see their relationship with Paramount flounder, ironically producing what is now regarded as their undisputed crowning glory: Duck Soup.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). Rather, it’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.