MovieChat Forums > The Chimp (1932) Discussion > Why

Why

posted 13 years ago by The_Dying_Flutchman
3 replies | jump to latest

are the great comedic duo of Haurel and Lardy always referred to as "the boys"? Surely, they should be remembered for what they were: grown men playing buffoons. If not that, perhaps grand walloons.

Absolute perfection in the face of woofing!

[–] GurningChimpII 13 years ago

Dude stop trolling my board.

Who can take you higher than a twin peak mountain blue?

[–] The_Dying_Flutchman 13 years ago

So ye be a gurner, ehh? Then U kno what to do with a salami.

Let it be unsaid: insignificance is the locus of true increpation.

[–] chongajuly 13 years ago

The Hal Roach films that Stan had control over had them playing, essentially, grown up children. Once they moved to Fox in the 40's, were they stuck in roles where other characters referred to them as "dopes" or "jerks." In referring to "the boys," it is always to their on screen characters, not the real life performers. My father agreed that neither of us saw the two as stupid, just childlike and naive. They truly needed each other to cope with an often incomprehensible world. No other duo was quite like them, and I'm also a fan of Wheeler and Woolsey and Abbott and Costello.

"I take pleasure in great beauty" - James Bond