Quality of the Film
I want to preface my comment by saying I'm not bashing Laurel and Hardy. But, this film was certainly not among their best, and the quality of the film was far below what I expect for a film produced in 1951. I watched the film and it felt like I was watching an early talkie, some low quality production from the early 1930s. I was totally shocked when I found out that it was produced in the 1950s, and with a healthy budget to boot. In short, did anyone else feel like the quality of the film was extremely poor for the 1950s?
share