"Better a fallen rocket than never a burst of light."
~ Tom Stoppard, The Invention of Love

Monday, February 16, 2015

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Passionate Plumber (1932)

Well, it’s not terrible.  That’s about the most I can say about this MGM Buster Keaton talkie.  It’s the first film that pairs Buster with Jimmy Durante, and it’s evident from the start that it’s not a good combo – Durante’s loudmouth brand of humor runs roughshod over Buster’s quieter style.  Put that together with an odd plot and minimal physical comedy, and you don’t wind up with a great film.

Buster plays Elmer, an American plumber working in Paris who gets mixed up in the farcical romantic muddle between the lovely Patricia and her smooth-talking boyfriend Tony.  After he accidentally winds up owing Patricia a lot of money (who he’s naturally in love with,) Elmer is hired to pose as the wealthy woman’s lover; she knows that the married Tony is no good for her but, unable to give him up, she banks on him bowing out when he sees her with another man.  Elmer takes to his new job with complete dedication, which becomes an annoyance to Patricia when she decides she wants Tony after all but Elmer doesn’t accept being called off.  (Like with the physical exam scene in Doughboys, Buster mined this movie for its comedic potential and later used it to make a much funnier short:  She’s Oil Mine follows the first two reels of this film, in which Elmer is first mistaken for Patricia’s lover and forced into an absurd duel with Tony, pretty closely.)

The Good – What little physical comedy there is works wonderfully, especially a scene of Elmer causing accidental havoc at a casino.  There’s also a nice run of gags with Elmer clumsily trying to serve Patricia breakfast in bed and a fantastically-Buster-ish moment of Elmer attempting to conceal a small dog on his person.  Aside from that, Elmer has a few good flashes of intelligence – he’s both a plumber and an amateur inventor, and he dreams up a pretty clever means of getting money to buy a suit.

The Bad – It’s a good thing Jimmy Durante’s McCracken (Patricia’s chauffeur) doesn’t spend all his time attached to Elmer, because Durante just steamrolls Buster.  His comic energy is completely different, and it’s tiring to watch him shout and mug while Buster waits for his turn to do anything.  The movie itself is largely unfunny, lots of forced farce that feels like it’s just going through the motions.  The only real laughs come when everybody else stops butting in and lets Buster do his thing, and even he seems listless through stretches of the film.  I don’t know if his personal problems were starting to interfere with his work by this time or if he simply hated the movie, but there are sections where he just doesn’t feel like Buster.

The Ugly – As with Sidewalks of New York, Elmer’s dimwittedness is all the more frustrating because we see hints that he really is a smart guy.  So, it’s aggravating to see him playing the dope again.  Also, I really dislike the plot in the second half, where Patricia wants Elmer to leave her alone but he won’t go.  She tries to evade him and complains about being a prisoner in her own house, and Elmer just keeps talking about his contract.  The whole thing is weird to me – other than plot contrivance, I don’t get why Elmer insists on hanging around.  Is it a patriarchal “I know what’s best for you” attitude towards the little woman?  Is he just so in love with her that he won’t leave after he finally gets an “in?”  Is he too dense to realize that she doesn’t want him there and that irritating her won’t pay off his debt?  I can’t tell you the answer, but each of these explanations leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

No comments:

Post a Comment