Reviews

The Three Stooges: Cops and Robbers (2002)

Tobias Peterson

Upping the antes set by previous physical comedians... the Stooges tripled the pratfalls and eliminated the plot.


The Three Stooges: Cops and Robbers

Director: Preston Black
Cast: Moe Howard, Larry Fine, Curly Howard, Shemp Howard
MPAA rating: unrated
Studio: Columbia Pictures
Display Artist: Jules White, Hugh McCollum, Edward Bernds, Preston Black
US DVD Release Date: 2002-08-27

"I'm tryin' to think, but nothin' happens." Curly's lamentation in Calling All Curs, one of six 20-minute shorts that comprise The Three Stooges: Cops and Robbers, neatly sums up the Stooges' philosophy and appeal, and their enduring influence. Perfecting the art of stupidity for stupidity's sake, the Stooges played dumb for yuks long before the Farrelly brothers were cracking jokes about hair gel.

Not only have the Howard brothers (Moe, Curly, Shemp, with Larry Fine) passed on their brand of entertainment to the Farrellys (in films like Dumb and Dumber and There's Something About Mary); their stamp can also be found, coincidentally, on the work of another successful team of siblings: the Zucker brothers, whose Airplane!, the Naked Gun series, the Police Squad! TV show, Kentucky Fried Movie, etc. all reveal Stooges influences. Most obviously, the Farrellys and Zuckers showcase the kind of physical tomfoolery and gleeful idiocy the Stooges practiced, reminding us that the oft-maligned popularity of lowbrow humor in recent films has a lengthy pedigree.

Bringing together material from two decades (the earliest film first appeared in 1936), Cops and Robbers reminds us just how delightfully idiotic the Stooges could be. As always, the storylines only provide a backdrop against which the trio's mindless antics can play for full effect. All six shorts -- Calling All Curs and Dizzy Detectives (both produced and directed by Jules White); Disorder in the Court (directed by Preston Black); Flat Foot Stooges (directed by Charley Chase); and Crime on Their Hands and Who Done It? (both directed by Edward Bernds and produced by Hugh McCollum) -- deal loosely with "criminal" activities and pursuits, placing the Stooges on various "sides" of the law.

Calling All Curs (1939), for example, makes them veterinarians-cum-detectives attempting to locate a dog stolen from their animal hospital. After bungling their way through the investigation (poking and punching one another along the way), they glue black mattress stuffing onto a stray dog to pass it off as the stolen poodle: mayhem ensues. In Disorder in the Court (1936), Larry, Curly, and Moe are called to testify at a murder trial. Rather than merely narrate what they witnessed, they decide to reenact events, but of course, it all goes terribly awry -- Curly ends up braining several unfortunate jury members over the head with a hammer.

In the rest of the episodes, the Stooges are dim-witted cops (The Dizzy Detectives, 1943), bungling detectives (Who Done It?, 1949), inept reporters-turned investigators (Crime on Their Hands, 1948), and incompetent firemen (Flat Foot Stooges, 1938). Each episode highlights the buffoonery and chicanery of the Stooges by placing them in varying positions of authority. The sharper the contrast between the Stooges' ridiculous actions and their officious trappings, the funnier their shenanigans become.

These shenanigans will, of course, be well known to most audiences, even before actually watching The Three Stooges: Cops and Robbers. Their eye poking, skull bonking, face slapping, and substance squirting have been admired and copied for decades. The Stooges practiced a "pure" and consistent (some would say relentless) sort of preposterous behavior that made them stars in the 1930s and '40s.

You might say that it's because of this purity that they remain stars today. Each in turn a victim of the other two's idiocy, the Stooges perform a kind of visceral comedy that is as effective as it is unsophisticated. Upping the antes set by previous physical comedians, who played alone (Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin) or teamed a straight man with a goof (Laurel and Hardy), the Stooges tripled the pratfalls and eliminated the plot. Or maybe, reduced the plot to essentials -- rising action and resolution in a most corporeal, immediate form. The result is a constant stream of stumbles, assaults, and gags that, nearly eight years later, continue to be funny, not dated.

If Columbia's DVD, or the many successful emulations of the Stooges' work by subsequent filmmakers, are not enough evidence of their staying power, consider their syndication by the American Movie Classics channel. The same brand of slapstick that is being branded cinematic blasphemy today can, in fact, be found on a venue devoted to the most well respected American films.

This "classic" status afforded (at least by some) to the Stooges brings up an interesting question whose answer will not arrive until next summer. Given the influence of the Stooges on the Farrellys' comedies, it should not surprise anyone to learn that the brothers are slated to release an updated version of "The Three Stooges" in the summer of 2003. Until the (as yet unnamed) film's release, we are left to wonder if this project will be grouped with rest of the brothers' cinematic "swill," or instead with the classic films that now air almost daily on AMC. The Stooges' syndication suggests that, perhaps, 80 years from now, even the Farrelly films will be classics in their own right -- their canonization based not on the film's artistic "merit," but on their unceasing ability to entertain.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less
6

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less
Theatre

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less
10

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less
7

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
8
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 Popmatters.com. All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.

rating-image