Harry Langdon Books

The main reason I had bought this movie was because my favorite Nascar driver (R.I.P.) Dale Earnhardt and my bf's favorite (R.I.P.) Neil Bonnet are in it. But after I started watching the movie I found it to be funny and loved Burt in that chicken suit! Even though Dale and Neil were only in it for a few seconds I still loved the movie.

Reynolds, Beatty, Anderson, Nabors and
even Bubba Smith are very fine in here.
Funny, short Comedy movie about egoman-
iac NASCAR (BACK WHEN THE SPORT WAS worth
watching!) driver and hillbilly friends
and pit crew who keep running out of spon-
sors. Reynolds signs on with fried chicken
magnate Beatty without reading the fine
print of contract, to his dismay. Lonie
and Burt started a relationship after
meeting on this set! Funny, especially
Jerry Reed's critique at the end in
outtakes! Director Hal Needham's best
effort with Reynolds! I really like it.

this movie more than any other helped kill what was left of burt reynolds acting rloes for the rest of the 80's and keeped him on t.v. till "boggie nights". not one laugh or even a good chuckle to be had in this mess that was realesased very quickly and went under the waves even faster than "heat" did. man what a waste of time and money. no stars but they make you give it one.

This film (along with the Cannonball Run movies) pretty much destroyed Burt Reyonlds's career. It's a shame, because anyone who has seen Deliverance knows that Burt Reyonlds can actually act. Instead, he wanted to be a "good ole boy", and he did a plethora of airheaded, terrible films like this. Reportedly, Burt turned down the role of the astronaut in Terms of Endearment for this. Now that's depressing!

It's an oldy but a goody. Looked all over for it for my boyfriend and was so glad I could make his day and find it. He can sit there and watch it over and over. Really good movie.

This book causes a man to seriously examine what is important in life. Though the moajority of the book is strickly written for men who work long hours and often forget their stay-at-home wife, any man can benifit from the wake-up call this book delivers. We all will die some day and this book helps us sort out what really matters in light of that truth. I'll admit I found a good portion of it not applicable to me, and at times it did seem a little outdated, but it does deal with a major problem of today: materialism. When we're on our deathbeds it wont matter how much stuff we have but what will matter is our relationship with God and how we've treated other people. This book helps make that plain. It might not be the best book in the world, but it is a good one.

In this book, Dr. Dobson talks to men and women about relationships in their marriages, their children, work, money,
housepets, and God. This book was right on when he talks about how important it is for men and women to work on their
marriages, not become workaholics so that we don't deprive our spouses and kids of ourselves. I loved some of the humor in
the book, like when someone suggested that he write a book on strong-willed wives (which I'm sure my husband would love), and
he said that he wouldn't touch that one with a shovel. It was also very clear that Dr. Dobson loved his father very much and
was a major influence in his life. I loved that stories about Dr. Dobson's dad's dog and Dr. Dobson coming to know the Lord
towards the end of his life.

Many people accuse Dr. Dobson of being sexist and racist, but I don't see that at all in his book. Dr. Dobson is a very big
champion of marriage and keeping the family together. We need more people like him, so that we don't have as many broken
people in this society.

Dr. Dobson explicates a bigoted theme of conservative ideology and blatant sexism in the guise of trying to justify social problems. In an attempt to explore contemporary social and gender issues, Dobson lays out a very dry account of where, he claims, the feminine situation should be in the modern Christian world. At one point he even analogizes a woman's role in society to a horse wita bit in its mouth. The underbelly of the book contains blatant racist tones. I find this book appaling, not only to the liberal audience but to anyone even remotely concerned with social justice.

The title says this book contain "straight talk," and it does. Dobson is right on the money in his description of our relationships in our marriage and our family of origin. This book helped to save my marriage. There are many aspects of this book that I believe are timeless. In every age we each must struggle to discover a path of selflessness rather than selfishness in order to develop the positive relationships we crave.

This book might have been published in 1978, however it makes many points that apply in today's world as well. This book outlines a man's responsibilities to his family and his God. In doing so, it also descibes how a woman(wife and mother) fits into the picture of marriage. Non-Christians will most likely find Dr. Dobson's view to be sexist and outdated. However, if the book is read entirely and seen from a Christian point of view, it is nothing of the sort. I hope you will find the book enlightening and helpful in your Christian lives.

Dear Mr. Schelly, I certainly respect your efforts. I wish they were better. Erich Von Stroheim said that authors should never talk about their own work, because they make excuses. Instead of excuses, why not update it? With the wealth of Langdon material available these days, and the availability of many more films, you could do yourself and the subject proud. Scarecrow has issued revised books; why not polish yours up? This is meant as constructive criticism. Harry Langdon does deserve something fitting.

I was very interested in reading this book since the subject, silent & early sound film comedian Harry Langdon, has been a particular favorite of mine since I first saw his classic feature comedies, TRAMP,TRAMP,TRAMP and THE STRONG MAN (the latter directed by the later-famous Frank Capra). (I became an even BIGGER fan when I finally got to see two of the features he directed, with assist from Arthur Ripley, THREE'S A CROWD and THE CHASER. Harry Langdon had a wonderful, unique talent, but unfortunately this book does not do him justice. The author was hamstrung by not having access to Langdon's many sound films, hence the book lopsidedly leans upon the five extant feature films that Langdon produced from 1926-28. There is almost no original research (a couple of fan magazine articles are referenced), and the critiques are not very polished. I like Harry Langdon and wish that someone who also likes him will do a good, objective book, OUT from under the influence of Frank Capra's formidable shadow.-Edward Wat

William Schelly's 1982 biography of one of the greats of silent comedy---Harry Langdon--- is a well-researched, if somewhat thin, tribute to the "little clown." A number of critics have complained that Schelly's book does not delve deeply enough into Langdon's private life or his talkie period. This is an unfair criticism. To begin with, Schelly's book is the first attempt ever at a full-blown Langdon biography and Schelly had to conduct research into limited archival data since Langdon's clippings, studio records, and even a number of his films are no longer available---literally lost in the dustbin of history. For various reasons, Langdon memorabilia were not salvaged and preserved through the years as were those of the other four giants of silent comedy---Fatty Arbuckle, Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, and Harold Lloyd. Harry always suffered from a lack of industry respect. Even his immense popularity in the 1924-1927 period is derided by critics as simply the result of relative innactivity on the part of the other silent clowns. In other words, Langdon was simply filling a gap until the others released their next films. Others opine that Langdon was an acquired taste and a novelty at that, which in two or three short years grew tiresome. But both of these criticisms sell Harry Langdon short (no pun intended). From the 1910s forward Langdon was a widely acclaimed headliner in the grandest vaudeville houses (including the famed "Palace"). During these years he developed his pantomime skills to a superb level. Harry could say more with facial expressions and body language than most other commedians conveyed in a thousand word dialogue. By the time he entered silent films in the early 1920s, the other great commedians had already been established screen stars. Langdon had to be incredibly good at his trade to have broken into this elite coterie. By 1924, Arthur Ripley and Frank Capra assisted Langdon in putting the finishing touches on his sad little clown personna, but it was Harry himself who brought this elfin character to life. In his three acknowledged classics, "Long Pants," "Tramp, Tramp, Tramp," and especially "The Strong Man," Langdon demonstrated an uncanny ability to make people laugh while at the same time creating a pathos that was heart-rending. He was always betwixt and between, with a heart of gold and a childlike naivete that evoked audience sympathy even as their bellies shook with laughter. Indeed, it wasn't lucky timing or mere novelty that made Harry Langdon a silent screen legend, it was an incredible talent to emote and induce a catharsis that was very real. As opposed to Harold Lloyd, whose comedy was contingent upon situational happenstance, Langdon was funny in and of himself. The decline of Harry Langdon was certainly not due to any lack or diminution of talent. Instead, Harry's decline resulted from two factors: First, as a genius at the art of pantomime, the dawn of talkies diminished Langdon's artistry and rendered him virtually impotent against a sea of new commedians whose comedy was based on the spoken word. Langdon was not alone in suffering such an undermining of his status as talkies took over---the great Buster Keaton's popularity and critical acclaim also took a nose dive in the late 1920s. Indeed, it might be argued that the greater the silent comedic actor the more likely he or she would become a casualty of sound movies. It is also a well-known fact that the great Frank Capra fueded with Langdon in 1926 when Harry was at the top of the heap. Langdon wanted more pathos and less overt slapstick in his films while Capra believed the opposite course was the wiser one. After one particularly acrimonious verbal joust, Capra called Harry a lot of names in the press and spread the word around Hollywood that Harry Langdon was an unreasonable ego-maniac. Capra insisted that it was he, not Harry, who created the "sad sack" Langdon character. Whether or not Harry would have been able to adjust successfully to talkies became a moot point once a rising and respected star gagwriter-director like Capra painted Langdon as industry poison. Langdon did assume virtual control of his next few features, with mixed results. His first post-Capra film ("Three's A Crowd") bombed, and critics attributed its failure---as Capra had predicted--- to too much pathos and not enough laughs. This failure also occurred at a precipitous time, since talkies were replacing silents and even the most loved stars found it near impossible to bounce back from a disastrous talkie debut. Langdon's next film was technically better ("The Chaser"), but not nearly popular enough for the actor to regain his previous exalted status. Ironically, his next feature, "Heart Trouble," was a critical success and marginally more popular than his previous two, but it was too little too late. Many viewers and critics at the time believed "Heart Trouble" initiated a return to Langdon's stellar standards, but the film did not receive wide distribution. Furthermore, as bad luck would have it, soon after its release and its aborted run in the theatres, the film was lost forever. No copy exists today). No matter. By that time (1928), Langdon's popularity had already taken a critical downward turn. To Capra's credit, in later years the director expressed sorrow for having maligned Langdon's character. Capra recalled with obvious sadness and remorse how he once inadvertantly saw the over-the-hill Langdon performing a tired, old comedy routine in the early 1940s in a second-rate vaudeville house. Up until his death in 1944, Langdon dreamed of making a comeback. While a comeback was not to be, a crical appraisal of the great comic's work has occurred. All in all, Schelly does an admirable job in tracing the life and times of a once great commedian, perhaps the greatest of the pantomimists. Of course, there is so much more than can be researched and written about Langdon. Hopefully Schelly's work will spur on others to take up this task. But as it stands, Schelly's biography of the little clown is doubtless a step in the right direction. Harry was one of a kind.

I've just completed reading William Schelly's 1982 biography of Harry langdon, and I must say that the author did a fine job with a rather obscure subject. By "obscure," I mean simply that source material on Harry Langdon is not (and certainly was not in 1982) as abundant as that of the three other great silent comedians (Keaton, Chaplin, and Lloyd).

I say this with a great fondness for Harry Langdon, the neglect of whom has resulted in this dearth of original source material. Sadly, unlike the wealth of information available on Chaplin, Lloyd and Keaton, Langdon and his work have never experienced the popular resurgence of the aforementioned silent clowns. Hence, by 1982 when Mr. Schelly wrote his book, certain original material (which no one in the mid to late 1920's thought important enough to salvage) as well as most of Langdon's peers, were all long gone. Harry, himself, was already dead for 38 years. Yet despite these elemental research obstacles, Mr. Schelly manages to provide the reader with much original, interesting and significant information on the "little elf." For instance, Langdon's unhappy romantic life prior to his last marriage, his close relationship with Laurel and Hardy, and his myriad artistic talents as a musical composer, sculptor, gag writer, etc., were covered quite adeptly and to a greater extent than in any previous written account of Harry (i.e., Walter Kerr, Kevein Brownlow, etc).

I also disagree with those critics of the book who claim that Schelly's work is "uneven." The greatness of Harry Langdon was achieved in the silent era when his little elf character was developed and perfected. His three masterpieces ("Tramp, Tramp, Tramp," "The Strong Man," and "Long Pants")were silent films-not talkies. It was the medium of silent film which allowed Langdon to do what he did better than anyone else before or since, pantomime. No doubt his work in talkies was far better than many critics over the years have claimed; yet, Harry is not remembered for the films he made after 1927. Accordingly, I think Mr. Schelly was correct in emphasizing the early work of Harry Langdon-the work that justified his being placed on the same level of comic genius as Chaplin, Lloyd and Keaton.

Finally, the reader must remember that Mr. Schelly made the very first attempt at writing a biography of Langdon. The personal and professional biographical information provided in his work is far more extensive than anything I had previously read about Langdon. For this fact alone, Mr. Schelly should be praised.

In conclusion, I highly recommend Mr. Schelly's book, as it was written in 1982, to all fans of Harry Langdon. I'm sure I speak for many admirers and fans of the sad, little clown by asserting that if there is someone out there who believes he or she can add something of original value to Mr. Schelly's book, go ahead and give it a try. In the meantime, do yourself the following favor: disregard the tenuous criticism and purchase Mr. Schelly's book. It's a good one.

I am currently teaching a drama class to a Catholic Home Schooling group in my area. This book was an awesome way to teach the kids about the lives of the saints and give them a chance to act them out. I would highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a creative way to teach your kids about the saints. I wish there were more books out there like this one!!! A must have for any Catholic family library!

I was looking for a book with different short plays in it for my 3 children. This I bought without having a review, so I didn't know what sort of plays it were! I started to read the first play; The older Mary: Jesus, I don't understand how you get so many Holes in your clothes. Jesus :Oh, I snag them on the tools in Dad's workshop. ? You don't learn your children this way the Bible. Their was one play about how Santa Claus came to earth. From St. Nicolas an archbishop in Turkey, this play we liked, so the only reason why we want to give it 1 star , because we always celebrated st. Nicolas on December 6, in Holland.