Nitrateville Comment Dept: Laurel and Hardy Year One

[Richard M Roberts]

So Gebert responded that it's Lobster Bullshit, as they trumpet in the booklet that SAILORS, BEWARE was "long Lost", which it obviously wasn't.

And DUCK SOUP was 50 years lost only if you do lousy math, since the first print recovered in 1974 was a Dutch-French reissue from the 1930's, taking a decade or so from that half-century, and next year it will have been 50 years "found", so I think it's time to stop trying to make it sound exotic, even Blackhawk offered a not-so-great print of it near the end of it's selling actual film, they never offered a print of SAILORS, BEWARE, though again, it was available from Film Classics Exchange for decades.

"Lost" is such a nonsense buzzword for some serious nerds, does it really sell any more units?

RICHARD M ROBERTS

[Richard M Roberts]

So apparently the note-writer for Lobster confused WHY GIRLS LOVE SAILORS and SAILORS, BEWARE in their hope to hyperbolize former "lostness" among as many titles as possible, again, also nonsense with WHY GIRLS LOVE SAILORS since it has been recovered since the 1980's (and like Ed Watz, I have had prints of it for years). Basically calling any Laurel and Hardy films that appeared in the old Michael Agee set "lost" is total frippery today, SHOULD MARRIED MEN GO HOME was thought "lost" until the late 1960's, but has been available longer than some fans have been on the planet, shall the "lost" drum be banged for it in Set 2?

It's fun watching Gebert squirm and protest when we mention these foibles on his sorry little site, more fun to watch him try to squirm out of them by false comparisons of what we are saying and what his nerds are saying, we're keeping the historical record as pure as possible, they're whining about plastic Blu-ray cases (or make that polycarbonate). Sorry Michael, our priorities and contexts are a bit more justified.

RICHARD M ROBERTS

[Richard M Roberts]

One of the cine-whiners trying to start more pointless trouble and attempted dissing commented that I haven't critiqued the Laurel and Hardy set, like I'm in any way obligated to, and I assure you I won't. I'm happy to take on their usual historical inaccuracies (like their last Keaton shorts set, where they recreated all of the opening titles to say "A Metro Release", including the ones released by First National), but as I have said before, I was not an admirer of Serge Bromberg even before his recent problems, and we don't promote Flicker Alley releases for many of the same reasons the Mack Sennett Vol 2 set will be coming out from The Sprocket Vault instead.

And frankly, though I've seen much of the Lobster restorations, I have more prints of the Laurel and Hardy silents than I need or want, some even better than the materials Lobster used (SUGAR DADDIES anyone?), so apart from hearing some scores done by friends of mine and my old friend Randy Skretvedt's commentary tracks, the set really holds little or no interest for me. Any of the other mafiiosi are welcome to express their thoughts on the set, but we know that since the cine-whiners are so threatened and fearful of Paul Gierucki and myself, they really have no actual interest in any opinion I would have on the set, one of their little ilk would only make that comment to diss, so fuck `em.

If they and the other nits at nitwitvile can overcome their traumas about the polycarbonate Blu-Ray cases and trying to diss us, they could be posting their own reviews on the set themselves, you know that's why Gebert took the time to do a big review on the whole set because he was nervous that our comments were hitting a little to close to home. I love it, a decade gone from that sorry little site and I can still make Gebert jump through hoops.

RICHARD M ROBERTS

[Agnes McFadden]

When the next Sennett set comes out, wouldn’t it be fun to label it Vol. 3? Imagine the lifelong quest it will unleash among those searching for the elusive Vol. 2.

You could make the film.set Vol 3 & the booklet inside Vol 2. The OCD folks would go crazy looking for what is right under their noses.

Agnes