Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Reviews for: Stan & Ollie

Mad Matty
7/10  5 years ago
Last night, Steve Coogan held a preview of this film at the Roxy Cinema in Ulverston, Stan Laurel's hometown. The cinema is just above the Laurel and Hardy Museum (where I work) and he also held a party afterwards for his guests in the museum.

My initial reaction: Utter and total relief, and I absolutely adore it. I was very apprehensive about how they were gonna be portrayed.
However after viewing the film myself, I was really struggling to hold back the tears with relief. (Yes, I am a softy!)
Despite a few awkward scenes where they are arguing, their friendship and love for each other does shine through. I think that’s the most important thing overall.

It isn’t entirely accurate: One scene has Stan waiting to sign the contract with Fox Studios but Ollie doesn't show up because he's still at Roach Studios, making an "elephant film" with Harry Langdon called "Zenobia". This is completely inaccurate. Laurel and Hardy made 6 films with Fox, proving that Ollie did turn up to sign the contract.

He made "Zenobia" back in 1939. Their career at Fox didn't start until 1941. By that time Laurel and Hardy had made three more films together since "Zenobia": "A Chump At Oxford", "The Flying Deuces" and "Saps At Sea".

Stan sent Ollie a telegram when he was scheduled to appear on a radio show to promote the film "Zenobia". It stated: "Will be listening and wishing you loads of success. Yours as ever." Again this proves that "Zenobia" was made only because Ollie was still under contract with Roach and Stan wasn't. They never had an argument about it. Stan stated: "Please don't say my friend Babe and I have ever had a bad word. Babe is one of my best friends and the only arguments we have had have been occasional differences of opinion on stories. There isn't an actor in the world who doesn't want to discuss a story idea and give his own personal viewpoint." (Parsons)

The portrayal of Hal Roach is also entirely inaccurate. In 1934, Roach paid himself $2,000 a week, paid Ollie $2,000 a week, and paid Stan $3,500 a week, more than anyone else at the studio... according to L&H expert Randy Skretvedt.
Another authority on L&H, Glenn Mitchell put it right when he wrote: "Though necessarily ruthless, Roach permitted his employees a mostly free hand within an agreeable environment; most agree that there was no finer boss." (The L&H Encyclopaedia.)

But the filmmakers of this new film were open and honest, and have explained that it isn’t entirely accurate. After all, the inaccuracies are a good talking point for discussion.

Despite the inaccuracies, the movie is also filled with accurate attention to detail. The acting, both as the characters and as the real life people is incredible. The make-up work is astonishing.
The set designs is absolutely phenomenal - There’s one scene where they’re inside Roach studios, but we get a glimpse in the background of what the studio looked like from the outside and it was uncanny. How they’ve re-created that, I’ve no idea.
At the beginning of the film we see Stan scraping off the heels from his shoes. It’s not explained in the film why, but it’s just something for true fans to notice! The film has loads of little moments like this - The general public won’t notice it, but true fans will.

The make up, costumes, lighting and choreography are all second to none. There really is so much to love about the film and I am so positive that it will introduce new fans to the boys. It will also remind people who haven't seen them for a while just how funny they still are!

I laughed - I cried - I was relieved - I felt a mix of so many emotions, but overall, it was absolutely incredible and I love it with all my heart.
Like  -  Dislike  -  132
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reply by spikey_mark
5 years ago
@mad-matty Great shout and thanks for clearing up those inaccuracies.
Reply  -  Like  -  Deslike  -  10

Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Reply by the_guy_with_the_hat
5 years ago
@mad-matty Thank you for your fantastic review. I love the fact that there is a laurel museum. I makes total sense, but i just wasn't aware of it.<br /> <br /> From my point of view, the "i have seen their movies in my childhood and liked it, but that's it" point-of-view, i can just say: Boy did i cry.<br /> <br /> This just hitted a spot. The Reilly and Coogan hit it just perfect.<br /> <br /> And what i liked the most was, that it was on point. The 100 Minutes were perfect and nothing felt streched or so.
Reply  -  Like  -  Deslike  -  20

Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
faithful soul
9/10  5 years ago
Tonight I was blessed indeed. For starters, I was blessed with a wonderful film - Steve Coogan and John C Reilly truly brought those age-old (yet timeless) comedians to life, in a film that was both funny and bittersweet. With reenactments of some of their most beloved scenes, it was hard to distinguish their performances from the real thing. A testament of talent to the actors playing the parts, and a testament to just how brilliant the original comic pairing were.

Secondly, I was able to attend an advance preview of the film hosted by Steve Coogan himself. While I have always held L&H in high esteem, I have long been a fan of Coogan's work, especially the indomitable Alan Partridge. To be able to stand in a room with Coogan's friends and family, and the great man himself before the film started (along with members of the L&H group I am a part of) was just great, and while I never got to shook Steve's hand, I was still able to breathe the same air space as him!

Sill, I shouldn't let my adoration of Coogan take away from the magic of the film itself. For any fan of the comedic duo, this is a must see - it's just unfortunate that unlike the blessed few, you won't be able to see it for another few weeks yet, at time of writing! AHA! And indeed DOH!
Like  -  Dislike  -  50
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Keeper70
/10  5 years ago
Let’s get one thing clear about Stan and Ollie and beautiful as it is as a love story between two long-time friends who stick together even in the thin times, it is to all intents and purposes more or less a work of fiction. Big alterations have been made to the circumstances of the two great comedians because if you did not there would be no real dramatic story. So, it is understandable and not a criticism because Stan and Ollie is a great, emotional, hug of a film, strongly acted and written from start to finish.

To qualify this without wishing to try to be clever or mean Stan and Ollie were actually hugely popular on this tour and performed in top venues as part of a variety bill and not on their own and they had been doing these tours since 1942. I just found this interesting to see what was changed to give the story more dramatic imputes.

The film is a huge love-letter (how many times do I use this expression in my reviews) to the two men and the era it is set it. It is helped able along by the two actor portraying some of the most viewed comedians on the planet, with Coogan once again proving what a fine actor he is as he gets to grips with the screen presence of Stan Laurel and more importantly the off-screen persona, he is more than match by the sublime John C. Reilly playing the sweet-natured ‘Babe’ Hardy.

If the audience is not spoiled enough, we get Shirley Henderson (always perfect) and Nina Arianda playing the power behind the respective thrones as the seemingly icy double-act of the wives. Both give us as many snorts and laughs as the two male leads just from a different angle. The chemistry is perfect between all four.

Wedged in between the foursome we have the perfect foil, Rufus Jones, pitched sublimely between true fan and untrustworthy agent as the man who books Laurel and Hardy into the venues and then has to suggest ideas to the old men how they might get more fans into the venues with some extra unpaid work. In truth the story, setting and acting are sublime and make and sad, beautiful film, that is still uplifting despite, like life itself, it’s up and downs.

Personally I could have seen more the 1937 Laurel and Hardy that we glimpsed at the top of the tale, I loved the short cameo of James Finlayson a regular foil of the duo but it is entirely understandable that there is no real dramatic pull in a story of two men being very popular and successful.

Stan and Ollie is a great, commendably short film, that tells a true platonic love story between two great comedians from the golden age of movies and comedy and it leaves you warm, glowing, feel at the end and perhaps a tear in your eye.

You can’t help feeling it is a movie that is needed in the current climate.
Like  -  Dislike  -  40
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
narrator56
/10  4 years ago
This movie tells a simple story beautifully about two complex men at the end of their careers.

I think I disagree with some people in believing that Stan & Ollie benefits from narrowing the plot. Showing their career together at their pear would show what they were as a team and what they did together, but this angle illustrates who they are. It sweats the details. Coogan and Reilly are very convincing in their roles.

They still have ambitions that fuel an attempt at a comeback, but their ambition is clouded by the knowledge that they are past their prime. They enjoy the nostalgia and leftover love from their fans even while they try to rise above it. The movie is able to end on a high note even though they cannot achieve all of their goals.

Perhaps what I like the most about this movie is the treatment of the stars' wives. As the agent character states, the two wives are also a sort of double act. On the surface they don't seem to like each other a lot, but we see moments of respect and fun between them, and they obviously both love their famous husbands very much. As I said above, Coogan and Reilly do a great job in this movie, but it would have been a lesser film without these two supporting characters.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top