O Homem Forte

The peculiar talents of Harry Langdon are displayed to their fullest advantage in the baby-faced clown's best silent feature. Seen today, it's certainly the most accessible of his few surviving films, but Langdon's curious, childlike habits and demeanor, so totally bizarre in a character meant to be a functioning adult, may still leave many viewers scratching their head. The success of this particular film can be credited, in part, to director Frank Capra, who had the patience to nurture Langdon's unique pantomime skills, using long, extended takes in which the comedian could freely improvise. Capra's pious sentimentality can be cloying (the story involves a wholesome small town rescued from gamblers and bootleggers), but he gave Langdon all the elbow room the comedian needed to work his innocent, uncertain magic. Playing the hapless assistant to a vaudeville strong man, Langdon responded with more than one unforgettable routine, proving himself the equal to his better remembered peers in the art of silent comedy.

I had heard of Harry Langdon for quite some time before I finally bought any of his films. He suffered quite a fall from grace by the end of the 1920s and his time at the top was relatively brief. Langdon became reduced to making 2 reeler comedies and alcohol became a problem for him. Now, thanks to a new biography that sets the record straight and some films being available, the talent of Harry Langdon can be fully appreciated. Released in 1926, "The Strong Man" is a story about a soldier in the First World War who is corresponding with a young lady from home in the form of many letters. Once he is demobbed from active service, Langdon attempts to locate his female pen pal. All kinds of comic mishaps occur during the film. It is quite clear to me that Langdon is like a child in a man's body. He views the world and the people within, with feelings of vulnerability, uncertainty and bemusement. It begs the question: can he look after himself by protecting himself from the various dangers and pitfalls that come with every day life? The comic creativity in "The Strong Man" is very good. Each scene demonstrates Langdon's comic ability via some well timed moments. He isn't one of these comic clowns who performs slapstick at a fast and furious rate. He has opted for a more leisurely pace and this suits him. On the strength of this film and "Tramp, Tramp, Tramp" from 1927, Harry Langdon deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd and Stan Laurel.

Having read the comment proceeding my own, I felt compelled to write a brief comment about this film (that I watched yesterday).

Sadly the previous reviewer didn't laugh a single time, which is in direct conflict with my own experience, I laughed out loud at several places in the film (and I watched it at 4:00am, so laughing out loud isn't ideal!) I enjoyed just about every aspect of the film, from the actors to the set-pieces, to the silly and poignant. There is even one moment of pure cinematic brilliance when a last curtain/sheet tears into shreds (when you see the film you'll know the sequence I'm talking about) which I thought was visually arresting.

Sadly we are too often drawn to categorize and judge films based on what is "best" or "more worthy". It seems every film must be judged against the very best at all times. I think this is a little unfair, and prefer to maintain a more open mind.

The bottom line was, this film actually did make me laugh out loud, and I was entertained throughout. From the opening sequences on the battlefield to the finale at that den on inequity. I highly recommend it to everyone, and it's certainly worth seeking out.

10 out of 10 for me, I'm going to rewatch this tonight with my good wife. Good times!

There's something about Harry Langdon that just doesn't work for me. Judging by the high marks this film has received and the uniformly positive reviews I'm clearly in the minority, but I simply can't see the appeal of this curious, borderline weird babyman. Langdon had a good sense of comic timing, there's no argument there, and with good direction from Frank Capra he clearly knew what his character was about (but only through his director's instruction, it would later transpire) and this film is even free of the over-sentimentality that so often plagued silent movies of all genres, but the fact is - his material just isn't very funny.

That's not to say there aren't any laughs in this, Langdon's first feature length comedy. There are a few: the shuffling upstairs backwards scene, the strong man act, the... erm... well, the shuffling upstairs backwards and the strong man act are about it to be honest. The meeting between Langdon's timid Belgian soldier and Mary Brown, the woman whose love letters sustained him during the Great War, is extremely well-handled, but even this scene is let down because Capra didn't seem to want to say 'cut.'

The film begins in WWI and Harry is a Belgian soldier who has an American pen pal. After the war, he comes to America as a sideshow strong man's assistant. However, he thinks it will be easy to find a girl named "Mary Smith"--which it naturally isn't. Eventually, he and the act arrive in a small town where Mary happens to live, but she is avoiding meeting Harry and it looks bad for our intrepid hero.

Years ago, I saw a compilation film about silent comedians (WHEN COMEDY WAS KING) and the film said there were "three truly great comedians of this age--Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin and Harry Langdon". Well, I knew this wasn't true, since Arbuckle (before the scandal) was much more famous and during most of the twenties, the most successful (and possibly best) comedian was Harold Lloyd. I truly think the film made this assertion because back in 1960 when it was made, Lloyd's films were not available--being owned by Lloyd and were locked in his safe.

As for Langdon, I've not seen tons of his films, though most are no longer in existence today. However, I've seen enough to know he wasn't one of the greats--perhaps a near-great. This film is supposed to be one of his best films and at no point did it approach the great work of Lloyd, Keaton or Chaplin. In fact, I much prefer Langdon's short films more than his full-length ones because the pacing is much better. In THE STRONG MAN, the film is 75 minutes long, but could easily had 10 minutes snipped off without harming the film at all. Plus, there are a few really good gags, but only a few. Now this doesn't mean that I must have a silent comedy that is constantly funny (after all, the other three greats I mentioned did make some wonderful character-driven full-length films). However, poor pacing undid the film and with this slight trimming, it would have probably earned a 9.

A very good comedy, just not one of the great ones.