14 reviews
This is a pretty poor film in some ways. First, although Buster Keaton is in the film, he is not given much to do. Instead, Fatty Arbuckle is clearly the star and Keaton and Al St. John are just along for the ride.
The film has a few cute moments, such as the incredibly slow and lazy way that Fatty responds to a fire he accidentally started in the house. But, unfortunately, too much of the film is mindless slapstick--punching, kicking and falling for little apparent reason. While this was very popular in the early days of film, by 1917, this was fortunately becoming passé. Not that the violence and action was bad, but that films in the early days had almost no plot--just action and hitting. This film unfortunately didn't find the right balance--just way too much mindless pratfalls.
The film has a few cute moments, such as the incredibly slow and lazy way that Fatty responds to a fire he accidentally started in the house. But, unfortunately, too much of the film is mindless slapstick--punching, kicking and falling for little apparent reason. While this was very popular in the early days of film, by 1917, this was fortunately becoming passé. Not that the violence and action was bad, but that films in the early days had almost no plot--just action and hitting. This film unfortunately didn't find the right balance--just way too much mindless pratfalls.
- planktonrules
- Jul 15, 2006
- Permalink
Watching The Rough House and other independent Arbuckle shorts, I am reminded of the sort of films I made with my friends when I was in junior high and high school. Weird, plot-less things where being funny and acting strange reigned over any sense of story or coherence. It's obvious watching these films that everyone involved in their making was having a great time, barely able to keep themselves from cracking up in the middle of a take.
However, The Rough House is not among Arbuckle's better efforts due to this meandering. Much of the short is a flurry of people hitting, kicking, shouting, and falling over. The best moments come in when the comedy comes from the characters, such as the lazy Arbuckle nonchalantly trying to put out the fire raging on his bed from a cigarette butt he dropped or the jealous cook played by Al St. John overreacting to the comely maid flirting with a delivery boy played by Buster Keaton in his second film appearance. Everything else is underwhelming, even random.
However, The Rough House is not among Arbuckle's better efforts due to this meandering. Much of the short is a flurry of people hitting, kicking, shouting, and falling over. The best moments come in when the comedy comes from the characters, such as the lazy Arbuckle nonchalantly trying to put out the fire raging on his bed from a cigarette butt he dropped or the jealous cook played by Al St. John overreacting to the comely maid flirting with a delivery boy played by Buster Keaton in his second film appearance. Everything else is underwhelming, even random.
- MissSimonetta
- Aug 3, 2015
- Permalink
Housekeeping chaos for a well-off homeowner, his small cooking/cleaning staff and a visiting party of refined dinner guests with ulterior motives. As with most slapstick comedies of the day, it only takes a little nudge to transition from a sleepy ho-hum day around the house into a full-blown food fight with smoke in the air and a never-ending parade of head-over-heels pratfalls. This one spirals out of control in a hurry, with Fatty Arbuckle setting the bedroom ablaze before he's had his morning coffee and Buster Keaton flopping flat on his back twice in his first sixty seconds, then snowballs until Arbuckle is gleefully empying a gun into his own kitchen door while Keaton hurls butcher knives at the chef.
Honestly, there's very little to The Rough House beyond sight gags and ever-increasing stakes in a high rollers' game of physical one-upsmanship, but it's a riot when it's in the groove. Arbuckle and Keaton's brands of expressive comedy are compatible and complimentary, and their constant efforts to out-goof each other lead to increasingly rich rewards for the viewer. It doesn't mean much of anything, but it's a hilarious way to kill half an hour.
Honestly, there's very little to The Rough House beyond sight gags and ever-increasing stakes in a high rollers' game of physical one-upsmanship, but it's a riot when it's in the groove. Arbuckle and Keaton's brands of expressive comedy are compatible and complimentary, and their constant efforts to out-goof each other lead to increasingly rich rewards for the viewer. It doesn't mean much of anything, but it's a hilarious way to kill half an hour.
- drqshadow-reviews
- Jul 31, 2020
- Permalink
This short comedy has some very good moments that make up for other stretches that are more routine. There are also a couple of classic gags worth watching for in themselves. The setting has 'Mr. Rough' (Arbuckle) trying to endure a visit from his mother-in-law, with Keaton and Al St. John on hand to create additional havoc. The two best gags come right at the beginning: watch for Fatty's fire-fighting technique, later imitated by other comedians, and then right after that Fatty improvises a gag that Charlie Chaplin later refined and made into a classic - it's a nice surprise, and worth watching for. And after that, the rest of the film also has some good moments that fans of Arbuckle and Keaton should enjoy.
- Snow Leopard
- Aug 21, 2001
- Permalink
The Rough House, a Roscoe Arbuckle short featuring Buster Keaton in a supporting role in just his second film, isn't exactly sophisticated when it comes to humor. A lot of the comedy consists of people falling down or being knocked down. By my count, Buster alone hit the deck 11 times in his first 3 and a half minutes on the screen, over 3 times a minute. There are a few exceptions though, like Arbuckle using forks stuck into bread rolls to emulate a simple little dance, something Charlie Chaplin surely saw and improved on in The Gold Rush eight years later. That's at the 3:41 point and probably this film's best moment, but it's brief. Arbuckle also cleverly uses a fan as a potato slicer in the kitchen and a sponge to squeeze soup into the bowls of diners as a waiter, and I wish there had more riffs on this sort of thing. The film also seems choppy in a few places, usually around moments when women are falling, being groped, or kissed, suggesting to me that the surviving print may have been a victim to a local censorship board. Regardless, it's not very remarkable, and maybe only worth checking out for the dinner roll bit.
- gbill-74877
- Mar 31, 2023
- Permalink
Haven't seen much of Arbuckle since I was a kid and, on the evidence of this effort, I haven't really missed much. I can't help wondering how famous Arbuckle's name would be today had his career not been destroyed by the Virginia Rappe affair. Probably as famous as Larry Semon, who was also big in the silent era but is now all but forgotten - and with good reason.
Arbuckle is outshone in every scene by his sidekick, Buster Keaton. This was only Keaton's second film but his technique is already far in advance of Fatty's. The story is non-existent, merely a prop on which to hang the relentless stream of pratfalls and sight gags. That's OK if the gags are funny and their execution spot on, but only Keaton is getting it right, so the laughs are few and far between. As others have pointed out already, its Fatty's lackadaisical attempts to put out a fire and his sausage-on-a-fork dance, which pre-empts Charlie the tramp's more famous version by a good seven years, that rise above the mediocre.
Arbuckle is outshone in every scene by his sidekick, Buster Keaton. This was only Keaton's second film but his technique is already far in advance of Fatty's. The story is non-existent, merely a prop on which to hang the relentless stream of pratfalls and sight gags. That's OK if the gags are funny and their execution spot on, but only Keaton is getting it right, so the laughs are few and far between. As others have pointed out already, its Fatty's lackadaisical attempts to put out a fire and his sausage-on-a-fork dance, which pre-empts Charlie the tramp's more famous version by a good seven years, that rise above the mediocre.
- JoeytheBrit
- Mar 27, 2007
- Permalink
'The Rough House' that marks the directorial debut of Buster Keaton and is his second collaboration with Fatty Arbuckle, falls flat. The most amusing part is in the beginning of the movie where Arbuckle's character nonchalantly tries to put out a fire with cup of water. From there on the film goes downhill. Repetitive gags of someone getting hit int the face with stuff (I know it is slapstick and pie in the face was widely used gag, but this time they did it too much). Too random, too messy and too noisy (for silent film).
- SendiTolver
- Aug 20, 2018
- Permalink
- Horst_In_Translation
- Oct 14, 2017
- Permalink
- weezeralfalfa
- Aug 26, 2018
- Permalink
This silent comedy short, the second of the Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle ones co-starring Buster Keaton and-according to IMDb-Keaton's first as co-director, was a hilarious one that I just watched on Image Entertainment's The Best Arbuckle-Keaton Collection DVD's. First, Fatty tries to put out a fire on his bed with just a cup of water. Then, Buster as a delivery boy comes in and, along with Al St. John as a cook, wreaks havoc fighting over the maid. Then, his wife and mother-in-law entertain some guests who turn out to be...Oh, just watch The Rough House and just marvel at how things escalate to such absurd heights you can't help laughing all the way through like I did. I was especially blown by the way Buster's knife was thrown at certain places. And, yes, Arbuckle does a nice fork-and-roll dance here that Chaplin later put in The Gold Rush. So on that note, I highly recommend The Rough House.
In cinema's infancy, most of the comedy involved gags. That's very much apparent in "The Rough House", starring and jointly directed by Fatty Arbuckle and Buster Keaton. The plot involves a get-together beset by one mishap after another (i.e., when Arbuckle's character accidentally starts a fire).
Keaton was only getting started in cinema, so Arbuckle is the star here. His physique certainly abets the comedy. I understand that not many of his movies survive due to his career having suffered after the death of an actress at a party that he was hosting. It's too bad, because he obviously had a lot of talent. Basically, this is the sort of movie that you can enjoy if you're willing to accept a bunch of silly stuff.
Keaton was only getting started in cinema, so Arbuckle is the star here. His physique certainly abets the comedy. I understand that not many of his movies survive due to his career having suffered after the death of an actress at a party that he was hosting. It's too bad, because he obviously had a lot of talent. Basically, this is the sort of movie that you can enjoy if you're willing to accept a bunch of silly stuff.
- lee_eisenberg
- Nov 26, 2024
- Permalink
The most popular silent movie comedians in their heyday were permitted, if not encouraged, to direct their own films. Comedians such as Charlie Chaplin, Harold Lloyd and Roscoe Arbuckle were freely given the independence to direct, act, and often times write the scripts for their own movies. The payoffs for their success were beneficial for both their studios and for themselves. Buster Keaton joined that illustrious rank when he began his own production company in 1920 where he directed all his films for the next 10 years until 1930.
Keaton received his first taste in commanding a film production behind the lens when co-director Arbuckle gave him the responsibility to direct of few scenes in June 1917's "The Rough House." The motion picture was Buster's only second one he appeared in, but he became a quick study in learning his new profession as a movie actor after years on the stage. Also, he had begun to understand the craft of move making, assisting Arbuckle on writing the scenarios of "The Rough House." The title of Keaton's partly-directed debut film derives from the last names of Arbuckle's household, The Roughs. A day in the life of The Roughs consists of a fire in the bedroom, a male fight and arrest over a housemaid's attentions, a dinner party gone haywire, and a theft of jewels in the house. And that's just in a 24-hour period.
One particular sequence of special interest to film historians is when Roscoe places a pair of forks into two rolls of bread and choreographs a dancing scene with them. In Chaplin's 1925's "The Gold Rush," one of cinema's more famous sequences is when he's entertaining his visionary female guests with his "bread roll dance." This illustrates how comedians glean ideas from one another.
Keaton received his first taste in commanding a film production behind the lens when co-director Arbuckle gave him the responsibility to direct of few scenes in June 1917's "The Rough House." The motion picture was Buster's only second one he appeared in, but he became a quick study in learning his new profession as a movie actor after years on the stage. Also, he had begun to understand the craft of move making, assisting Arbuckle on writing the scenarios of "The Rough House." The title of Keaton's partly-directed debut film derives from the last names of Arbuckle's household, The Roughs. A day in the life of The Roughs consists of a fire in the bedroom, a male fight and arrest over a housemaid's attentions, a dinner party gone haywire, and a theft of jewels in the house. And that's just in a 24-hour period.
One particular sequence of special interest to film historians is when Roscoe places a pair of forks into two rolls of bread and choreographs a dancing scene with them. In Chaplin's 1925's "The Gold Rush," one of cinema's more famous sequences is when he's entertaining his visionary female guests with his "bread roll dance." This illustrates how comedians glean ideas from one another.
- springfieldrental
- Aug 6, 2021
- Permalink
Rough House, The (1917)
*** (out of 4)
Fatty Arbuckle helps run a seaside resort but trouble starts when a deliver boy (Buster Keaton) shows up. It's rather amazing to see how much time the star/director Fatty gave to Keaton who's allowed to steal the show with his physical comedy. Another interesting thing is that there's a dinner scene where Fatty puts forks in two rolls and does a dance, which Chaplin borrowed eight years later in The Gold Rush.
Butcher Boy, The (1917)
** (out of 4)
The butcher boy (Fatty Arbuckle) falls for the store owner's daughter and must fight to get her. The first half of the film takes place in the store and has Buster Keaton playing an obnoxious customer. This half is very funny but the second half dealing with Fatty dressing in drag in order to sneak into a boarding school really doesn't work.
*** (out of 4)
Fatty Arbuckle helps run a seaside resort but trouble starts when a deliver boy (Buster Keaton) shows up. It's rather amazing to see how much time the star/director Fatty gave to Keaton who's allowed to steal the show with his physical comedy. Another interesting thing is that there's a dinner scene where Fatty puts forks in two rolls and does a dance, which Chaplin borrowed eight years later in The Gold Rush.
Butcher Boy, The (1917)
** (out of 4)
The butcher boy (Fatty Arbuckle) falls for the store owner's daughter and must fight to get her. The first half of the film takes place in the store and has Buster Keaton playing an obnoxious customer. This half is very funny but the second half dealing with Fatty dressing in drag in order to sneak into a boarding school really doesn't work.
- Michael_Elliott
- Mar 9, 2008
- Permalink