BUD ABBOTT and LOU COSTELLO: funny or not?

amazingly funny

Poll inspired by J Hoberman's closing in his review of the Universal Monsters DVD box in the Sunday NYT:

Small compensation to have three of the movies in which Universal paired its venerable creatures with their more current box office monsters: Immeasurably coarsening the strain of comic horror pioneered by (James) Whale in the 1930s, “Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein” (1948), “Abbott and Costello Meet the Invisible Man” (1951) and “Abbott and Costello Meet the Mummy” (1955) demonstrate that there are some things worse than un-death.

or, why normal ppl hate highbrow film criticism

What Abbott & Costello would you recommend someone who hasn't seen any

Laurel & Hardy's comic personas were a pair of adult simpletons. Abbott & Costello's comic personas were siblings aged five and eight. This makes them somewhat less sophisticated than L&H, imo, but more appealing to children.

I liked them as a child. Doubt I would care now.

Def prefer L&H's brand of idiocy

A&C def less sophisticated, moving at a faster speed than L&H; perhaps more crucially less genteel. Especially in terms of the TV show, Bud was actively mean to Lou.

wins, I'd say watch any TV episodes you can lay your hands on, also Meet Frankenstein, Buck Privates and below that, a few other movies from the '40s.

(Buck Privates is really half a musical and half an A&C vehicle)

they were radio stars too, if you feel like hunting online for some shows.

Thx, will see what's around

A+C had a funny man and a straight man like every other double act ever. L+H had the genius idea of one funny man (who wrote all the jokes) and one absolutely hilarious man. it still baffles me no one tried to repeat this, but i think it's because no one ever could. i think also the fact that L+H got on so well helped the comedy, whereas just about every double act ever despised each other.

cheers!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bh1qLlyCEAAtj6q.jpg

stay away from Africa Screams i've heard

Martin & Lewis had the genius idea of one funny handsome man (who sang) and one absolutely hilarious monkey-man. Unfortunately, the movies seldom allowed Martin to be funny.

Seen too little to judge, though I remember unsuccessfully looking for a copy of ...Meet Frankenstein at the video store when I was a kid (still have never seen). Do remember whichever one it was that had the elaborate mirage scene when they were stranded in the desert.

Do wonder. I know I liked them as a kid but not seen them in ages.
Might check them out if I get a chance.
Might give the tv show a shot. Not sure if I've seen any, know at least some films were getting repeats on 70s Uk tv, don't know about the tv show.

I got the aforementioned Universal Monsters box for cheap-ish (significantly cheaper than retail, anyway). I probably would've never gotten around to watching the A&C pictures but you've piqued my interest.

I cannot vouch for the second and third monster comedies, as I don't remember seeing them but am pretty sure they are considered diminishing returns.

i read a bunch of books on comedy as a kid (most prob written in the 60s and 70s) and i remember they all seemed to agree that A&C marked the end of the 'classic' comedy era without really explaining why; there was just this sense that A&C were 'just' a couple of ex-vaudeville guys who got lucky, just professional hacks reading someone else's scripts, without the depth or complexity or originality of the marx bros, w.c. fields, lauren and hardy, et al. i don't get the sense that this has changed much; even the three stooges seem to get more critical love these days. i've always thought this was extremely unfair, but i think it's mainly down to the fact that A&C did their best work on radio and television. i also get the sense that a lot of ppl who were into things like old comedy and old universal monster movies enjoyed the opportunity to be snobbish about something for a change, and poor old A&C gave them the perfect pretext.

haven't rewatched their movies in a long time (except "...meet frankenstein," which is great), but every time i've seen a clip on youtube or listened to an old radio routine i've always been impressed by how well they hold up: the timing and delivery are invariably perfect.

Gilbert Gottfried loves em, has done tons of riffs both live and on H Stern (and p sure w/ my comic friend at the Friars Club)

In the '60s/70s the TV show was in perpetual weekday reruns in NYC, and Ch 11 (WPIX) ran one of their films every Sunday morning at 11:30, so that produced a ton of NY-area fans who wren't around for their active career.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o1SAS8KyMs

found that clip here btw, which puts the TV series in context. Future Three Stooges member Joe Besser playing neighbor kid Stinky was indelible.

http://buckprivates.blogspot.com/2012/12/on-this-day-in-abbott-and-costello.html

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

After a month of deliberation I think I've come to a decision

I haven't. My mother absolutely loved them, more than Laurel + Hardy, Crosby + Hope, Marx Bros., whatever, they seemed to perfectly fit her adolescence, which was post war, late 40s/ early 50s - and as most of what I've learned about classic Hollywood cinema I learned from either watching movies or talking about them with my mother, I feel as if I have to give A+C some respect... but, I'm not sure, their movies are so rarely screened these days, I haven't seen one in literally decades... and Bud Abbott, what's with that guy? Shouldn't straight men have something more going on than just being 'straight', wasn't he just crochety and boring? Lou was funny, if not in an esp. subtle way. (This is all childhood memory tbh)... and another thing, do double acts who obviously don't like each other ever work? (Don't like Martin + Lewis either).

Achieved museum status for their "Who's On First?" stage routine

... and what about the Susquehanna Hat Company?

It is kind of funny that they were introduced to America (visually) in the same Broadway show that introduced Carmen Miranda, back in 1939

In the '60s/70s the TV show was in perpetual weekday reruns in NYC, and Ch 11 (WPIX) ran one of their films every Sunday morning at 11:30, so that produced a ton of NY-area fans who wren't around for their active career.

Bud Abbott's pure raspy aggression is hilarious in its own way.

Martin & Lewis liked each other for most of their years together, i think

As a kid growing up in the UK in the late 70s we got the cartoon version, the films would occasionally pop up on a Saturday afternoon.

Gregory W Monk's audio commentary on the Region 1 DVD of Abbott and Costello is more interesting than the film itself.

I like this line from David Thomson: "Deep down, we know that Bud has abused Lou - it is the secret in their films never quite arrived at."

sorry, commentary on the Region 1 DVD of Abbott and Costello MEET FRANKENSTEIN

I'm pretty sure he slapped him around on the TV show. That's comedy.

I watched all the old Saturday and Sunday morning re-runs growing up- L&H, Marx Brothers, 3 Stooges, Rooney/Garland (not really slapstick or anything but fun nonetheless), Martin/Lewis, Hope/Crosby etc. Abbott and Costello never clicked with me. Abbott in that moustache was the stuff of nightmares as a kid.

I have the best memories of A&C, although steered clear of the horror movie teamups. Moe Howard kind of scared me so I kept Stooges at arm's length. Bowery Boys were kind of bizarre to me. Wasn't the host of that WPIX show some kind of Irish fire chief? Had most of extended version of "Who's On First?" memorized at one point.

Just watched one of those clips and was thinking Lou was great at doing something I will call an "embarrassment take," Mary Tyler Moore being another television expert at this skill.

Bud's meanness verged on bothersome but seemed within the bounds of comedy convention, especially when in Junior High School I read a bio of them learned the showbiz 101 fact that behind the scenes the roles can sometimes be reversed

Morbius, do you remember Uncle Floyd one time doing a bit about "Abbott Presley"?

I do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeXUf6SxVEw

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LcQV3UBXn44/SyupssR9xII/AAAAAAAABPo/LouUs56o-ic/s400/wpix.jpg

http://www.tvparty.com/lostny2catjack.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_McCarthy_%28television%29

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

At some point in the early 90s (possibly late 80s) they were running the sitcom on Philly UHF when I saw it. I still think the "MEATBALL!" gag is great. Costello has such awesome timing, even when I can see a line from a mile away, the beats and rhythm crack me up.
This summer I watched the follow-up to Buck Privates where they join the Navy. It had its moments but I wouldn't recommend it if you aren't already a fan.

Dice routine in Buck Privates another stone classic.

Africa Screams is mediocre, but Lou has his good bits. Both Joe Besser and Shemp Howard in the supporting cast.

Africa Screams is really bad. it verges on Ed Wood bad at times.

"and Ch 11 (WPIX) ran one of their films every Sunday morning at 11:30, so that produced a ton of NY-area fans who wren't around for their active career."

I chose this over Unitarian Sunday school in Redding, Ct. Which is why i've seen all of their movies multiple times.

The original script had a lovestruck female gorilla pursuing Lou Costello. However, the Breen Office censors that enforced the Production Code objected to any hint of the possibility of a sexual encounter--even an unwilling one--between a man and a female gorilla. The writers changed it from a female gorilla to a male one, and the Breen Office approved it, apparently they saw that man/gorilla straight relationship would involve marriage and sex, but man/gorilla same sex relationship wouldn't rise above mere friendship.

Watched Rio Rita last night. It's amazing how fast Lou Costello's patter was - I couldn't keep up at times. Abbott's not funny per se, but the randomness of his stock placeholding interjections creates a hypnotic effect. This was an MGM release, one of three they made there on loan from Universal.

Abbott: Who is on first!
Costello: I'm asking YOU who's on first.
Abbott: That's the man's name.
Costello: That's who's name?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: Well go ahead and tell me.
Abbott: That's it.
Costello: That's who?
Abbott: Yes.

pic.twitter.com/ep6afGTUzH

— Parker Molloy (@ParkerMolloy) November 16, 2021

That's amazing--I'm tempted to think they set it up, but that'd be way too much credit, I'm sure.

Holy shit, I saw this thread bumped this morning and didn't think twice about it. Then later I saw that clip and though, omg, I need to add it to that A&C thread, without once thinking that the clip is why the thread was bumped!

I do think it was a deliberate bit fwiw

I started to wonder when I read the comments, but I've come across two newspaper reports (The Independent and The Guardian) that have written about it as an embarrassing gaffe.

However, (Tabitha Soren) may be best known for her 1992 interview with Bill Clinton where she asked the candidate on a “Choose or Lose” special, “Who's your favorite musician?” When Clinton replied, “Thelonious Monk,” Soren responded, “Who's the loneliest monk?”

having grown up watching MTV in the 90s, the idea that Tabitha Soren would be best known for one 10 second soundbyte is insane

She is also known for being Mrs. Michael Lewis, is she not?

Ugh, their teenage daughter died in a car crash earlier this year.

So, is that what she's best known for now?

oof, awful. she is indeed Mrs Michael Lewis, though I did not previous know that. He is one of my favorite of the pop intellectuals. I found the first season of his podcast actually enjoyable and thought provoking

eh didn't really mean pop intellectual... he's a journo. but what's the name for that category of folks like gladwell, freakonomics guys, etc

this is a very postmodern kind of weird minor cultural event today. to me, it was very obvious they were doing a bit, they were referencing the A&C bit, of course, in a very direct,1-1 parody way. but whatever, it's fox, and conservative humor is always either a guy in a flannel shirt making fun of white southerners or a reference to something that happened during the early era of black and white television. what's weird, though, is seeing the range of reactions to it, from conservatives thinking it's the most clever and hilarious thing they've ever seen, to people who have no idea it was a gag, and the interactions and confusion between the two (on twitter and the like). then there's watching the video again, watching their performances, knowing that they were going to devote minutes to an abbott & costello parody gag about how Woke television is bad and he was watching a show called You. You, Laura. He was watching You, Laura. What?

i want to die

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/Time_youcover01.jpg

I hope they keep it up, just lean into the fact that they're *all* bits.

"Up next, a guy named Brandon. Let's go, Brandon!"
"Wait, are you insulting me?"
"No, Brandon is your name, we're just encouraging you, Brandon."
"OK, I get it. Using Brandon as a slur would be very on-brand, wouldn't it?"
"Brandon on-brand? I don't know what you mean. I'm a fan, bran ... don. So let's go! What did you have for breakfast?"
"Bran flakes."

I don't know, I'm just not convinced it's a bit. It could be--the easiest thing in the world would be for me to say yeah, it's a bit and it's terrible--but I'm seeing a lot of reports take it at face value. I'm not sure myself--if it is fake, and I'm loathe to admit this, it's better (i.e, less obvious and clunky) than I ever would have thought that network or that host capable of.

this isn't the new "that's where i'm a viking" we wanted, but it may be the new "that's where i'm a viking" we deserve

I'd like to find out that Marjorie Taylor Greene is a bit. And Josh Hawley. And etc.

Greene may be Mike Myers in makeup.

you're right though, clemenza!

https://mashable.com/article/laura-ingraham-you-confusion

lots of people are disagreeing! if she's not doing the A&C gag...she, they both, are just incapable of communicating.

good lord. maybe it is real

wtf

"There's a show called Laura Ingraham on Netflix?"

Yeah, that's 100% a scripted line.

the way it's delivered, though. you can barely make it out because she mumbles her own name. also, watching it again, even if it's a gag, it's one where she comes off as especially dumb, even within the context of the joke. also, does she always seem so angry? i don't want her show. it's possible that, like, tucker carlson, she's just permanently in anger mode

this is upsetting my day. i am going to have to close the tab on this one for a bit

Only inclined to think this is legit because I've seen conservatives try to be funny on purpose:

We stopped the tax! (We stopped the carbon tax) @fordnation @RodPhillips01 pic.twitter.com/YczQL2jmBv

— Sam Oosterhoff (@samoosterhoff) October 31, 2018

was she being funny when she Nazi saluted Trump that time?

was pretty obviously a charlie chaplin reference

anyone saying this is a bit probably hasn't watched enough Laura Ingraham

like, I know the way conservatives try to do humor. if this was a bit, they'd be chuckling the whole way and would probably just straight up say "I feel like I'm in an Abbott and Costello routine!! You know, who's on first", and then afterwards laugh it off like "just having fun folks"

Basically my argument for why it's legit too: the mere fact that there's any room for doubt. If it were a bit, they'd be so heavy-handed, and so can-you-believe-how-clever-we-are?, there wouldn't be even a trace of uncertainty about the whole thing.

I mean, even Trump, out of all the funny things he said, how many of them were on purpose? when he actually tried to be funny he was corny as hell and couldn't construct a proper joke. which is why that "only if it's Rosie O'Donnell" clip seems so uncanny valley if you watch it now

Seemed like a bit but yes I do not watch her show

I watched. My sense of his frustration and her incomprehension is that they are very believable, and if this were planned and scripted, then they must be quite talented actors who rehearsed it over and over until they had it polished to a fine sheen. That effect of talking over one another is especially hard to pull off in scripted material.

i dont see why it's that hard to believe, I would imagine people say "I watched you last night" all the time to her referring to her show and she probably just thought "oh he's phrasing that weird" and then tries to recall if she did in fact do a show on that subject

You'll know if it's a bit if they do it again really soon, even more eagerly, with built in pauses for laughs and no talking over one another.

that would mean it wasn't a bit, didn't they spend weeks arguing that "covfefe" was not the President passing out mid-tweet but rather some coded message designed to make people laugh?

it's better (i.e, less obvious and clunky) than I ever would have thought that network or that host capable of.

It looks very obvious and clunky to me.

^ To me, too. One obvious tell is that it would be very easy for the guy to clarify what he’s referring to, yet he goes out of his way not to. Good enough for a publicity stunt I guess.

Publicity stunt for who? The TV show "You?"

Well I now know the name of this guy for no good reason

If they did indeed fool half the people who've seen this (primarily people they hate, no less--the people who want it to be genuine), I would think they'd be all over the place today gloating and celebrating their genius; modesty and restraint also not usually associated with the hard right. Don't see anything on either of their Twitter pages (god, this thing has me checking Laura Ingraham's Twitter page), like maybe they're just waiting the day out.

"One obvious tell is that it would be very easy for the guy to clarify what he’s referring to, yet he goes out of his way not to."

That's what did it for me. It was a pretty good job by the two of them tho of it was a bit!

The guy Raymond Arroyo is gloating on Twitter about how it was scripted.

he'd be doing that regardless, remember conservative media consistently claimed that every single one of Trump's misspellings was intentional

(xpost) I checked, but I missed that...I would expect some gloating, so once again I'm not sure. If it's fake, I will reluctantly concede a pretty good job.

Raymond Arroyo is gloating on Twitter about how it was scripted.

I think I'd need several credible witnesses and some detailed corroboration to back up that claim. otoh, regular FOX viewers will believe whatever they're told about it without the need for any evidence, so it's just a regular day in MediaWorld®.

"One obvious tell is that it would be very easy for the guy to clarify what he’s referring to, yet he goes out of his way not to."

He also gestures at her every time he says 'You', as if to increase the confusion.

It does make most sense for it to be a bit, for sure. Watching it with that in mind, it seems pretty stagey. But if you just give it a quick run-through on Twitter, it's not hard to think it's legit.