Fire!! (1926) User Reviews

Not particularly funny--and that's bad when it is supposed to be a comedy.

[planktonrules · 4/10 · 2 August 2009]

As the other review states, this is an excellent quality print--especially for a silent film.

The film begins with Snub Pollard employed as a House Detective at a hotel. However, he makes a nuisance of himself and is rightfully fired. Why, then, moments later does the ex-boss make him a fire inspector working for the hotel, I have no idea--a serious weakness of the film.

As a fire inspector, Snub is over-zealous and once again, gets himself into trouble. However, one situation that he's not responsible for is a crazed husband out to kill him because the old fire inspector was flirting with the man's wife. This results in some chases and the old cliché of wildly firing a gun (where, of course, no one is hit). This scene of a man firing madly was common in older Sennett comedies, so I am surprised that as late as 1926 anyone was still doing this.

When a real fire breaks out, Snub runs to the scene and the angry husband is soon forgotten. Snub's efforts to put out the fire are really lame and the film, thankfully, ends.

Sadly, while Snub could be very funny, the Weiss Brothers comedies I've seen that he's made look as if the studio was using third-rate gag men as writers. FIRE!! doesn't seem to have a single genuine laugh and I was amazed at how so much potential was wasted.

Mixed blessing

[suchenwi · 6/10 · 1 April 2009]

First of all, the image quality of this short comedy is excellent, compared with several of 1918-20 vintage that it came bundled with. Do 6 years make such a difference? Just for the image crispness, it is comparable to Harold Lloyd pieces from the same years.

But only for that. While there were some funny ideas (e.g. the boys playing firemen, the little bucket trick), too many jokes were unfunny (but then repeated too often, like how people get splashed with water from fire-hoses or buckets). The scenes that could have made this a great film (at least for this beholder, 83 years later) lasted only seconds: the fire engines coming out of their station, and in the busy streets.. the street scene around the burning hotel.. It appears as if they were deemed "not funny enough" back then, and cut very very short. What a pity.

All in all, a somewhat disappointing experience. I watched it twice the same evening, hoping to spot some goodies I had missed the first time around, but no. The few good spots are still far outweighed by the unfunny majority.