The Sin of Harold Diddlebock (1947)

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Don't listen to the negative reviews

A Disappointing Continuation

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

{This review is for the 89-minute version.}Harold Lloyd revisiting one of his silent-comedy classics with the help of one of the sound era's most revered directors reads like a match made in heaven. The reality is much more earth-bound.Harold Diddlebock (Lloyd) is first seen in a flashback to his college days, a heroic escapade lifted entirely from the 1925 Lloyd comedy "The Freshman." Two decades later, the game-winning student has become an office drone, so much so his boss fires him for lack of initiative. Drowning his sorrows in strong drink for the first time, Diddlebock wakes up to discover he is wearing a loud checkered suit and lost all memory of the previous day.What we know, and he doesn't, is that his dismissal has awoken a ferocious beast inside him: "A man works all his life in a glass factory, well, one day he feels like picking up a hammer."This seems a fantastic set-up for a Walter-Mitty-style comedy; add to it the legendary Preston Sturges as writer-director, bringing along his team of wisecracking supporting players, and what's not to like?Apart from two or three scenes, pretty much everything."Diddlebock" spends too much time replaying "The Freshman," with insert shots of Diddlebock's future boss overreacting to every play on screen. Then we fast-forward to the then-present, in which the boss drops the boom on middle-aged Harold. Sturges and Lloyd play this very real, with only some black humor for levity.This actually kind of works, as it effectively sets up Harold's rebellion. Coaxed into a bar by Sturges regular Jimmy Conlin, he tells bartender Edgar Kennedy that this drink will be a first-time experience."You arouse the artist in me," the bartender murmurs, inventing a concoction he calls the "Diddlebock."Then Harold's off to the races, literally, putting all his severance money on a pair of longshot horses. The sequence is sustained nuttiness, up there with the best Sturges comedies.But the second half, woof, what a stinker! You get the feeling either Sturges never developed his story, or else lost it in the editing room. Instead of a development of the Diddlebock character, Sturges has Lloyd walk around with a lion and a ten-gallon hat, something about impressing bankers to invest in a circus idea, while Conlin trails after him screaming "Mr. Diddlebock!" over and over.It's such a shame because the film had a chance of being so much better. Sturges revisits old themes, sending up capitalism especially with the notion of Diddlebock's midlife crisis being brought on by corporate greed. Lloyd shows he had skills as an actor, developing pathos and charm (the latter especially in a sequence with Frances Ramsden playing the youngest of seven sisters with whom Harold has successively, unsuccessfully fallen in love).But all that good groundwork comes to naught as Sturges sticks Lloyd on a building to revisit past glories, dangling from a lion's leash with Conlin overacting by his side. This plays so hollow it makes one long for when he was just a fired office drone. Diddlebock finds success, improbably enough; more understandable is the sad fact neither Sturges nor Lloyd worked much after this half-baked partnership bombed.

This movie is billed as a comedy but the story gives little cause for laughter. Instead the movie dramatizes the plight of workers who labor for years in utter obscurity, buried alive in huge bureaucracies where they labor and are then discarded like a worthless commodity. That is not funny, even if it's Harold Loyd acting the role and Preston Sturges as the director. At first the movie seems to be little more than a cheap two-reeler, almost amateurish in its production. But after a while it becomes apparent that the movie contains a subliminal message relating to the human condition and how people have to become almost crazy in order to break through the shackles that smother their individuality and creativity. This theme does not inspire laughter. Indeed it is baffling why this movie was made at all.

Thank you Preston Sturges for this little hidden treasure. This movie evolves from scene to scene slowly and gracefully in some places and abruptly and catastrophically in others. It is like life and it is not like life. Harold Lloyd is brilliant throughout. The action packed football scene sets the stage, part Three Stooges part WC Fields. There are scenes in this movie that are at the pinnacle of comedy -seriously the best comedy of all time! (See the bartender scene, the take my circus scene, the form fit Franklin for the fit phenomenal scene, the your fired scene) then there are places where the pacing wanes for you to catch your breath and better enjoy what is to come. The lessons to live by involve accepting a little risk. I love this movie. Anyone who has ever mistrusted a banker should love this movie too.

While I was able to watch this film without throwing something at the TV screen, it was tough going for me since I am a HUGE fan of Harold Lloyd. For those who don't know much about Lloyd, though, I am sure the film is probably more watchable because expectations aren't nearly as high as mine were. When I think of Lloyd, I know he was one of the most brilliant comedians of all-time and produced some fabulous silent and talking films. Because of this, I could see just how far below average this film was for the actor.Quite frankly, in many places the film is just bad. The worst problem was the beginning of the movie where the final super-important football game from Lloyd's silent classic, THE FRESHMAN, was replayed. That's because at the end of the THE FRESHMAN, Harold was a hero and the film ended so perfectly. But, in MAD Wednesday, it picks up from here and shows that Harold's moment in the sun was brief and all too quickly, we see him as a pathetic washed-up has-been! This is just awful and seems to destroy that wonderful and wholesome character. How could Mr. Lloyd have allowed the writers to have done this to his once-great character?! This made the character not so much sympathetic (like "Speedy" originally was), but just pathetic.Also, at times, the jokes were very, very broad and bad. The worst was when Harold drank alcohol, he let out a very stupid and embarrassingly bad yell that was supposed to be funny. It wasn't. And to do it again and again was just beating a dead horse. I have long been critical of Preston Sturges, despite the generally high acclaim he's received. While I did enjoy a few of his films, such as HAIL THE CONQUERING HERO, I also disliked many because his sense of timing was, at times, just awful--beating jokes half to death. Sublety was NOT a trademark of his work! Some prime examples are the laughing scene towards the end of SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS and the fumbling sequence from UNFAITHFULLY YOURS--two well-received films that could have used some editing to allow the scenes to seem more realistic and less "sledgehammer symbolism". And this is sad, because for Harold Lloyd, his subtlety was so much of what made him a genius. The combination of Lloyd and Sturges was terrible--especially when the building climbing scenes from Lloyd's SAFETY LAST (a brilliant film) are terribly redone--with rotten camera-work that was so obviously fake and a lion added for god knows what reason! For Harold Lloyd fans, this is a painful to watch and completely unnecessary film. While the main plot idea of Harold getting drunk and doing some amazing things to strike it rich in the process was a good basis for a film, the rest of the film was low-energy and sub-standard.