The Patsy (1964, Jerry Lewis)
Worst JL movie I’ve seen so far. I can’t believe this was the (directorial) follow-up to “Nutty Professor”.
Lewis is of course the title patsy. A famous singer/entertainer dies, and his handlers don’t know what to do with themselves. They want to continue their partnership, keep doing what they were doing, but how can they without a star to support? Enter clumsy bellboy Lewis. His character is sweet but SUCH a loser that it’s impossible to suspend enough disbelief to believe that the handlers would unanimously adopt him instead of taking maybe an hour to look around, or more likely holding a casting call.
Hardly ever funny, the romantic bit seems forced, movie’s sole reason to exist seems to be so Lewis could work with some high-class supporting actors, so here they are:
Everett Sloane (Disorderly Orderly, The Enforcer, Citizen Kane)
Phil Harris (Anything Goes, The Jungle Book)
Keenan Wynn (Piranha, Laserblast, Point Blank, Parts: The Clonus Horror)
Peter Lorre (M, Maltese Falcon, Mad Love)
John Carradine (The Howling, Frankenstein Island, Red Zone Cuba)
Ina Balin (The Projectionist 1971) is the girl, the heart of the picture, and Scatman Crothers gets one good scene.
Jerry is called the “king of comedy” once, and Ed Sullivan refers to having Martin & Lewis on the show before.
a patsy:
L-R: Lorre, Wynn, Lewis, Carradine, Balin, Sloane, Harris
this was his final film:
the mushy flashback scene:
funny ending, dismantling the set:
UPDATE: Senses of Cinema calls it “a discourse on comedy” and points to the scene where Jerry almost but never quite breaks all the priceless vases as an example of defying comedic expectations. See attached comment for a more thought-out opinion than mine.
Tags: comedy, Jerry Lewis
filmbo said,
January 24, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
Wow, I very much disagree with you. The Patsy is easily one of JL’s greatest films. The concept of a comedian who isn’t funny, and who never actually becomes funny despite the ending, is another example of his commenting on his own sad state as a resident clown. The story and even the deliveries are attacks on his audience, who he felt were cornering him into only making one type of film.
JL’s telling of jokes in the film is also worth noting, and can also be rather subversive. Within each joke, he focuses his attention on the set-up rather than the punchline. An example may be the reveal of the three back-up singers in the recording studio. Before we see the three JLs dressed as ladies, he throws in a slow tracking shot to build even more suspense before the disappointing pay-off. This is very deliberate. You can see traces of this build in his earlier films like The Errand Boy (take the musical number). It was a way for him to handle knowing that a) there was a punchline coming, and b) that most people probably knew what the punchline would be. The final “pay-off” to JL’s breaking of jokes comes at the very end, when he ruins his falling off the building.
Though I will say that JL’s entrance in this film, as well as his horrible lip-synching moment, are two of the funniest bits in an of his films.
The world is definitely split as to how to read JL’s films, and I clearly am on the more controversial side of the fence. I didn’t completely buy it until I caught some of his later films, mainly Hardly Working (which seems to be a direct comment on his lost Clown picture) and Cracking Up (which is an even greater comment on his entire career). Both are worth checking out.