There may be many different forms of humour, but comedy has always been driven by a few major tenets, with every work that sets out to provoke some form of laughter following either one or a combination of these concepts. Mistaken or false identities have always been a very reliable source of humour, going back to the earliest days of theatre, where audiences were presented with dastardly and delightful works that were built on the fact that the mirror doesn’t always reflect reality (to appropriate one of those hackneyed adages from our high school English classes), which can be very funny when done well. Another very funny theme that we find in many comedies is the idea of culture clash, where two wildly different groups come into collision, usually when one finds themselves in the space of another, with the effectiveness of the comedy usually depending on the degree of difference between them. A film that utilizes both of these particularly well, and manages to be very effective in both concept and execution, is Fancy Pants, in which director George Marshall works closely with Edmund L. Hartmann and Robert O’Brien, who work laboriously to adapt the novel The Ruggles of Red Gap by Harry Leon Wilson, which was previously made as one of the very best films during Hollywood’s Pre-Code era, and which has remained a masterpiece of this peak era in comedy, single-handedly helping launch Charles Laughton’s career as not only a very gifted, classically-trained actor, but one of our greatest comedic performers. This discussion is not about him, nor his film, but rather this wonderfully energetic and upbeat revival of the material, in which Marshall (one of the great journeyman directors of his generation) takes this existing material and reconfigures it into one of the most unexpectedly delightful and brilliantly inventive comedies of this new stage in Hollywood, which benefitted massively from this rise in more subversive cinema.

Naturally, we have grown accustomed to expecting remakes of cherished works to be far inferior to the original production, even when its predecessor is not seen as some sacrosanct product, but rather has a strong but not infallible reputation. There was a concerted effort to undergo a process where part of the film was finding new ways to explore this old material, without losing the spirit of the original, but also not depending too heavily on those traits, under the impression that doing so will only create further unnecessary comparisons. For the most part, Fancy Pants is very successful, turning the original novel and previous film into a fascinating and quite endearing riff on the major themes (rather than a direct facsimile of the previous plot – there is an entirely new framing device that sets up the conflict that is at the heart of the film, and it is certainly allowed to go in its own direction, which is quite an amusing prospect, since looking at the cast they assembled to tell this story, one could only imagine the potential for mischief and appetite for destruction that came when proposing this film, which helps develop the intriguing identity that governs most of this film and makes it such an invigorating and charming work, all through carefully constructing a very strong sense of humour. If you are going to adapt something that has been a proven success in more than one medium, it is vital to choose an approach that actually works for the material, so while it has been marketed as a musical (which is indeed quite a radical shift for reasons we will outline shortly), its the actual use of humour, and how it frames that is already quite an intriguing story, which is done in a way that is consistently thrilling and always very interesting, but also challenging in ways we may not expect. Fancy Pants is able to stand on its own as a well-constructed comedy that hits all the right notes and makes perfect jokes at the appropriate time – what other motivation could there be for such a film than to be a well-crafted work of pure comedic madness, delivering on all of its promises, which is a much rarer achievement than perhaps we may realize.

Obviously, the main attraction of a film like Fancy Pants is not the fact that this is a reinterpretation of a cherished text that was previously made into a well-received film (and the fact that the film doesn’t even market itself on its source material is a clear sign about exactly how inconsequential it saw the connection), but rather the two stars that anchor the production. Bob Hope and Lucille Ball achieved the status of near-royalty when it came to comedy, becoming two of the most beloved entertainers of the 20th century, their careers spanning several decades and seeing them conquer every conceivable medium. The decision to pair them was a shrewd one – they had previously worked together in Sorrowful Jones the year before (which proved that they had chemistry), and they’d continue to collaborate in subsequent years, in both film and television. They brought out the best in one another, and had so much compatibility, it’s surprising they were never consolidated as a legitimate comedic duo (some may argue that their notorious egos prevented them from sharing the spotlight with anyone else too regularly) – and as the marquee names that were essentially the driving force behind the entire production, they bring everything they could to this film, turning Fancy Pants into even more of a delightful experience. Without their popularity, as well as their ability to command the screen at every possible moment, it’s doubtful this film would have registered with any degree of significance, and while we can imagine any vaguely competent comedic actor could have effectively played these roles, it’s difficult to imagine anyone else giving these performances, which are built from the actors’ personas, as well as their capacity to handle many different forms of comedy, and make it look natural. No two performers have ever made comedy look more easy than Hope and Ball, so it’s almost undeniable that this film owes every iota of success to their pairing, and the brilliant experience of seeing them play off one another with such dedication.

More than anything else, what really endears us to Fancy Pants and helps gives it a lot of charm is the very simple fact that this is an effortlessly fun, entertaining film that never takes itself too seriously. It does struggle with a few cases of not knowing exactly what it wanted to be, constructing itself as a musical adaptation, but only featuring three songs that are spread so far apart, we forget about them after a while, which is arguably an effort to help distance this film from the source material, which was a smart decision in theory, but perhaps should have been given slightly more thought in order to avoid the same trite conventions that usually dominate with these films. It does effectively overcome many of the more conventional cliches by offering a more absurd depiction of this world – The Ruggles of Red Gap was very funny, but it was steeped in realism, whereas Fancy Pancy is as wacky and off-the-wall as a film like this can get, with bright colours accentuating the increasingly bizarre scenarios, which in turn give the film such a distinctly surreal perspective, which is only made more striking by the gorgeous Technicolor photography – nothing has ever looked more beautiful than the Old West shot through the lens of Charles Lang’s camera, which proves to be one of the more unexpectedly defining aspects of this film, elevating what was already a very strong story and making it far more complex based purely on the artistic resonance that comes through. This is most importantly a film that doesn’t take itself too seriously, but still has enough foresight to know that they weren’t making a film for immediate audiences, but rather future generations as well – a good comedy is one that aligns itself with what is popular at the time, as well as the elements that would remain more timeless, and nothing ages better than pure chaos distilled into a compelling and frequently funny story that knows how to make the best of every moment, in spite of the shortcomings that keep it from being an unimpeachable masterpiece, which is a challenging achievement for any film, so it shouldn’t be too controversial that this film never quite reaches that point.

Funny Pants is certainly a film that provides exactly what it promises – it is an off-the-wall, outrageously funny comedy that is driven by its eccentricities, which it utilizes in increasingly creative and memorable ways. It blends genres, being as brilliant a period comedy as it is a western musical, oscillating between styles with wit and dedication, the likes of which seem to be restricted to the early era of Hollywood, where maximalist, over-the-top cinema was not only more common, but actively encouraged, since it felt like a spectacle. We had not quite reached a place where more excessive musicals were becoming popular (and at only 92 minutes, this film is surprisingly compact, which likely aligns more with the tightness of comedies produced during this era, rather than musicals, which were allowed to be a bit more expansive), but yet we see the roots embedded deep within this film. It’s peculiar to think that a remake of a classic era comedy would go on to be covertly influential to an entire genre, but this is simply one of the many surprises that define this film and make it such a peculiar but captivating work. It is driven by actors who understand exactly how to master the material, and it feels refreshing and funny in ways that many of us may not expect from a film produced in 1950 (the off-colour humour is rare, but when it does re-emerge, it hits twice as hard purely on the virtue of being made during a far more conservative era). More than anything else, Fancy Pants is a hilariously irreverent social satire that draws on culture clash as a source of humour, and while many films may have neglected the nuances that normally make these stories effective, this one instead chooses to highlight them, creatively and consistently drawing our attention to some deeper meaning that lurks beneath the surface of the film – it doesn’t dampen the off-the-wall humour, but it does create quite a vivid blend of genres, all of which are masterfully handled by the director and his stars, who seem to understand the value of a story well-told, and the impact of good, solid execution of the boldest and eccentric ideas, which rely on delivery just as much as they do conception.