Tit for Tat (1935 film)

Tit for Tat
Directed by	Charles Rogers
Written by	Stan Laurel Frank Tashlin
Produced by	Hal Roach
Starring	Stan Laurel Oliver Hardy
Cinematography	Art Lloyd
Edited by	Bert Jordan
Music by	Leroy Shield
Distributed by	Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Release date	January 5, 1935 (1935-01-05)[1]
Running time	19:25
Country	United States
Language	English

Tit for Tat is a 1935 short comedy film starring Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy. It is the only direct sequel they made, following the story of Them Thar Hills, which was released the previous year and includes the same two supporting characters, Mr. and Mrs. Hall, portrayed by Charlie Hall and Mae Busch.^[2] This "two-reeler" is notable too for being nominated for an Academy Award as Best Live Action Short Film (Comedy) of 1935, although it did not win.^[3] It also has a central theme similar to the comedy duo's 1929 silent short Big Business. In the opening scene of Tit for Tat, Oliver places a sign in the front window of his and Stan's electrical store. It reads "Open for Big Business", an allusion to the escalating revenge and "reciprocal destruction" common to both films.^[4][5]

Laurel and Hardy inaugurate an emporium specializing in electrical merchandise, Laurel and Hardy's Electrical Supplies, situated proximately to Charlie Hall's provisionary establishment. A chance visitation to Hall's premises, ostensibly to foster neighborly relations, foments a misunderstanding, precipitated by Hall's lingering suspicion stemming from a prior encounter involving the inadvertent consumption of alcoholic-infused well water. Hall misconstrues Hardy's intentions, perceiving them as amorous overtures toward his spouse, thereby catalyzing a sequence of misapprehensions and entanglements.

Subsequent occurrences ensue, marked by fortuitous pilferage from Laurel and Hardy's establishment by an opportunistic customer, while the duo contends with an array of misfortunes, including an unintentional intrusion into Mrs. Hall's abode facilitated by a mishap with a ladder and a pavementside platform during a sign maintenance endeavor.

A crescendo of misadventures ensues, punctuated by retaliatory maneuvers instigated by Laurel and Hardy in response to Hall's perceived transgressions. These exchanges escalate in intensity and absurdity, emblematic of a tit-for-tat dynamic, culminating in a tumultuous confrontation between the parties.

Meanwhile, the persistent pilferage perpetrated by a recurring shoplifter, initially inconspicuous but progressively audacious, serves as a parallel narrative thread, emblematic of the duo's waning vigilance amidst their escalating feud with Hall.

The climax manifests in a chaotic confrontation between the parties, abated only upon the intervention of law enforcement, culminating in a truce brokered through diplomatic negotiation.

Laurel and Hardy return to their emporium, only to discover the depletion of their inventory at the hands of the relentless shoplifter.

• Stan Laurel as Stan
• Oliver Hardy as Ollie
• Mae Busch as Mrs Hall
• Charley Hall as Mr. Hall, the grocer

Uncredited:

• Bobby Dunn as shoplifter
• Baldwin Cooke as customer
• James C. Morton as policeman
• Jack Hill as passerby
• Viola Richard as passerby

The short was popular with audiences in 1935 and was generally well received by critics and theater owners. Variety, the entertainment industry's leading trade paper at the time, gives the film high marks in its March 27 issue.^[6] In its review of Tit for Tat, the paper also alludes to news reports that Laurel and Hardy's partnership had recently ended due to Stan's recurring disputes with producer Hal Roach:^[7][8]

Newest L&H short, and perhaps the last, since they split recently, is another topnotch two-reeler with a sufficiency of laughs and novel situation accompaniment...Stan and Oliver are in the electric business...One bit neatly worked up is a man walking in and out of the electric store and walking out with increasingly large bundles. The fat boy and his thin partner are too busy fighting with their neighbor to bother with him and for a tag finish the crook comes up in a truck to clean out what little is left.^[6]

The Film Daily, another widely read trade publication in 1935, was impressed by all the "Grand Laughs" in Tit for Tat.^[9] In its March 23 review, the paper welcomes what it views as the comedy duo's return to broad physical comedy and, like Variety, draws special attention to the shoplifter's role in the film:

This Laurel and Hardy funfest gets back to the good old slapstick technique of their earlier pictures, and is one of their best...A very funny running gag has a stranger entering their store and walking out with valuable electric appliances for the home. Each time the partners return to the store they encounter the thief, but are so occupied with their row with the grocer that the pay no attention to him....^[9]

Motion Picture Herald, yet another influential trade publication in 1935, gives the film a somewhat restrained, clinical assessment in its March 10 issue, describing the short as a "Good Comedy" with "numerous laugh-provoking situations".^[10] In addition to providing reviews and news about the film industry, Motion Picture Herald regularly published the reactions of theater owners or "exhibitors" to the features and shorts they presented. Their reactions to Tit for Tat were mixed, although most were very positive. "A lot of laughs", reports Roy Irvine, owner of the Ritz Theatre in Ritzville, Washington, while H. G. Stettmund of the H. and S. Theatre in Chandler, Oklahoma, describes it "the best these boys have made for a long time."^[11] Some theater owners, however, considered the film to be a mediocre production and only a modest box-office draw. C. L. Niles, the owner of Niles Theatre in Anamosa, Iowa, was not impressed with the short. In the April 20 issue of Motion Picture Herald, he grades it "Just fair" and remarks that his theater simply "got by" in screening it, suggesting that the film, as least in Anamosa, had not been very successful in boosting ticket sales.^[12] In Eminence, Kentucky, the owner of that town's cinema, A. N. Miles, found it to be a decidedly weak comedy. "Not a good laugh in the whole two reels", he complains in the July 13 issue of Motion Picture Herald.^[13]

• Tit for Tat at IMDb
• Tit for Tat at the TCM Movie Database