334. The Heckling Hare (1941)

Warner cartoon no. 333.
Release date: July 5, 1941.
Series: Merrie Melodies.
Supervision: Tex Avery.
Producer: Leon Schlesinger.
Starring: Mel Blanc (Bugs Bunny), Kent Rogers (Willoughby).
Story: Michael Maltese.
Animation: Bob McKimson.
Musical Direction: Carl W. Stalling.
Sound: Treg Brown (uncredited).
Synopsis: A dim-witted dog is on the look out for a rabbit. Being a threat to Bugs, he takes advantage of the dog's lack of intelligence with his smart tactics.

Throughout most of the early Bugs Bunny shorts, (with the exceptions of Tortoise Beats Hare or Elmer's Pet Rabbit), the Warner directors were still writing the same story formula for Bugs Bunny, involving Bugs outwitting several different characters each short.

With that said, being a very common trait of Bugs Bunny throughout his career, later shorts on the other hand had more focus towards story and each short had different dilemmas. In this short, this is really the basic, A Wild Hare-type story.

Instead of a hunter: Bugs is being pursued by a dim-witted dog (if you wish to call him Willoughby, fine). Since this is a short where the story formula was still largely the same, Tex still had a new set of gags to invent, and this short he is certainly experimenting with new gag ideas, that would still seem beyond what animated cartoons, then, offered.

The short starts off like how an earlier Bugs Bunny short might begin, the antagonist of the short appears first, as the purpose is the audience would be wanting to know the antagonist better.

Willoughby is seen sniffing out for the scent of a rabbit in the forest. He introduces himself, and explains to the audience of his intended target.

Note the walk-cycle that Tex gives to Willoughby, which shows how Tex's walk cycles only get even more bizarre in each short he is making. With the walk animated by Bob McKimson, Tex shows an urge of attempting to create funnier animation, which is becoming more noticeable in this short.

This then follows with a glimpse of Bugs Bunny's ears once Willoughby discovers a rabbit hole. Bugs' ears then appear out of scene. This requires stronger character animation, as well as a heavier set-up from a scene used several times previously.

Instead of Elmer's gun, Willoughby's mouth is held wide open, and the detail on the teeth emphasise on the viciousness the dog could be. And so, Bugs outwits Willoughby with his presence, where Willoughby is too late for his double-take delivery, a gag formula that Tex loved to use between two parallel characters. Once Willoughby realises his error, this follows through a sophisticated, walk-cycle of Bugs Bunny who walks in rhythm to Carl Stalling and Milt Franklyn's synchronisation to I Was Strolling Through the Park One Day. The walk-cycle, likely animated by McKimson or Virgil Ross, shows how the animators at Warners were becoming more confident in exploring their animation, and that cycle alone expresses not only how much better the animators got, but also the freedom to explore several aspects when animating.

A great example of how Tex Avery was definitely allowing his animators to explore further in what they could do with animation happens in the following sequence. This classic sequence in the short centres on Bugs mimicking Willoughby's facial expressions in a psychological effect to have the dog's mind focused on making consistent facial expressions.


The sequence, animated by Rod Scribner, is great for what Tex was wanting his animators to do, as well as what he was attempting to explore. The wacky Tex Avery everybody would come to associate with is only at the tip of the iceberg in this short, and Scribner nails on how Tex probably visioned the scene.

Bugs and the dog go through some far-out expressions, such as the details of their mouths and Scribner was exploring the broadness of his animation in a lot of bizarre ways which no animator in Tex's unit did, he tries to top each pose with a more exaggerated feel towards it. Tex's comic timing is also a striking example of how he is attempting to achieve funnier timing.

The dog, making consistent face-making is already been fooled, to the point where Bugs is no longer a threat to the dog. It builds up with a typical Tex Avery delivery, as he holds a sign reading "Silly, isn't he?", but only returns from his hole with a giant baseball bat. Tex's use of colour to follow the effects is only seen at a brief glimpse, to find that the scene quickly follows with Bugs holding onto a damaged baseball bat. Tex's time couldn't get better for the build up that it got to. He is already succeeding in achieving funnier timing, and his talent of it is already glowing in this sequence. Stalling's choice for Mendelssohn's Spring Song heard briefly in the underscore is an excellent little cliche to emphasise of Bugs's innocent posture.

The following sequence, a gag which is largely borrowed from Tex's The Crackpot Quail, is once again another challenge in terms of animation in order to make the gag easier to follow as well as visualised in a comical way. Bugs, deciding to dive underwater, and placing his bathing cap, dives underwater, but only to end up being pursued by Willoughby on the way.


The effects animation (did they have other effects animators at that time, other than Ace Gamer?), is well achieved in order for the two characters to be communicated under water. One of the highlights would be through the communication of bubbles rising from the surface.

We can identify Bugs from underwater due to the frantic speed he is travelling through underwater, but once he's stopped by Willoughby, the silence then deepens. Their identities are somewhat more obvious as Bugs' ears and Willoughby's tail rise from the surface.

Tex only gets even more bizarre with the gag when a giant log is seen in the middle of a lake. Bugs travels straight towards the log, but manages to dodge by having both ears separate to each corner. Tex used a slightly, though more subtle gag in The Crackpot Quail which featured Willoughby sniffing the quail's gap, and at one point the tracks then become greatly separated. Here, it is more bizarrely visualised, as the ears separating is somewhat very surreal compared to the previous short.

The following sequence is another animated challenge, though it requires a lot of strong character animation, and methodical skills. The gag, being rather straightforward from Mike Maltese's writing: shows Bugs standing on top of Willoughby who is still hunting for Bugs, though without noticing his presence above him. Bugs, pacing up and down Willoughby, comes up with another strategy, and thus tickles him, causing Willoughby to scratch.

Whilst the gag delivery is somewhat basic in terms of how it looks how, the technical side would be a lot more challenging. For one, Willoughby would have to be animated separately, especially since Willoughby, for a small part of the sequence is animated as a walk cycle. Bugs, however, is animated separately, and thus making staging difficult for the animator, in order to achieve an accurate line position for the dog's back. It's likely that both animators were animated at the same time, once Bugs begins to tickle Willoughby, considering how the action is done.

The following sequence, and despite some great strategies and sequences invented by Mike Maltese: the following sequence is somewhat cliched. Willoughby, suspecting the rabbit is inside the bark of a tree has his hand reaching out on the other end of the tree. Bugs, once again taking advantage of the dim-witted dog, grabs out a tomato to place on Willoughby's hand.


Once Willoughby squeezes the tomato in his hand, Willoughby mistakes the tomato juice as Bugs' blood, crying, "I crushed him". He continues to cry, and expressing pity towards himself for killing the rabbit.

I've never been a personal fan of these sequences, and despite making the characters just appear even more foolish: it never made sense to me of their sudden sadness for killing an animal they intended to kill. Perhaps the impact of killing had reflected poorly on them? Well, a cartoon's a cartoon. Willoughby, mourning the "loss" of Bugs, arrives at his rabbit hole to place flowers besides it. Still sobbing, Bugs approaches on top of his hole and feeling flattered, puckers up to Willoughby: "For me, doc? Oh you darling".

This then leads to the cartoon's climax, and without doubt, the most memorable sequence in the short for several factors. One factor was that the sequence was reportedly considered to be the longest fall in cinematic history.

Tex Avery, who was taking new levels that Leon Schlesinger considered dangerous, had wanted to test the audience's patience by having the characters not fall for a great distance, but a total of three falls, which was cut from the print that everybody knows of today.

For further information on the removed sequence, read Thad K.'s enlightening blog post. Though the sequence was considered to be the reason why Tex Avery quit the studios (which wasn't the factor); it just goes to show how Tex was already becoming far more ambitious with his cartoon directing, but his original ending just happened to flop.

Despite the original ending, the edited version does feel somewhat a lot more better in terms of the short's cliffhanger. The audience feel for Bugs Bunny, their favourite character, and this was Tex's vision of testing the audience's mind on how they could make it alive. The problem is solved with them skidding to the grounds safely, with Bugs remarking to the audience, "Ehh, fooled ya didn't he", in which Willoughby responds, "Uh, yeah". The delivery works well as an ending. Whilst the original ending would have shown Tex exaggerating the significant amount of feet they are falling and landing from, it does feel somewhat very anti-climatic, and shows how Tex's original approach didn't work out.

In all, for a short that did itself have a repeated story formula: this allowed Tex to explore at different heights in terms of approach to gags, as well as timing. Tex's timing is only getting faster and edgier compared to his previous shorts, and his idea for gag build-up has certainly gone to high levels which he hadn't yet achieved before. Of course, there are many sequences in the short where Tex had recycled certain gags, though the mimic sequence as well as the fall stand out as being far more original not only as to how they were timed, but also how they were delivered. Mike Maltese, appears to be under much of Tex's influence in the short as many of the sequences feel very Tex Avery oriented, and little of the charms from Mike Maltese. In all, it was an entertaining short for a  Bugs Bunny cartoon, a character who is only getting funnier and broader in each short. The shorts by this point are only becoming a tad faster and edgier, and thus giving Warners a reputable name.

Rating: 3.5/5.

317. The Crackpot Quail (1941)

Warner cartoon no. 316.
Release date: February 15, 1941.
Series: Merrie Melodies.
Supervision: Tex Avery.
Producer: Leon Schlesinger.
Starring: Tex Avery (Dumb Hunting Dog), Mel Blanc (Quail).
Story: Rich Hogan.
Animation: Bob McKimson.
Musical Direction: Carl W. Stalling.
Sound: Treg Brown (uncredited).
Synopsis: A dumb dog is seen hunting after a quail, but finds that the quail outsmarts him too easily.

At this point in Tex's career at Warners; he was definitely trying out new material that hadn't been achieved with animated characters, especially with personality. Having already used the street-smart Bugs Bunny in A Wild Hare or the cunning fox in Of Fox and Hounds, Tex has another turn with an alternate and a queer choice for a potential character: a quail.

Combined, he also creates another slow-witted dog character who represents Willoughby in Of Fox and Hounds, though with an alternate design, whereas previously he was designed big to represent Lennie Small.

One typical viewer would be balked at how the quail could be another incarnation of Bugs Bunny, by using the word, "doc" and sharing the same wits. In the introduction sequence, when the dog and the quail are introduced: the dog is oblivious to his identity which is echoed from the Elmer/Bugs introduction in A Wild Hare.

This causes the quail to remark quietly in the dog's ears, 'You know what doc? YOU'RE RIGHT!'. It is a formula for Bugs Bunnthat has been used over and over again which works well as it creates a very surrealistic and three-dimensional character. I am curious whether an audience suspected of the sequence echoing from Bugs' 1st appearance, especially considering its popularity.

How Tex creates additional personality to the quail (perhaps as a way to not resemble Bugs too much) is he appears to use a lot of creativity as well as personality in giving the quail a continuous problem with the plume above his head. Other parts it pays off from the gags, whilst other times its execution fails. Let's get to the positive side.


Tex, being the expert of takes and reactions gives the quail's plume a spiked reaction when cornered by the snarling dog, prior to the stick throwing sequence. The plume reaction is animated wonderfully as well as beautifully exaggerated that the gag had its own advantage.

Another sequence occurs during the pond sequence where the dog accidentally sniffs his way underwater, and is approached by a fish as well as the quail disguised as one. This leads to the dog and the quail's plume communicating with one another.

Stalling creates a funny melody during the plume pattering in rhythm to The Umbrella Man. The communication is gold, as the plume is given life and realism through personality animation. The plume forms to a question mark, curious of whose identity he is communicating before going into a double take. Then this results in the quail's plume wiping his eyes like a windscreen, which again concludes the sequence well.

As to where the gags do not come to advantage, would be for two prime examples. One of the biggest ones off-hand is seen in the introduction where the quail first appears in the screen in full figure. As though Chuck Jones' molasses timing was enough to endure in a Warners short; Tex appears to fall as a victim in this short where he shows some useless piece of character animation of the quail being distracted of his plume, which is seen to be ruining his image. He licks his mouth to straighten it out, but it keeps flopping on his face, and this just goes on again. It would have worked if it was animated subtler, and also, only seen once, and not at roughly 30 seconds.

You'll notice that the quail also happens to whistle throughout the short, and tends to whistle in dialogue when he notices his plume is about to collapse. It can be seen as very naturalistic, and gives the quail a three-dimensional bit of personality there, but repeating it over and over again doesn't give him more of an identity other than a Bugs Bunny-esque character. For reader's sake, it is worth mentioning that Tex's own vision was to have the quail make a razzing noise each time, and it was used when it was released in theatres, but reissue prints replaced it with a whistling noise. Of course, having the razzing noise would've have shown a lot more of Tex's quirky humour in shorts, though personally I believe the whistle is better off as it is, considering how its more subtle than a razz effect, and notice how the breath effects are seen through his beak; which is what you'd expect in a whistle. Why the razzing noise was omitted in later releases, I don't know.

Watching the short on the animation side, Tex sure does like to let his animators explore the possibilities in animation, by creating very intriguing angles as well as obscure techniques. Note the perspective animation of the dog which shows him sniffing the quail's tracks. It's also a visual gag which is very subtle, as not only does the dog stretch as he sniffs, but note how comparing the size of the quails, that he appears to leave a track which is stretched wide out.

In terms of comic timing; Tex indeed starts to experiment with what he would become the master of, rather than relying on radio references, which is similar to what he did in the previous short. There is a chase scene which shows the dog and the looney quail in rushing from tree-to-tree and spot to spot.

Stalling's music cliches certainly add the touch, but in terms of timing and animation, the airbrush effects create an effective piece of movement where you cannot see the quail's legs as well as even the dog's.

It wouldn't be enough for Tex as he also creates a personality run cycle for the character, which he would love to exaggerate. Here, the dog pretty much has the exact same cycle as Willoughby in Of Fox and Hounds, where he was running in the most bizarre case. This shows how Tex appears to be desperate to have a change as well as a desire to create some wacky timing and animation.

Personally, one of Tex's more flawed gags in his career happens to be a recurring gag which happens throughout the entire short. At the beginning, when the dog looks at the advertisement for Barko's Dog Food (reference or just a corny pun?).

Desiring to catch a quail, he rushes and foolishly crashes into a tree, which leads the camera to pan beyond his appearance, and then back to the dog, who points: "A tree" in a cretinous voice.

The first time the gag actually is worth a laugh, especially for the timing as well as the delivery of the retardation of the dog. But, being a continuous gag, he doesn't hit the tree one, twice or thrice--but a total of four times.

To achieve great comedy, one must understand the patience as well as the pacing/construction of a sequence before slapstick could be achieved. Having been hit four times just kills the moments or the opportunities the short could have had. Though, one could say that it pays off well to the climatic chase sequence, which it does to an extent; and it can't make it totally flawed. The chase sequence is quite possibly the most visually fulfilling Tex has achieved up to this point in his Warner career; and he is showing great uses of speed where only the dog's head is visible. This then results in quite possibly one of the longest crashes in animated history.

The camera pans to a very long path with the crashes still creating, in which we expect an incredible amount of damage was caused. The crash as well as how the scene is setup is very entertaining and well-executed, especially how the dog reacts to it in the end, with the ending line: "Lots of trees!".

It is evident how Tex had deliberately set up the recurring gag to create one big laugh for the audience. It does pay off well, but the fact of having it just been a repeat earlier on bothers me a little, even though I'm sure it was a hoot for the audience of its time.

As all reviews must come to an end, I felt this short showed Tex Avery having a desire to try and experiment what he would master. It is clear he has been experimenting a lot more comic timing, than he was trying to make corny punchlines or corny puns. Whilst a part of the short at least steals some of A Wild Hare, it goes beyond what the former had, as the short appears to go a lot faster and comical. The quail/Bugs Bunny comparison is a little erratic, though no harm was obviously done as Tex already appeared to be in love with a street smart personality, which at the time was pretty much unheard of in animated cartoons. Overall, the short at times is quite enjoyable in terms of personality animation, as well as what Tex had to other, but its flaws...it's already been mentioned.

Rating: 3/5.

309. Of Fox and Hounds (1940)

Warner cartoon no. 308.
Release date: December 7, 1940.
Series: Merrie Melodies.
Supervision: Draft No. 412. (Tex Avery).
Producer: Leon Schlesinger.
Starring: Mel Blanc (Willoughby / George the Fox).
Story: Draft No. 1312.
Animation: Draft No. 6102.
Musical Direction: Draft No. 158 (too bad) (Carl W. Stalling).
Sound: Treg Brown (uncredited).
Synopsis: Two George-and-Lennie personalities: a sly fox, a dim-witted hound named Willoughby is in hunt for a fox, but never succeeds when one keeps out-witting him.


Before the review can begin, as it appears to be (judging by the copyright catalog) the original titles for the cartoon had a sort of gag to it; where the artists responsible for whichever were credited as digits. A very typical interpretation by Tex, but at the same time a little pointless as enthusiasts don't get to know who the story was credited to, and the animator...but at the same time? Does it even matter? Tex's unit already consisted of Bob McKimson, Rod Scribner, Virgil Ross, Sid Sutherland and Charles McKimson; whereas the story credit was rotated, and at the time: worked in groups. However, it's most likely possible credits or possible writers for the short could have been Dave Monahan or Jack Miller, who were regular writers for Tex in this time period.

The original title card does exist (though it is seen as a small size) through a group of original titles owned by Tim Cohea (Sogturtle); though it would be great to see it blown up into a clearer and bigger size.

Had Tex completely abandoned the Bugs Bunny idea after A Wild Hare and interpreted it as a one-shot cartoon? Of course not, where did I get such nonsense! Obviously, Tex would direct a few more Bugs Bunny cartoons; until he left the Studio...but did Tex experiment the personality formula with other characters? Well, here is the cartoon which is being reviewed.

It was no doubt that A Wild Hare was (and is) a revolutionary cartoon for the whole Schlesinger Studio; but before Bugs would make more appearances--Bugs would use the quick-witted persona for other characters. Here, we see the fox...named George; who is merely Bugs Bunny in a fox suit.

He can manipulate his potential enemies, for example..the bloodhound, Willoughby. He can easily outsmart his opponents, including a slow-witted, stupid hound; as well as a fierce, grizzly bear. Compared to A Wild Hare this cartoon lacks as much creativity and the gags appear to fall a bit flat in this cartoon. It has quite a tepid construction to the story; where it really focuses on Willoughby being out-witted by the sly fox, and falling off the climax. Nothing too original, or as well as exciting.

For what it is worth, the cartoon is a "first" for its reasons. For one, it is the first Warner short (or quite possibly Hollywood short) which is a satire of the very popular Steinbeck book: Of Mice and Men which was published in 1937. The parody between the two characters work so well, and the relationship is very rich and successful that this would revolutionise to more future cartoons using that similar formula (or satirising elements of it).

Also, this is the first cartoon which marks the first appearance of the short-lived character by Tex: Willoughby..who he had used in two other Warner cartoons: The Crackpot Quail and The Heckling Hare. With the 'Of Mice and Men' persona being more revolutionary in the cartoon, the contrast between Lennie and George. It's not so much on the book; but of Lou Cheney Jr's performance on Lennie from the 1939 Hal Roach film of the same name.

It becomes a very rich and believable concept from Tex. The fox being very cunning and sly, as they are known for, and whereas Willoughby just has the look and expressions of a dimwit.

It has an excellent satire that you are convinced you see George and Lennie inside of them, it can see through some excellent character animation by Virgil Ross when the Fox and Willoughby first encounter one another. This just about explains as to why the Of Mice and Men satire is revolutionary for the cartoon; as it would help upgrade the humour in the Warner cartoons by producing more clever burlesque, rather than just over-used, unfunny one-liners from obscure radio shows.

Johnny Johnsen's background paintings also punch up a notch in terms of detail and beauty. We've all seen his for for Tex's cartoons at MGM and Disney, who produces beautiful colours and designs for his shorts...but the panorama opening shows how rich it looks. Whilst Stalling plays William Tell during the opening shot where it is shown as early morning.

The colours of the sky show so much realism and truth to it. A background no nice, that Tex has used it twice: the latter for the MGM short Out-Foxed. Friz himself had also borrowed it for Foxy by Proxy--interesting how Tex still had access to re-use Johnsen's backgrounds when he was over at MGM; and yet Freleng could at Warners.

Note that even the backgrounds show a particular style throughout the film. Note the illustrated cover of the first edition of Of Mice and Men (by Ross MacDonald) actually shows some subtle inspiration in the backgrounds by Johnsen. Although it may not be very evident, but Johnsen's use of colour and the wavy trees give quite a strong connection to the illustrated cover--which could mean Johnsen was inspired by the cover.

On the animation side; Tex Avery is still developing on some characteristic cycles which he is well known for. Look at the run cycle for Willoughby when he running in the forest (supposedly chasing after the fox).

This is a great one which was hilariously animated (probably Bob McKimson) which shows how Tex could even be very wacky and exaggerated in some areas, even if he hadn't quite got into that faze. The cycle is used at least four times in the cartoon itself; which is used as a climax which then results into failure: three times he just falls off at the edge of the cliff, and the first he crashes into a tree "I'm gonna go catch the fox--'cos I know every tree in this forest!" and then he slams at the tree. Perfect timing. What's great about the run cycle is that it nails the dimwitted personality and low intelligence of Willoughby. It implies that Willoughby is that ignorant he cannot run properly.

Despite the cartoon being a little revolutionary in terms of the humour, the animation as well as animation timing--the story of the cartoon, however isn't so much of spectacular as those three which I covered.

The cartoon is really split into acts where the fox outsmarts the dog; and there is really no twists or connections which follow in the cartoon.

The first sequence shows Willoughby, dumbfounded of the fact he is speaking to a fox, and asks for the whereabouts. This means the fox responds:

"Well, I tell ya what you do. You go down to that ol' tree stump, and turn right until you come to a ray of fence. You'll find him right on the other side. You can't miss him". Then, Willoughby runs in his characteristic cycle until he falls, and realises: "Y'know...THAT was the fox!". The next sequence, however, is just a repeat from the previous sequence, except the fox is in disguise of a hound costume.

He repeats the exact same instructions, and then Willoughby crashes again. Tex deliberately makes the sequence a pointless repeat, even by the own words of the fox: "My name's George. Here we go again". The animation, most probably done by Rod Scribner, shows some great character animation as well as weight of the costume, whereas the previous sequence showed great communication animation (by Virgil). Whilst the acting by Blanc and Tex (voicing Willoguhby) is top-notch; the sequence really lacks any depth (and humour) as well as a climax for what is to come, a little irrational.

Then, the pace doesn't pick up until Willoughby follows the fox in disguise; but discovers however that whilst he is under the log; the costume stretches (as it is jammed from the log) and it rips open. So, George the fox then begins to run away from Willoughby, who realises it is the fox: "You know, George was spoofin' us. He was no fox all the time." Then this leads to a brief chase sequence; until the climax finally comes---Willoughby intimidated by an intimidated bear which he mistakens as a friend for trapping George the fox.

Tex's own use of suspense in the shots then becomes evident when Willoughby is hiding on top of a tree, frightened of a provoked, fierce bear.

George, witnessing the intense moment, then attempts to save Willoughby by using his craftiness--the ol' hotfoot. He strikes a match and places it under the bear's foot. The pacing of the shots where the match almost strikes his foot is very effective, as well as Stalling who gives the suspense through music. As though Tex was hardly wacky in this time period, a wonderfully comically timed sequence occurs when the bear is struck by the foot; in which it reflects all the way to the bear's spine, and he dashes off. For the time period it was made in, it shows some great use of speed and delivery.

 Then as the cartoon draws to a close; we find that Tex recycles and repeats animated sequences and bits of action and dialogue all to combine to the concluding gag of the gag. We find the realistic looking trumpeter on his horse; blowing to A-Hunting We Will Go, and all the other hounds follow.

Just then, Willoughby (who has kept George in his kennel) then asks him to help find a fox in which George, responds the exact same words which he used twice previously; in which Willoughby responds: "Well, gee, thanks a lot, George! Thanks a lot!" kissing George.

Then, this results in the crazy characteristic run cycle, Stalling's music cue for the run and he falls off the cliff. This time, hardly a sound---just a little 'ping'. The camera pans down vertically, in which Willoughby (already planned) had landed softly on a bunch of mattresses and cushions, remarking: "Ya know, I ain't so dumb!". A few flaws in the sequence, Willoughby's ignorance and consistent response to George's overused prank just gets carried away; and having a whole sequence full of repeated elements all runs down together. Except, that the concluding gag at least had a continuous bit of logic towards it...and at least a smart move for Willoughby.

Despite the cartoon being revolutionary in terms of its humour; using the Of Mice and Men formula, as well as character relationships...the cartoon itself falls flat and runs down together. The story is full of contradictions, where the results are just weak. The whole first half of the short is incredibly slow, where two sequences are generally the same, and many elements (and sequences) are reused several times, just to get one big laugh--which was the ending shot of the cartoon. It was just one of Tex's little ambitions in hoping to get a laugh, but it wasn't one which he pulled off successfully.