Sunday, April 16, 2006

Recommended Reading

Glenn Greenwald writes about something that has long bugged me, which is the debate trick of likening every potential enemy to Hitler and to argue that to not attack him now is to make some wimpish Neville Chamberlain mistake. It not only bothers me in regard to things like the Iraq War, it bothers me in less crucial, day-to-day battles. Back when I was active in the Writers Guild, every committee I was on seemed to have a couple of members who were rabid to go to war against some enemy — calling a strike, filing a lawsuit, etc. — and it had to be done right away to prove our manhood and stop this particular Hitler before he invaded Poland. Should you dare to suggest that the problem could be settled in a manner other than all-out combat — or even (shudder) that it didn't have to be fought at all — someone would haul out ol' Neville Chamberlain and use him as an insult.

Long before it became a cliché to do so, I used to argue on computer bulletin boards that it was unfair to compare anyone to Hitler unless the person was arranging for mass genocide. If they were actually killing Jews, okay, you could call them Nazis. You couldn't invoke the analogy if, for example, they wouldn't let you smoke in restaurants or park in a loading zone. By the same standard, not every time someone is hesitant to resort to fisticuffs does not make them Chamberlain-style appeasers. You have to pick your battles in this world. If you try to fight every one, you won't win any. If someone wants to make the case for war against Iran, they'd better be able to make it without that little trick.

• Posted at 10:59 PM · LINK

Today's Political Comment

The head of Exxon testified last year that gas prices were high because of global supply and demand. It's just been revealed that this gent is receiving a $400 million retirement package, this after years of multi-million dollar paychecks ($51 million in 2005 alone). This is in keeping with the fact that last year, Exxon made $36 billion, which is more profit than any company has ever made anywhere in the known universe.

In this news report, a lady at the Institute for Policy Studies says, "I think it will spark a lot of outrage." I don't think so. I think it will spark a few snarky comments here and there but most of America will never hear about it and 98% of those who do will shrug and go right on paying inflated prices. And tomorrow, if all the oil companies get together and raise prices by another buck a gallon, a few of us will grumble and then we'll go in and fill our tanks at the new prices.

Back in the late seventies, when gas inched up towards a buck a gallon, there was outrage in this country. People organized boycotts or demanded that their elected officials do something. Even advocates of free-market capitalistism toyed with the notion of capping gas prices or at least limiting CEO compensation. But we've given up on that. Now, we just bend over, grab our ankles and shout, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?"

• Posted at 6:53 PM · LINK

Fugue for Tinhorns

MGM Home Video is about to release a deluxe, widescreen DVD of the 1955 movie of Guys and Dolls, which starred Frank Sinatra in the role of Nathan Detroit, and Marlon Brando in the role that Sinatra should have played.

Hollywood, of course, has a long history of taking hit Broadway shows, bypassing the stars that made them hits on Broadway, and miscasting them. The other day, I caught a few minutes of the 1969 film of Hello Dolly! and it dawned on me that Barbra Streisand is just now hitting the right age to play the role she played then. It's amazing that often when they did cast the right person, it was only after the filmmakers had tried and failed to get someone else. When they made My Fair Lady, Rex Harrison was the third or fourth choice to play the role made famous on Broadway by...Rex Harrison.

Sam Goldwyn obtained the film rights to Guys and Dolls. When it was suggested to him that he get Sam Levene, who'd created the role of Nathan Detroit on Broadway, Goldwyn reportedly said, "No, I don't want someone Jewish." That was not anti-Semitism. It was his way of saying he wanted a movie star in the role. That's not an unreasonable position but owing to Mr. Levene's inability to sing, Nathan Detroit was a largely non-singing part. So who'd they cast in that non-singing part? Only the top male vocalist of the day, Francis Albert Sinatra. And because they had Sinatra, they suddenly had to find reasons to have Nathan sing...so Frank Loesser wrote this dreadful, unnecessary song for him called "Adelaide." In fact, it's worse than unnecessary. It's against character. Nathan Detroit, until near the end of the story, is trying to avoid marrying Miss Adelaide and here, because they told Loesser to write a love song, Nathan's singing about how wonderful it would be to marry this lady. They also stuck Frank in the "Guys and Dolls" number, which is about how men always fall for the right lady. Nathan shouldn't have been singing about that, either.

So that pretty much destroyed Nathan Detroit's character arc. In the meantime, they put Marlon Brando, who didn't sing, in the role crafted for a strong singer. Brando is so charming and charismatic in the speaking scenes that he almost pulls it off...but I still think Frank would have been better.

You know who they should have gotten for Nathan Detroit? Think about it: A weasely gambler who tries to fast talk his way out of jams, matrimony included. There was a perfect actor available but unfortunately, Phil Silvers was busy making a new TV series in which he played an Army Sergeant. And of course, they also could have hired Sam Levene.

There are a couple of other odd choices in the film. One of the best songs, "A Bushel and a Peck" was replaced with a not-great tune called "Pet Me, Poppa." I don't know why unless Frank Loesser was eager to write something that might qualify for an Oscar. I also don't understand why, after spending so much money to acquire the rights and hire that cast and build those incredible sets, the producers didn't spring for a few bucks to get more extras to people the streets of New York. On stage, you can replicate Manhattan with a handful of people but on screen, it looks barren and uninhabited.

Anyway, it's still a fun movie in many ways. If you want to pre-order the new DVD, here's a link. And let's see if anyone in the supplemental material points out the appearance of a young Jerry Orbach in the chorus of the "Oldest Established" number. A decade or two later, he'd be more qualified to play either male lead than Frank or Marlon.

• Posted at 6:35 PM · LINK

Recommended Reading

Molly Ivins writes about the continued easing of consumer protection laws.

• Posted at 11:09 AM · LINK

Today's Video Link

And now for something completely the same. Here it is: The original "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch as performed on At Last, the 1948 Show by John Cleese, Graham Chapman, Tim Brooke-Taylor and Marty Feldman.

• Posted at 1:44 AM · LINK

Recommended Reading

One of the founders of Greenpeace, who used to fiercely oppose nuclear energy, now doesn't think it's such a bad idea.

• Posted at 1:43 AM · LINK

Recommended Reading

A former Marine Captain who served in Iraq explains his disillusionment with the war effort.

• Posted at 12:19 AM · LINK