George Tuska, who's been drawing comic books almost as long as there have been comic books, was born 90 years ago today in Hartford, Connecticut. His first comic art job was in 1939 assisting on the Scorchy Smith newspaper strip and soon after, he went to work for the Eisner-Iger Shop (that's Will Eisner) where he worked alongside artists like Lou Fine, Bob Powell and Nick Cardy, and soon proved himself as bold and skilled as anyone in the field. He drew super-heroes (including Captain Marvel) before going off to fight World War II...and it was upon his return that he really began to shine. Before long, one of the top-selling comics in the country was Crime Does Not Pay, and Tuska was the book's "star" artist — the one others tried to imitate.
He later returned to the Scorchy Smith newspaper feature, this time as lead artist, and drew the Buck Rogers strip for a time. In the sixties, he was a mainstay of the Marvel line, especially on Iron Man, X-Men and Luke Cage, Hero for Hire. For DC, he drew Challengers of the Unknown, Teen Titans and many other comics and he was among the illustrators on T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents for Tower. Lately, in semi-retirement, he's been doing commissions which show he's still got it.
Stan Lee dubbed him "Gorgeous George" Tuska for good reason. He could have also called him "Gentleman George" and "Gallant George," for he is a charming, delightful man. I don't think you're on the Internet, George...but please, someone tell him that a lot of us here on the World Wide Web are delighted to wish him a happy ninetieth.
A cartoonist friend of mine is writing an article about his experiences back in the sixties trying to sell gag cartoons to some of the crummier men's magazines of the day. He would like to know the name of the publishing house responsible for Dude, Escapade, Gent, Caper, something called Gags and Dolls, and a magazine called either Army Laughs or Army Laffs. Can anyone drop me a line and help this person?
I don't think I'm going out this weekend to catch United 93, the new film dramatization of the events that occurred on 9/11 aboard United Flight 93. This is despite the fact that I keep hearing that the movie is expertly made and done with total respect and as much taste as anyone could bring to an account of such a horrible event.
When it was first announced, it sounded like something I'd want to see, that perhaps I should see. I've certainly read enough about the events of that day and seen at least a half-dozen documentaries with actual footage. But now that it's about to open at a theater near me, I think I'll wait for either the DVD or a showing on HBO. That's if I even watch it at all.
It figures to be an emotional experience. In this world, you can't always control when you have your emotional experiences but to the extent you can, I think you should. If I watch United 93 at home via DVD or TiVo, I can start it when I want, stop it when I want, pause it when I want. If I go to a theater, all of that will be out of my control. It's bad enough that it will be out of my power to change what happens on screen. Flight 93 will crash and kill everyone aboard whether I remain in my seat to see it or not...and I guess that's what I'm afraid of: That feeling of powerlessness. At home with remote close at hand, I'll feel a tiny bit in command, maybe not of the fate of that plane and the people aboard but certainly of myself.
You may call it cowardice. I call it not subjecting myself needlessly to things that may be unpleasant. It's the same reason I don't go on roller coasters or hang-glide or listen to The Howard Stern Show any more.
Some movies, of course, you want to watch on a big screen and/or with an audience. This one, I'm thinking I'd rather watch without anyone else around, or at least only with people I feel close to. That's if I watch it at all...and I'm thinking I might. Still, the problem with seeing it in a public place is that it's a public place. I don't want to deal with the grief of the lady sitting in front of me, the kids sitting behind me, the people on either side. I want to be able to cry or to get angry...and I may even feel like yelling at the screen. A good comedy should be shared with others and their laughter can make it a more enjoyable occurrence. But some tragedies — especially the kind you can't do a damn thing about — are best experienced alone.
Our friends at TiVo are quietly rolling out a new model — the Series 2 TiVo DT. This is not the new, improved Series 3 model that's been announced for later this year and which will shock everyone if we actually see it before New Year's Eve. The Series 3 will handle HD-TV. The big difference in the new Series 2 model is that "DT" stands for dual tuner. That means you can theoretically record two shows at once.
Here's why that may not be as wonderful as it sounds. To record two shows, you need two video sources and with this machine, neither one can be a plain, old-fashioned roof antenna and one must be analog cable without a cable box or descrambler. You could have a satellite feed or a digital (or analog) cable signal with premium channels for one...but the other would have to be basic analog cable, meaning you can't record HBO and Cinemax at the same time.
The new model comes initially in an 80-hour configuration with a 180-hour version to follow at some unspecified time. The first ones are supposed to be available already over at the TiVo website but I sure couldn't find them there. If you can't either, they're supposed to be at your local retailers on May 1. List price is $249 but there seem to be some $150 rebate deals available. Alas, that's not the main expenditure. Since lifetime service is no longer available for standalone TiVos, you'll have to pay as you go, which is $12.95 a month if you own one TiVo and an additional $6.95 per month for every other one you own. In addition, most people will probably have to shell out extra to their local cable company to get an analog cable signal as their second input and that will run them at least another ten bucks a month.
None of this sounds all that useful to me, though I suppose it will brighten the television experience for some folks. Overall, it's a disappointment. Most of the time, TiVo is wonderful but it does tend to let us down once in a while.
And here we have the Evian commercial with the naked babies doing water ballet to the song "Bye Bye Baby" from Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Notice if you will that every single one of these kids displays more talent than Henny Youngman did in yesterday's video link.
Several folks have reminded me that Howard Hughes is said to have granted permission for the filming of Diamonds Are Forever on property he owned in exchange for, among other considerations, either a 16mm print of the finished movie or (accounts vary) 16mm prints of all the James Bond movies. So he presumably saw Diamonds. We just don't know what he thought of the way the character based on him was portrayed.
Y'know, I find it amazing that the filmmakers got permission. They had to submit the proposal to Hughes' underlings, all of whom were notorious for being terrified of what "the old man" would think about something. Hughes was already somewhat irrational by that time, especially about his privacy and image. This was the period where Hughes would hear that some journalist was readying a book or article about him and he'd call one of his lawyers and say, in effect, "Stop publication or you're fired." If I'd been a Hughes aide at the time, I'd have looked at the script, saw that it included a Hughes-like figure and thought, "Even if the boss okays this, he might hate the finished film and sack everyone who didn't stop it. There's nothing in it for him (or me) so I'd better stop it." But somehow, that isn't what happened.
The arrangement presumably was to allow some filming at the Landmark Hotel. As far as I know, the hotels where the movie was shot were Circus Circus, the Riviera, the International and the Landmark. Of these, the only one Hughes ever owned was the Landmark. (He also at times owned the Desert Inn, the Sands, Castaways, the Frontier and the Silver Slipper. The only one still standing is the Frontier and no one's betting on it being around for long.) The "Whyte House" — the hotel in the film owned by the Hughes doppelgänger, Willard Whyte — was played by the International, which Hughes never owned and which is now called the Las Vegas Hilton.
Scott Blacksher writes with regard to that story I related of Hughes buying TV station KLAS and phoning in to tell them what late movies he wanted to watch each night...
I've spoken to a couple of life-long residents of Las Vegas about things they remember. The funniest story was about how Howard Hughes kept falling asleep while the TV station ran Ice Station Zebra. Whenever Hughes dozed off and reawoke he'd have his people call KLAS-8 to put the movie on the last scene he remembered watching. It wasn't unusual for Vegas to watch the same segment of a movie more than once.
Talk about Video on Demand. I recall talking to one Vegas resident who recalled those days as rather exciting. Every night, he'd turn on KLAS and find some great, surprise movie run uncut and without commercial interruption. This was before home video or HBO so unexpurgated movies on your TV was a big deal. (I remember when we first got cable TV at our house — the legendary Theta Cable with its "Z Channel" — we'd watch anything. It must have been like the early days of talking pictures.)
April 27, 2006
