Comedy writer-producer-actor Bill Idelson died last night. He had been hospitalized for some time after a bad fall and that's all I know about his health problems. What I do know is that he was a successful and creative man who worked behind (and sometimes, in front of) the camera on some fine TV shows including The Twilight Zone, The Andy Griffith Show, Love American Style, The Odd Couple, The Bob Newhart Show, M*A*S*H and Gomer Pyle, USMC. He was also a writer on The Dick Van Dyke Show, and occasionally played the role of Sally's bland boy friend, Herman Glimcher.
In an earlier life, Bill was a child actor, appearing often on radio, in movies and on early television. His big radio credit was the Vic and Sade series, on which he played the role of Rush Gook.
The last decade or two, he was primarily a teacher, running a successful writing workshop that graduated many top professional writers. He also authored several books about his life and work, one of which — Writing for Dough — I often recommend to people who are curious about television writing in the fifties and sixties. He was one of the good guys and he leaves behind a fine legacy of good writing and good writers.
David Brooks on why Mitt Romney can't possibly win in '08. I suspect that if you do a little web-surfing, you can find a reasoned argument for each of the candidates, Democratic or Republican, telling why that person has no chance of winning. But this one strikes me as a pretty solid case.
Brooks, by the way, is the man soon to be known as the New York Times Conservative columnist who's occasionally correct. That's what they'll be calling him after William Kristol's new column begins appearing in the paper. You just know that hiring came about because someone said, "We need a new right-winger...who should we get?" And someone else said, "I dunno. Let's see if we can find someone who's never been right with one single prediction about American foreign policy!"
Also: I should mention, in light of some e-mail I'm receiving, that I am not opposed to Barack Obama. I'm not particularly for him either, or for anyone. I figure I've got plenty of time to decide which person I will reluctantly back and then have to cringe as they often disappoint me. Why start that process now?
If you haven't set the TiVo or VCR yet, this would be a good time to do it. It's on Turner Classic Movies at 2 AM Eastern time on Friday night/Saturday morning...but your local cable company (if that's how you get your signal) may time-shift. So consult whatever you consult to make certain when something is on.
Reza Aslan writes of the challenges that await our next President and in so doing makes an interesting case against Barack Obama. He makes no case for any particular candidate but the argument would seem to lead one towards Clinton...Bill, not Hillary. I don't see anyone on either party's ballots who seems to know anything about these rather serious issues, let alone how to solve them. Joe Biden, maybe — but Joe Biden has about as much chance of being elected President as Michael Vick. I don't want to have to vote for Hillary and hope that she turns a lot of her job over to her hubby but it may come to that.
I guess what I'm wondering here is: Are the candidates not talking more seriously about what to do in Iran because they really don't know? Or is it that they expect America will elect its next leader based on matters like abortion and guns and immigration and maybe how tough they sound when they mention Iraq or how religious they seem to be? And then we'll hope that whoever sounds good to us on those fronts can figure out what to actually do about the Middle East?
I spent last night home alone, writing and coughing and trying to stop a small cold from going big on me. I never like to go anywhere on New Year's Eve for two reasons. One is that back when I used to party-hop, I was not impressed with the merriment at any of the parties. I'm sure there are many fine, memorable ones out there but the ones I attended all seemed forced and ritualistic. It was like people were working backwards from the premise that since it was New Year's Eve, they were having a good time, whether they actually were or not. It took me a while — and a couple of less-than-glorious experiences — to decide I was happier staying home, especially with the right person. She would have been here last night but for my increasingly sore throat.
She not only missed out on my germs but also on a fine example of my other reason for not going out on New Year's Eve. Around 11:10, as I was sitting here writing something for DC Comics, I heard the horrendous sound of a Drunk Driver. I mean, it was just the sound of squealing brakes and car hitting car but you knew it was a Drunk Driver. I grabbed up a cordless phone and sprinted outside.
The D.D. was already long gone. He'd been driving a white Toyota or maybe it was an Acura. It could even have been a Honda Something. It all happened that fast. He'd been doing about sixty, well over the limit, and had attempted to pass a silver-colored Chevy on the left, which on this street meant crossing the center divider, moving briefly into the opposite lane. You shouldn't do that anywhere but you especially shouldn't do it here, where there's a curve ahead and you don't have a long view of oncoming traffic. Apparently, he saw headlights coming and rushed to swerve back into his lane, sideswiping the Chevy and sending it crashing into a black Buick that was stopped at an intersection, waiting to cross the street that the drunk and the Chevy were driving on.
Damage to the Chevy was minor — "about equal to my deductible," the guy said, and he was shaken-up but not hurt. What really upset him was that an older man and woman in the Buick were hurt to the point of needing paramedics. I called and the 911 lady had to ask me to be very honest with her as to how great the injuries were...because emergency services were being taxed by call after call at the moment, some of them quite serious but some not. I told her the situation did not seem life-threatening but "I'm not a doctor...I write Daffy Duck comic books." (I often say that even though I haven't written Daffy Duck comic books since 1973. It's a good way to tell people not to put too much stock in what I say if it's a situation where I don't think they should.)
The dispatcher chuckled, asked me if I was on strike and then said someone would be here as soon as possible. It took a little less than an hour before police and an ambulance arrived, almost simultaneously but from opposite directions. They took the folks in the Buick off in the ambulance, noting that it was a tight fit: "These are built for one but it'll take forever to get another one here." The Chevy drove off under its own power and as I look outside this morning, I see that the Buick is gone, probably via tow truck.
Three things I remember...
One is a nice, overworked policeman realizing that no one could give him any sort of description of the other driver. I didn't see him. The people in the Buick never saw him. There were no witnesses around. And the guy in the Chevy only caught a fast glimpse of him in a rear-view mirror. Still, we all took it for granted that he was inebriated. And when the Chevy driver said, "It's a shame he got away," the cop said, "There's a good chance he didn't. We've had a lot of crashes tonight. He could have been the guy who just wrapped his car around a utility pole up on Melrose."
Second thing I remember: The folks in the Buick were pretty upset. Above and beyond the fact that he probably had a broken arm and she had a bad pain in one leg, there was that "We didn't need this now" factor. '07 had been a hellish year for them with personal and financial problems. The man is fighting to keep a job at a company that may not remain in business, struggling to make payments on a home they may not be able to afford even if he doesn't lose that employment. They were out celebrating that an ogre of a year was finally departing...and now here, it had taken one last shot at them.
And then there was this moment: I wasn't wearing a watch. Standing out there in the street, waiting for assistance, none of us knew precisely what time it was. Suddenly, there was an eruption of cheers and a horn or two from the surrounding homes...and far off in the distance, something that may have been a gunshot or fireworks. Which meant it was 12:00. The man in the Buick was still in a lot of pain but he made the effort to lean over, kiss his wife and tell her convincingly and will great assurance, "2008 will be a lot better." Two minutes later, help arrived.
"2008 will be a lot better." For them, it almost has to be. But I sure hope it is for all of us.
I don't place a lot of stock in Internet Polls but hey, let's try one. I configured this one partly as a test to see if I can embed one of these. If it turns out I can, I may find a use for them on this site.
The question here is which of the main two late night talk shows — Leno's or Letterman's — you're more interested in watching on Wednesday night when they return from two months off the air due to the strike. This is not a question over who you generally like better — Jay or Dave, nor are we asking which show you figure to watch more often after Wednesday. We're just asking which interests you more...seeing Dave return with writers and say what he has to say about the strike, or watching Jay return without writers and say whatever he's going to say. Vote now then check back later and see how the numbers are lining up.
In honor of January Uno, we have a three-for-one special for you. From The Today Show of last October 31, here's much of the cast of Young Frankenstein performing three numbers from the show out of context on a makeshift stage in the middle of the street, dancing and moving their mouths to a pre-recorded track. They did the same performance at the Macy's Parade (though with worse lip-sync) and as I mentioned, there will be a number on Mr. Letterman's show on Thursday evening.
I'm curious as to why they've been doing all this so early in the life of what everyone assumed would be a long, long-running show. Broadway shows often arrange appearances like this when they're not selling tickets at a brisk clip...but this show opened with tremendous fanfare and promotion on November 8...and there they were, more than a week before that, getting everyone up and into costume very early in the morning. This was before any reviews, remember. Usually, you don't start showing the world your best numbers until after you've opened...and then, only when you need to drive people to the box office because the reviews and word-of-mouth aren't doing that.
Could this show not be performing up to expectations? Even before it opened, could its producers have been looking at a disappointing advance sale and figuring they had to do something? In light of the mixed (in some cases, negative) notices, could Young Frankenstein not be doing so well? I went to look up the grosses to see how ticket sales have been and — well, here's a surprise — Young Frankenstein is the only show on Broadway that is not reporting its grosses to the press. This is very rare.
Before we leap to any conclusions: According to this article, it's a decision that was made some time before the show opened. So maybe they had a principled reason for doing it...or maybe they took a look at those advance sales, got worried and decided to keep mum about how they were doing. Or maybe they decided to keep mum unless sales were outstanding. Or...
Well, it's all just speculation. It could also be doing fine. A check of the TKTS website shows that it was one of the few shows that didn't have half-price tickets available there last week. Les Miserables and Cyrano DeBergerac, which each reported selling 95% of their seats that week were on the TKTS board but Young Frankenstein wasn't. (A theory I like is that maybe they're hiding the grosses because they financed the whole thing by selling 12,000% of the show to little old ladies.)
Anyway, here are the three numbers. Both feature Roger Bart as Dr. Frankenstein, Sutton Foster in the Teri Garr role and Christopher Fitzgerald following in the footsteps of Marty Feldman. (They were all quite good when I saw the show, especially Fitzgerald. I hope my partner Sergio doesn't kill him.) This first scene is a slightly-abbreviated version of the Act One closer. Doc Frankenstein has created another of those monsters that his family likes to create and the angry villagers are swarming the castle, wondering it it's so. Igor (pronounced "Eye-gore") tries to start a dance craze to divert their attention...
And then here's "Roll in the Hay" from earlier in Act One, which introduces the Inga character. On stage, there were some visual effects that made this a much more effective number but you may enjoy it in this form...
Lastly, here comes "Together Again for the First Time," which is the number Dr. Frankenstein and Igor/Eyegore perform when first they meet. I liked this song a lot. In fact, despite the disappointing moment here and there, I liked the entire show a lot. I still recommend it, by the way, no matter how it looks when performed outdoors in Rockefeller Center early in the morning with traffic going by in the background as sleepy actors try to lip-sync and the director and cameraguys struggle to cover a production number that they obviously didn't see much of in advance...
January 2, 2008
