Yearly Archives: 2013

Sorrentino's Seafood House was one of several Southland restaurants owned and operated by members of the Sorrentino family. It was located at the corner of Pass Avenue and Riverside in Burbank. A few blocks away was the more upscale Alfonse's, run by the famous chef, Alfonse Sorrentino. The seafood restaurant was reportedly run by two of his cousins. Whoever ran it, it was a great place that at lunchtime was packed with folks in the entertainment industry. When I was working for the Ruby-Spears animation studio, Joe Ruby and I used to go over my scripts at a table at Sorrentino's.

I liked lunch there better than dinner, though both were great. At lunchtime, most entrees came with an amazing kind of potato I've never encountered anywhere else. It was halfway between the consistency of a baked potato and mashed — something like a pudding — and laced with onion. It was not listed as a side dish on the menu, which may explain why it didn't seem to have a name. Every time I asked a waitress what it was called, the answer was "It's just something the chef whips up at lunchtime." He did not whip it up at dinner and believe me: I asked.

The photo above is of Sorrentino's banquet room which got a lot of traffic from TV shows and movies holding wrap parties or press conferences. I rented it a few times on behalf of CAPS, the Comic Art Professional Society, back when I was on its Board of Directors. The food was good, the staff was great. The only reason I can imagine for its closure in the eighties was that they didn't do as much business in the evenings as they did for lunch. An awful lot of deals were concluded and script meetings held in its lush, red booths. I miss it and I miss those potatoes.

The Supreme Court's hearing arguments today — right this moment I think because this message, despite what you may read, was posted at 8:32 AM — on the all-consuming topic of Gay Marriage. This is to say a bunch of attorneys are in a courtroom, selling their positions and engaging in banter with the various justices who had their minds made up long ago. Shortly, various reporters will try to predict the vote based on the way Scalia scratched his nose or some random syllable Roberts uttered. I hereby resolve not to place even a milligram of faith in such predictions. They've recently had about the same track record for accuracy as Dick Morris on a bad day. Dick Morris hasn't had a good day for predictions since 1974 when he ordered bacon-and-eggs in a Denny's in Atlanta, Georgia and predicted it would come with grits. Somewhere in my garage, I have a Magic 8-Ball that can make just as accurate a forecast of the highest court in the land. It'll probably say, "Ask again later, picture cloudy."

Even if we don't know where SCOTUS is heading, we know where the country's going. More and more former opponents of same-sex wedlock are "evolving" every day, rushing to get on the right side of history while there's still time…and — you notice? — nobody prominent ever evolves in the other direction. My (oft-mentioned here) cynical side suspects that the ones who are now open to Adam and Steve as a married couple are shifting because it's just not as valuable an issue as it once was for getting right-wing supporters fired-up to donate and get out the vote.

I have a few right-wing friends who are to the point of now arguing that allowing gays to marry one another is really the conservative position. I also have one or two who are still wrestling with how to walk back their former deeply-held positions…or maybe they're just afraid of what's next. They spent so much time telling us that Gay Marriage would lead to everyone marrying cocker spaniels that they have trouble turning loose of that. It's amazing how many Slippery Slopes aren't all that slippery when you actually get onto them.

Further tech problems (which involved our relocation to yet another new server — one that is all our own) kept this weblog down most of yesterday. This will not happen again. I hope, I hope, I hope. For service above and beyond duty, I would like to thank Glenn Hauman here…and I will thank him in person later this week at WonderCon, taking him out for a lavish dinner and allowing him to order anything he likes on the menu as long as the first two letters are "Mc."

I still have one or three cosmetic things to put back the way they're supposed to be. The biggie is that for some reason, the server on which this site now operates doesn't know what time it is. It will tell you via this message was posted at 3:14 AM. It wasn't. It's around 8:30 as I write this. The next message or two (at least) will be similarly unstuck in time. Isn't it shocking to know you can't always believe what you read on the Internet?

I've been writing here about how today's talk shows lack spontaneity. We have here an example of a talk show where very little was planned, even less was scripted…and all depended on the ability of the host and guests to ad-lib. Fortunately, that host was Steve Allen — a very witty man and as you'll see if you watch this, a very brave one, as well.

This is an episode from 1962 of a 90-minute late night show he did that was syndicated by Westinghouse. It was done from a theater on Vine Street a few blocks south of Sunset and very close to a funky, all-night open-air food store called The Hollywood Ranch Market. Steverino and his merry band of co-conspirators often did stunts out in the street (this video opens with one) and they frequently involved the Hollywood Ranch Market which, sad to say, is no longer there.

This incarnation of The Steve Allen Show was utterly unpredictable. Not only did you never know what was going to happen on it but it was quite obvious that Steve often didn't know. If you stick it through to near the end, you'll see Steve interview a lady who had been dubbed Miss Mattress and who was on to promote mattresses. Steve does not introduce her. The show's announcer, Johnny Jacobs, brings her on and that's the first Steve knows about the guest he's to interview. No notes. No rehearsal. Just Steve Allen winging it. And if you stay through to the credits, you'll note that this show, which ran 90 minutes, had a writing staff that consisted of two men — Mike Marmer and Stan Burns plus whatever Steve contributed.

The show also did not put much emphasis on Big Name Guests. Sometimes, they had one or more. Sometimes, not. They often didn't billboard guests at the top because they did these shows two or three at a time — that is, two or three taped on the same evening — and sometimes didn't decide until well into the taping of an episode if a given guest waiting backstage would be in that episode or the next one.

I remember watching this show — which aired from 1962-1964 — whenever I didn't have to be at school the next day. KTLA Channel 5 aired it at 11:20 following a 15-minute 11 PM newscast and an odd little five minute show on which comedian Cliff Norton would give the weather forecast. It has been rarely seen since then but I'm told the Steve Allen Estate has every episode in its vaults. I wish they'd release them because it was such a funny, wacky program. I suspect you'd see an awful lot of things on it that were later considered revolutionary and ground-breaking when done by others. This is not the best episode but at the moment, it's all we've got…

This blog has been up today more than yesterday but we're still having some problems. We'll get 'em fixed. In the meantime, it is not necessary to send me messages telling me my blog is down. Thanks but I usually know…and if I don't know, I'm away from it and in no position to do anything about it.

Ted Herrmann wrote me to say…

I only hope Leno doesn't do a long fade into obscurity like Merv did — seemed like his syndicated show went on for years and years…and years.

There are performers — though I don't know that Jay is one of them — who'd be quite happy with any show that went on for years and years…and years. I have a friend who got a job some time back as a regular in a sitcom. Before it went on, we were at a party and someone said to him, "I hope it's the next Bob Newhart Show." He said, "I'd rather it was the next Perfect Strangers." He explained he'd be more comfy with a series that didn't draw a lot of attention but did draw enough of an audience that (a) he felt he was entertaining a huge chunk of America and (b) it stayed on a long, long time. Perfect Strangers was on for eight seasons. The Bob Newhart Show was on for six.

You can want all sorts of different things as a performer. You can be primarily motivated by money. You can yearn to have people recognizing you in restaurants. You can want artistic satisfaction or recognition. If you got a TV series, you might want it to be the capstone of your career or you might want it to catapult you into movies. A powerful wish by some is that — never mind fame or fortune — they just won't have to go out and look for a job for a while…and they hope that when they finally do, they don't have to go back to auditioning like an unknown beginner.

Leno's kind of different from other guys who've done talk shows in that he has a second career that is very lucrative and which he enjoys very much: Doing stand-up. If he lost The Tonight Show and never got another talk show again, he could probably be pretty happy and well-compensated just working in Las Vegas and doing concert dates until such time as he was standing-up with the aid of a walker. I can't think of anyone else who ever hosted a talk show for any length of time who had that kind of fallback position. Pat Sajak, when he did his, still had Wheel of Fortune but his talk show was more like a temp job…something to do in his spare time when he wasn't selling vowels. Carson wasn't going to go out and play Vegas, Letterman isn't going to go out and play Vegas, Conan wasn't going to go out and play Vegas…

I dunno what to make of this supposed interest from Fox. If Jay is really going to be taken off The Tonight Show, as seems increasingly his destiny, there will probably be some kind of fight over how long NBC will be able to prevent him from engaging elsewhere. That may be all they're talking about right now over there. Fox may not want to wait, feeling that Jay will cool off too much before they get him. If they do want him when he's available, the next question would be the terms of the deal and the solidity of their commitment. I doubt he'd go there if there was a chance of being dumped in six months or a year. If I were in his position, I'd try demanding a clause that established a certain minimum acceptable ratings level for my show and specified that I could not be cancelled as long as I didn't dip below it for X consecutive months.

When I think of what's gone on with Leno, I'm reminded of a quote from Ken Berry, who starred in a spin-off of The Andy Griffith Show called Mayberry, R.F.D. It was the fifteenth highest-rated show and #1 in its time slot when CBS decided to purge itself of "rural" shows and cancelled it. Berry let his anger seep into public view and said, "I feel like I played by their rules, I won by their rules…and then they changed their rules." I don't feel sorry for Jay because I think it's insane to feel even a tinge of sympathy for a guy who's doing that well. I just like following this story because it reminds me that the one certain thing about show business is that that there are no certain things in show business. Except that whatever you watch, there's always a Geico commercial.

It's Stooges Sunday here at newsfromme.com and today's was the fourth short subject starring Moe, Larry and Curley (later known as Curly). It's Three Little Pigskins and it came out December 8, 1934, a little more than two years after the release of Horse Feathers, a Marx Brothers film with a similar storyline.

What's notable about it? Well, its similarity to Horse Feathers, for one. The presence of a blonde (and new to movies) Lucille Ball, for another. It's also supposed to be the first film in which the Stooges demanded and got stunt doubles.

The way Moe always told the story, the director wanted them to do this scene in which all the other players dogpile on top of them. Moe, on behalf of himself and his fellow knuckleheads, refused, saying they'd get hurt. He said that earlier in the filming, Larry had lost a tooth when a faked punch was botched and turned real, and that Curly broke his leg in the dumbwaiter scene which you'll see in the film. Curly doesn't appear to have a broken leg in the rest of the movie so I don't know what that's all about.

Anyway, Moe said no to do the dogpile scene. The director argued it was safe. Moe put his foot down and finally, filming shut down for an hour or two until suitable stunt doubles were brought in. The scene was shot, everyone piled onto the stunt guys…and when it was all over, the doubles had multiple broken bones. At least, that's how Moe told the story. It's apparently the shot with the photographer.

The football scenes were shot at Gilmore Stadium, which was located at the corner of Fairfax and Beverly — where CBS Television City now stands. You can spot a few Gilmore signs in the background plus there's the name on the scoreboard. You can also see the sign for the Fairfax Theater, which is now closed and awaiting demolition…but it's still right where it was at that intersection.

Here's the film. Forgive me if there are commercial interruptions…

David Carroll wrote me last week to say…

Mark, I enjoy your observations on the late-night wars. On a side note, I love your writing style. I can tell that you appreciate good language, and have a love for words. I'm afraid it's a dying art.

But back to the subject at hand: I watched Friday's episodes of Leno/Letterman. It left me a little sad at the state of the late night situation.

Leno's main guest was Craig Ferguson. I find Craig's show hit-and-miss. He's naturally funny, but he needs to be reined in now and then. On this night, he was a terrific guest. Jay's questions, as always were scripted, and he makes no attempts to hide that. Craig generally followed the segment producer's plan, telling the appropriate stories and hitting the right punch lines. The awkward part was when Craig would blurt out a spontaneous line; something he had just thought of, equally funny in the course of the conversation. Jay of course would react awkwardly as if someone had dropped something in his lap. It seems like he used to be able to roll with the punches. Now if it's off script, he seems almost annoyed. A once-mediocre conversationalist has become a a weak one.

Letterman's main guest was Seth Meyers. Again, very scripted and planned, with pre-approved stories, most of which scored. But midway through the segment, after Seth finished a bit, Letterman just looked down at the table, and muttered, "Pope? Anything there?" Just out of nowhere…in no way connected to the conversation. And then Seth launched into his handful of Pope jokes, and so on. As much as I've loved Letterman, I don't think I've seen the worst talk show hosts appear so uninterested.

"So…got anything on the Pope?" Any audience member could have read that card. It's sad to see how disengaged he has become.

As I've mentioned here many times, I lament the loss of spontaneity on talk shows. This is also becoming true of game shows, by the way. I suspect one of these days, there's going to be some big exposé published somewhere about how much control is exerted over allegedly unscripted goings-on…including editing, retakes, and the enlistment of actors — identified as having other professions — as contestants. There's a lot more of it than most people think.

However, a few folks who work on current talk shows have explained to me why there's so little that's unplanned. To some extent, it is the reluctance of the hosts to be in free-fall but there's another big reason…

Trial and error by all the talk shows has yielded a number of basic truths. Audiences, for instance, no longer like old reruns. When Mr. Carson aired old shows, he usually picked from a year-or-so back. Mssrs. Letterman, Leno, Fallon, etc. have all enjoyed higher ratings with reruns from just a few weeks before. On Fridays, Kimmel reruns bits from the preceding four days.

Audiences are no longer as wild about stand-up comedians performing and all the shows have found they need to be sparing about those. And the kind of stars the shows book — especially as the first guest — have become more important to the numbers. There are exceptions to this but for the most part, what keeps viewers tuning in and staying tuned-in is folks who are either super-megastars (there aren't enough of those) or folks who have a hot new movie or TV show (there are always plenty of those).

Just being an interesting conversationalist may make the show fun but the ratings breakdowns have convinced most of the producers that it's not enough. One of the gripes NBC execs had about Conan O'Brien on his Tonight Show was that he was booking folks like Norm MacDonald and Kevin Nealon as lead-off guests because he thought a funny segment would result…to the exclusion of someone hotter and probably younger who had a huge movie opening in two days. There were also NBC execs who thought the segments with MacDonald and Nealon weren't all that funny but the real objection was that the show could have had just about anybody and was bypassing guests who might have brought in higher numbers. I'm told that CBS thinks Letterman does a little too much of that as well.

So what does this have to do with a diminution of spontaneity and an increase in almost-scripted exchanges on talk shows? This: Most of your hot guests want it that way…or maybe it would be more accurate to say their managers and publicists want it that way. They view the guest's appearance as a vital tool in the promotion of the new movie, the new CD, the new TV show, the new whatever. They want planned questions and answers to ensure the guest comes off well and gets to say the proper things to plug the current project. It isn't always all planned out to the nth degree and like I said, there are exceptions. Craig Ferguson doesn't do much of that…which is, I suspect, why he makes a show of tearing up the notes on a guest before he starts chatting with them. He also doesn't get or maybe want many of the kind of guests that Leno and Letterman want…and he loses in the ratings to Jimmy Fallon.

One of my first jobs in show business, back in the early seventies, was writing press releases for a big-time Hollywood public relations firm. Mostly, it involved smoothing out the language of press handout bios of the clients there. Once in a while, it involved making up anecdotes for clients to tell on talk shows — sometimes, Johnny's; more often, Merv Griffin's. Actually, the performer first had to tell it to a producer or talent coordinator as part of a pre-interview. Sometimes, it was also an audition to get on the show. Sometimes, the performer was already booked and advertised. In any case, they needed a funny story to tell so I made one up or, if possible, took some true anecdote they had and polished it up a bit. There's a lot more of that now than there was then and I don't mean bogus stories. I mean an agreement before the taping as to just what the host will ask and what the guest will say (approximately) in response.

Almost all talk shows have always had pre-interviews. When Johnny said to a guest, "Someone told me you've been having some trouble with your plumbing," that meant the notes from the talent coordinator told Mr. Carson that the guest was expecting to tell an anecdote from the pre-interview about plumbing. Often, the notes included a summary of the story. Johnny might depart somewhat from the "script" and he had guests with whom almost nothing was planned (Buddy Hackett, Don Rickles, others) but most guest spots were planned out. And now, it isn't so much that the show demands it but that the guests and their managers do. And since these are for the most part, the guests the shows have learned will bring in viewers, that's the reason there isn't a lot of unplanned talk on talk shows today.

Do we look any different? This website is now coming to you from a new server which, they say, will handle its traffic better. That's why it was up and down (mostly down) today. I will resume posting shortly.

Tom Doran, who wrote that thoughtful piece on Monty Python, has a new essay up about the work of Gary (The Far Side) Larson.

We are currently experiencing technical difficulties here at newsfromme.com due to too much traffic. It has slowed down the loading of the site to about the pace of a Galapagos Tortoise on Xanax and caused the site to be only intermittently available. If you can read this, you're lucky.

I'm arranging for some upgrades (which may cost money, he said, hinting for tips) but it may be a few days before we're up and running at the old pace. Don't worry if you can't get here since I probably won't be posting anything that's all that interesting…or very often. I have another killer deadline, I have a load of meetings and appointments, and it looks like the deal to sell my mother's house has fallen through so I have to deal with that. In Escrow, no one can hear you scream.

Fear not though. I will soon be up 'n' running at my old pace again.

Well now, what do we have for you today? Hmm…it seems to be the entirety of the 1941 comedy classic, Hellzapoppin' starring the comedy team of Ole Olsen and Chic Johnson. This started life as a Broadway revue, opening on September 10, 1938 and running for 1,404 performances. That would be an impressive number now but it was really impressive at the time. Throughout the thirties, only two other plays managed to have more than 500 performances.

The show's success was attributed to a number of factors. In no particular order, they were that Olsen and Johnson were always scurrying around New York doing crazy promotional stunts; that superstar columnist Walter Winchell loved the show and plugged the hell out of it; that the show kept changing so people came back to see it again and again; and that it was indecently funny. In addition to its long Broadway run, it also became a cottage industry: Its producers sent out all sorts of touring companies and spin-off sequels with different casts and (often) different material.

The movie was made while the original New York version was running and it opened a week or two after the show closed on Broadway. Olsen and Johnson were the only two cast members from the show who were seen in the film, which used some songs and sketches from the stage but not a lot. For the most part, the movie was an original creation and it set some sort of industry record for not only breaking the fourth wall but annihilating it. It was successful enough that Olsen and Johnson made more films — some of them quite funny — but with diminishing box office. The two men are largely forgotten today…I suspect because while their scripts were often hilarious, they themselves weren't. Shemp Howard is probably the funniest one in this film, which is really quite hilarious at times. As you'll see if you clear the next hour and twenty minutes and click below…

Stephen Robinson writes…

This is all very interesting timing for Fallon. He gets Late Night because Conan left to do the Tonight Show. And Conan's failure in that slot paved the way for Fallon to get the Tonight Show despite having less than five years experience as a talk show host when the transition occurs.

I can't help wondering what would have happened if Conan had accepted NBC's offer to host the Tonight Show at midnight after a half-hour Leno. Would Fallon have survived if his show had been pushed back an hour?

I know some celebrities, including Seinfeld, thought Conan should support the network and make the move. Was there a scenario in which he did this and got to move back to 11:30 in 2014?

Still have trouble seeing why NBC thinks Fallon will do better than Conan at 11:30. It seems like NBC keeps trying to replace Letterman as host rather than Leno, who always did better in the ratings. Is there no one out there who has Leno's mainstream appeal?

When Conan wrote his infamous letter saying he wouldn't tolerate The Tonight Show being moved to 12:05, he said it was because he felt the move was injurious to a great tradition. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant that when he wrote it but I think it also would have been a terrible career move for him to go along with it. First off, it was kind of a public, insulting declaration that he couldn't handle the job he'd been given. Better to go down swinging than accept a demotion. Secondly, imagine two scenarios…

If they'd done it and ratings had gone significantly up, it would have been proof that Jay at 11:35 was just better for the network than Conan at 11:35. The next logical step would have been for many to wonder aloud, "Gee, if a half-hour of Jay there boosted the ratings that much, what would an hour do?" Then Conan winds up either off the air or back at 12:35, right where he was and with history reporting that he bombed when they tried to move him up. On the other hand, had they installed Leno at 11:35 and ratings either stayed the same or went down, no one would have blamed Jay. He'd already proved he could handle 11:35. The next logical step then would have been to try a full hour of Jay like the old days when his show worked. I just don't see a scenario in there where Conan had a chance to win.

If you asked the NBC execs why they thought Fallon would do better at 11:35, I would imagine they'd say something like this: Because we think Fallon will do a better show. His recent ratings at 12:35 are more impressive than O'Brien's last year of ratings at that time. (O'Brien was having trouble beating Craig Ferguson. Fallon doesn't.)

If some reports are true, one of the reasons NBC lost faith in Conan was because they felt they were offering Conan good notes on how to improve the show…and Conan and his people didn't feel the show needed any improving; just better promotion and lead-ins. That's pretty much what the producers of every show say when the ratings are disappointing and sometimes, it's valid. In this case, NBC felt they were giving Conan more-than-sufficient promotion and as for stronger lead-ins at 10 PM…they didn't have any then and haven't had any since. If they still aired The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien, its lead-ins today would be even weaker than they were during that seven month period.

They seem to feel Fallon will be more cooperative and that he does have the kind of mainstream appeal Leno has had. The working theory here is that Conan couldn't get the younger viewers without losing the older ones but that Fallon can. Are they right? If networks always or even usually were, they wouldn't wind up canceling most of the new shows they put on.

From James Tobey comes this…

I don't follow the late night situation closely but NPR this evening said sources are saying it's about the future, specifically how media will be viewed. They compared Leno's 500,000 Twitter followers to Fallon's 6,000,000. Do you think the landscape will change that much, that quickly?

Yeah. It wouldn't surprise me if the discrepancy between Fallon's online presence and Leno's is a major factor in this decision. All the networks are wrestling with how the Internet is changing their industry. It's not insignificant that Conan did (and still does) so many bits designed to remind you he can be followed on Twitter. Jay's staff tweets often in his name but all it usually is is retreads of his monologue and retweeted messages by guests saying, "Hey, I'm on Leno tonight." Jay may be ahead of everyone else in the Nielsens but he's running way behind in the Tweets.

Someone named Sammo writes…

I see the New York Post quoting the head of the affiliate board at Fox as saying they're open to the idea of Leno at 11 PM. Why would they be interested? Doesn't Fox ruthlessly pursue younger viewers?

Yes but Fox becomes a slightly different business after 10 PM when most of its stations air their local news. Local news is not as driven by demographics as entertainment programming. In some markets, they don't care much about the age of their audiences. They kinda figure they've already lost the kids. That age bracket is not as interested in news (the theory goes) and if it is, those folks will get theirs online or they're over watching Jon Stewart. Local news is mainly for two groups: People who are used to getting theirs that way and those who want to watch timely sports highlights. One of the few things you can't get on the Internet, at least immediately, is footage from that night's major sporting events.

That's why NBC's affiliates rebelled loudly when they had that 10 PM Leno show delivering fewer viewers to their 11 PM newscasts. Yeah, Jay's show was more profitable for the parent network because it was cheaper but that didn't help local newscasts. They also rebelled against Conan as a lead-out. A lot of the viewership that local newscasts get is from people tuning the news in while they wait for the 11:35 program of their choice. Conan's more favorable demographics helped the network sell commercial time during his broadcasts but that also wasn't helpful to local newscasts in most areas. In his book on it all, The War for Late Night: When Leno Went Early and Television Went Crazy, Bill Carter said that when NBC was wrestling with the idea of bumping Conan and putting Leno back at 11:35, they asked Michael Fiorile, who was the head of their affiliate board…

Fiorile possessed evidence that the affiliate body did not disagree. NBC had asked him what the local stations' preference would be at 11:35. Fiorile had quietly polled the affiliate board. The stations had long experience with Jay. (And the age group most of them occupied did not fall anywhere near the core audience of eighteen-to-thirty-four-year-olds that idolized Conan.) So it was little surprise whom the station owners preferred. Not one voted for Conan.

If you ever wondered why NBC put Jay Leno back on at 11:35, that's most of the reason right there. Even though those same station owners desperately wanted him out of the 10 PM slot, they all wanted him back on at 11:35. No word on how they feel about Fallon going in there in his place.

One of the reasons Conan wanted to go to Fox was that his people felt that promotion on Fox shows was a potent weapon for him; that one promo on The Simpsons was worth ten plugs on even the youngest-skewing NBC prime-time series. I don't think Jay would benefit in quite the same way but it might "young up" his audience a bit. I suspect Jay on Fox would also have the first pick on guest stars in Hollywood.

Yesterday, I said here that a Leno move to Fox didn't feel likely to me. It feels a little more likely in light of this report. At the very least, it may complicate whatever dickering and negotiations are now in progress between Jay and NBC. Suddenly, that network has more reason to try and scuttle Leno's remaining months on The Tonight Show, to get him off the air soon and to keep him contractually unable to go right back on opposite them. That's probably the main thing they're arguing about now.

Ah…welcome back, my friends, to the show that never ends.