Category Archives: Uncategorized

Incidentally, Tom Richmond's weblog (which I just mentioned) is currently addressing a topic currently being discussed on many a blog. There's a video making the rounds that does a nice, albeit unauthorized job of animating Bill Watterson's Calvin & Hobbes property. A lot of folks seem to think this is Fair Use. After all, the person who did it isn't making any money off it and since Watterson has declined to animate his characters, it's not infringing on his business plans.

I disagree strongly. I think it's theft, copyright infringement, disrespectful to Watterson and just plain wrong. That someone isn't making any money off some transgression is irrelevant. If I print up and start giving away free copies of your copyrighted novel, the fact that I'm not profiting does not lessen the damage to you and your work. And besides, I may be profiting in non-monetary ways, just as the guy who animated that Calvin & Hobbes bootleg is using Watterson's artistry and rep to make himself look good and to get attention. The fact that Watterson isn't (currently) interested in animating his characters is also irrelevant. Not animating them — and controlling their every appearance — is part of his business plan. It may not be how you or I think the property should be managed but our opinion doesn't count. We don't own it. He does.

A lot of my friends have looked at MAD Magazine the last few years and felt estranged. It's like, "Where's Jack Davis? Where's Dave Berg? Where's Antonio Prohias?" Well, Davis is retired and the other guys are enjoying what Jonathan Winters calls "The Permanent Dirt Nap." But the current issue might feel more familiar to long-time readers. Like every issue, there are cartoons by that Sergio Aragonés guy (when will he get a real job?) and a Fold-In by Al Jaffee, but there's also an article drawn by Paul Coker and a TV parody — of one of the C.S.I. shows — by Arnie Kogen and Mort Drucker. Mort's still got it and so has Arnie.
There's also a parody of Dog the Bounty Hunter drawn by Tom Richmond, who's become the magazine's "new generation" star caricaturist. Tom is not only skilled at drawing but he's skilled at sharing his skills and teaching others. His weblog is full of great tips and glimpses of work in progress…and he's assembled a video that shows how he colors his drawings and that's our video link for today. (By the way: Tom's coloring in a caricature of himself. He's one of the very few cartoonists I've ever seen who draws himself to look worse than he actually is.) Here's that lesson…

This piece by Gary Kamiya asks the musical question, "Why hasn't Bush been impeached?" and gives a number of possible answers. Some, I agree with and some, I don't — but I think all are worth discussing. Oddly enough, Kamiya gives little or no consideration to two reasons that I'd think would be near the top of almost anyone's list. One is the futility of ousting Bush only to wind up with Cheney…or the messiness of getting rid of both to wind up with Nancy Pelosi. Ms. Pelosi may or may not be a good Speaker of the House — I don't know — but she sure doesn't impress most Americans as having the chops, as they say, to be Prez. (And yes, the case can be made that a caretaker Chief Exec would be better than what we have now. But in wartime, that has its dangers and the main point is that the cry for impeachment would be louder if the replacement seemed more like presidential material.)

And the second point is that many of the people who would lead a genuine Bush Impeachment haven't recovered from their disgust at the Clinton attempt. In some cases, the disgust has probably grown greater as they've seen people who screamed "Rule of Law" and made moral condemnations at a fib over sex now look the other way at vastly more serious allegations. That whole episode made the idea of impeaching a president seem sleazy.

Anyway, read Kamiya. See what you think. I think he's on to something with the observations about Bush's war arising from a national yearning for revenge and how some people can't get too mad at him for attacking the wrong enemy. After all, he attacked someone and a lot of Americans either feel complicit or figure someone was better than no one.

This morning, I remembered one more time I saw Irv Benson perform. It was in the early-to-mid eighties in Las Vegas. My friend Marv Wolfman and I were in town for a comic book distributors' meeting and I insisted we go to the Union Plaza Hotel downtown (It's now just The Plaza) to see what turned out to be a very odd production of my favorite musical, A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. It starred Alan Young, who later told me he was a last minute replacement for someone else who'd dropped out. He was very good, by the way.

It was a real Vegas production. A couple of roles and about a half hour had been eliminated, and the courtesans in the play were a little nuder than you might see in any other venue. Irv Benson was playing the role of Erroneous, the befuddled old man abroad now in search of his children, stolen in infancy by pirates. But though the rest of the show had been drastically trimmed, the part of Erroneous had been beefed up. Each time the character entered, he stopped and went into a small chunk of Irv Benson's Vegas/Reno act. For no visible reason, there on the street in Ancient Rome, there were jokes about slot machines and breasts and, of course, Liberace. In the eighties, you weren't allowed to set foot on a Nevada stage without at least one joke about Liberace.

At the end of the show, Mr. Young came out and did about a five minute monologue that commenced with, "Yes, he's working without the horse." He talked about Mr. Ed a little…and as he later told me, audiences expected that. Alan Young often toured in various plays — usually Showboat — and attendees didn't seem to feel the evening was complete unless Wilbur Post had alluded to his horsey friend. After that, Marv and I left and I explained to him how little the show we'd just seen resembled the actual musical by Stephen Sondheim, Larry Gelbart and Burt Shevelove.

A week later back in L.A., I ran into Gelbart in a car wash and told him about the bizarre production I'd witnessed. He apparently called up and threatened to have the show closed if they departed so drastically from his text…but by then, they were within days of closing anyway so the whole matter was moot.

The next time Marv and I were in Vegas, Irv Benson was in that Minsky's show at the Hacienda. I persuaded Mr. Wolfman and our mutual pal Len Wein to go see Irv in his natural habitat. Actually, what I told them to get them to go was that the show had naked women in it…but like me, they enjoyed Benson and his partner Dexter Maitland even more than they enjoyed the naked women. That may have been because the ladies were about the same age as Irv's material.

The guy on the right in the photo above is a great old comedian named Irv Benson. I'm posting this because there doesn't seem to be anything on the Internet about Irv Benson, apart from a few things I put there…so to begin rectifying that omission, let me tell you everything I know about Irv Benson.

Irv Benson was the last of the Minsky's Burlesque comedians. He was born in 1914 and I have no idea if he's still alive. He was playing in Las Vegas and Reno until around 1990, usually paired with a charming gent named Dexter Maitland, who was the last straight man from the Minsky's circuit. Their last gig was at the Hacienda Hotel in Vegas where they filled time between strippers in the Minsky's Burlesque Revue there. (When it closed, the next occupant of the Hacienda showroom was Lance Burton in his first starring show.) In the late eighties, I spent an evening backstage there with Mr. Maitland, hearing great stories about his long, long career. Unfortunately, I only got to say a brief hello to Benson that night and never had the opportunity to actually converse with him. A few years earlier, I'd seen the two of them at the Sahara in Reno, starring with the singing team of Sandler & Young, along with a bevy of Penthouse models, in the Penthouse Pet Revue. Benson and Maitland were very funny performing very old material.

I only know of three places Irv Benson appeared on television. In the sixties, when he hosted Hollywood Palace and his own variety show, Milton Berle always used Benson. Irv would be in a box seat or in the audience, appearing in the guise of a character named Sidney Spritzer. Mr. Spritzer enjoying heckling Mr. Berle. One joke that they did every time was when Benson/Spritzer would tell Uncle Miltie, "You're too close to the microphone!" Berle would ask, "How far should I be?" And Irv would answer, "You got a car?"

Apart from a bit part in one episode of Happy Days, the only other times I ever saw Irv on TV were on The Tonight Show. Johnny Carson was reportedly a huge fan of Benson and also of a couple of other Minsky's veterans who worked Vegas in the fifties and sixties — Hank Henry and Tommy "Moe" Raft. I don't think Johnny ever had them on his show but he booked Benson about a dozen times and played "straight" for him. In the above frame grab, Johnny has just asked Irv if he and his wife have any children, and Irv just replied, "Are you kidding? I won't even drink her coffee!" Bada-boom!

And that's just about everything I know about Irv Benson…a very funny man and the last of a now-extinct breed. I'm posting this in the hope that someone out there knows and will tell me more. And also because I thought there oughta be something on the Internet about Irv Benson.

I haven't been all that amused by David Letterman's show for quite some time…but this recent bit made me laugh out loud for some reason. Ignore the weird video at the beginning. It'll clear up in a few seconds.

And can you imagine what would happen if the day they were doing this, Steve Ditko suddenly got the urge for a Jamba Juice and went into that store?

I also enjoyed a game they played another night called "Please Stop Calling Me Mitt." What I find even funnier than the game is that the YouTube video of it seems to have been uploaded by the Mitt Romney campaign.

A reader of this site named Maxwell writes to ask…

I'm a relatively new member of the Writers Guild of America. If there's a strike as you're predicting, it will be my first strike. The other day, I received a packet which I suppose you also received. It asks me to vote on something called a Pattern of Demands. It's kind of a wish list of things the Guild would like to win for us in the upcoming negotiations but I'm afraid I don't understand why I have to vote on this. What's the opposition to this? I'm sure you can explain.

I'll try. You're making the mistake of assuming it means something. It really doesn't, except maybe in a symbolic sense. It's a way of giving our Negotiating Committee a little more sense of authority to speak for us when it sits down at the bargaining table. In a way, it puts them on a similar footing with the other side. We negotiate with representatives of the producers who can and will say, "Our employers have authorized us to go this far and no farther." Because the Pattern of Demands will pass with an overwhelming majority, our reps will be able to say, "Our members have demanded we get some of this."

That's about all it means and some years, that isn't much. We've had negotiations where the producers, in effect, walked in and gave us what they said was their Final Offer and then refused to listen to any demands. (One thing to always remember: The last time they did that, that "Final Offer" was the first of about eight. I believe there was even an "Absolutely Final Offer" well before we got to the one we accepted.)

As always, the Pattern of Demands proposal is a list of things that no WGA member would contest, except maybe to complain about what isn't on there. The second item, for instance, is "Increase initial compensation in all areas" and this will come as a shock to no one. I don't think there's ever been a labor organization that went into negotiations to demand rollbacks. So the P.O.D. will pass with a huge majority and there'll be industry press coverage that suggests a massive vote of confidence for our Negotiating Committee…and then they'll go in and get whatever they can get. Just vote "yes" and send the thing back.

By the way: I'm not exactly predicting there will be a strike, although I may have said as much. I'm predicting there will be a massive collision of the WGA demanding we get more and the producers demanding we get less. Prepare to hear men who take home $50+ million a year tell us that the business is "sluggish" and that everyone has to take less. It all usually means a strike but it could also, at least in theory, mean the WGA buckling and caving in. I don't think that'll happen though…so get ready for some serious picketing. New technology and methods of distribution have simply rendered the old business models (and therefore, guild contracts to address them) obsolete. If we don't catch up now, it'll be even bloodier to reconfigure our role in the industry later.

Larry Flynt remembers his good friend, Jerry Falwell. This is the only pro-Falwell memorial piece I've seen that was written by someone who knew the man and didn't have a politicial and financial incentive to prop up his reputation.

I don't find it so incredible that those two guys were pals. They had a lot in common…two chubby guys who learned you could make a helluva lot of money exploiting the more tasteless corners of the First Amendment.

This is a clip from some Steve Allen Show or other. In the forties or fifties, any comedian who utilized music in his act was legally required to savage the tune, "Cocktails For Two" at some point. Here, we see one of the milder (but still fun) maulings of the song, introduced by Mr. Allen and featuring Jo Stafford, Tony Randall, Don Knotts, Pat Harrington Jr, Louis Nye and Gabe Dell. Ms. Stafford had a nice career as a top female vocalist under her own name and also released a series of parody albums which she recorded with her husband, Paul Weston. In them, they assumed the identities of Darlene and Jonathan Edwards, singing and playing outrageously off-key. In this clip, Ms. Stafford seems to be forgetting she's supposed to sound like Jo and not Darlene…

I did something this evening I haven't done in a long time. I went to a bookstore.

There was a time when I rarely went three days without being in one of those places but since the advent of Amazon, that doesn't happen so often. I hear or read about a book I want and instead of making a mental note to pick it up next time I'm in a bookstore, I do a couple of immediate clicks and order it…and then I don't go to the bookstore because I already have all the new books I want. (I'm also buying fewer books then I once did owing to a lack of space and the fact that I'm on a lot of Review Copy lists so I get 'em free.)

A couple of brief observations from tonight's expedition…

• I breezed by the "political" section. It wasn't called that but that's pretty much what it was. I think it would speed the buying process if instead of shelving them alphabetically, they had one section called "Books That Demonize Bush and/or Cheney" and another called "Books That Demonize Clinton (Bill and/or Hillary)." It's hard to look at some of those covers and not think that there's a sizeable audience waiting, cash in hand, to read the worst — true or not — about the people they already dislike.
• I wanted to buy a copy of Vincent Bugliosi's new book on the Kennedy Assassination but the store only had one copy and it looked well-thumbed and a little soiled. It also looked too heavy to carry since I was walking home. Two more reasons to order from Amazon.
• A very short woman was unable to reach a very large book off a very high shelf and there was no store employee around to assist her…so I got it down for her. She thanked me and said, "I'll be around for a while if you need anything off the bottom shelves."
• When I do go to bookstores, I always see some customer doing a little rearranging of some shelf. And I always assume its an author jockeying for position.
• Lastly: Please, if you work the checkout counter at a bookstore, just ring up my purchases, run my Amex card and stick the books in a bag. It's not necessary to page through my selections, making little comments on why I'm reading what I'm reading. On the other hand, if I had that job, it would be hard to resist the temptation every time someone bought a mystery novel to open it up, spot a proper name and announce, "Oh, I read this one! Harry Murphy [or whatever the name was] was the killer!" I'd hate myself but I'd probably do it.

At the 1972 Democratic Convention, there were a number of heartbreaking moments — in every sense that the heart can break — but one that I recall especially was a big, phony salute to Hubert Humphrey. It was not phony in that the people saluting him didn't like or admire the guy. What was phony were the words used and the evasion of what everyone knew it was all about. Ostensibly, it was just a salute to Hubert H. and a thanks for all he'd done for his country and party, not necessarily in that order. But everyone knew what it was about. George McGovern was getting the nomination, Humphrey wasn't, and Hubert would be too old to run next time.

Actually, Humphrey wasn't that old. He was 61 in 1972 so if he'd run in '76, he would have been 65. That was the same age as James Buchanan when he was elected but he was one of our worst presidents ever…and anyway, that was in quite another era. Humphrey, due in whole or part to illness, was an old 61. He died in early '78. A few years later, Ronald Reagan was elected to the presidency at the age of 69 but he didn't seem that old…at least, not until near the end. I suspect even some people who loved Reagan in that job would now say he was too old, at least for two terms.

The '72 salute to Humphrey had as its unspoken message that he always seemed to his fans as a man who was destined to be president, like he'd almost earned the job/honor in every way save for being elected — and even then, he came darn close to that in '68. The whole tribute to him had the air of a consolation prize; like the party was saying, "Thanks for all your hard work, Hubert. We all agree you should have been president but somehow it just didn't work out that way."

I bring this up now for a reason…

I don't think John McCain is going to get the Republican nomination. Granted, it's not impossible but it sure doesn't look to be going his way.

McCain is 71. If he won, he'd be the oldest president we've ever had. I don't think that disqualifies him from the job but it almost certainly means that if he doesn't get it this time, he ain't never going to get it. To a lot of people, including many who won't vote for him, he looks like a guy who's earned the job the way Humphrey had earned it. Think what you will of the guy (and I'm sure disappointed by him in many ways), McCain has worked his ass off in public life and probably foregone much more lucrative opportunities in the private sector. That's above and beyond being a war hero and a man who, at various points, was widely respected even by his opponents. Unlike Humphrey though, he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy to bow out gracefully and vanish into obscurity.

This is not so much a prediction as a vague feeling. Looking at those ten G.O.P. hopefuls in the debate the other night, I couldn't help thinking that one of these things is not like the others. Four or five of those guys have about as much chance at the nomination this year as I do and can't seriously be thinking they have a real shot at it. All but one of them have to be thinking that at worst, they're laying groundwork for a run in 2012, which might even be a much better year to be a Republican candidate for President. For the one — McCain — it's now or never.

You have to wonder if he'll support someone else as the Republican nominee or even go quietly into the night. Lately, there have been news stories (like this one) of the fabled McCain temper flaring up. It's not hard to imagine him blasting the G.O.P. establishment and/or maybe mounting a third-party effort. He sure doesn't strike me as a guy who's happy with some of the things he's had to say lately, kissing the butt of the right-wing base to try and get their support. And the worst part of that is that it doesn't even seem to be working.

Like I said, this isn't a prediction. It's just kind of a subtext I'm watching. If and when the nomination is out of McCain's grasp, will he explode? If not, what's to stop him? Is he going to support a nominee who advocates "enhanced interrogation techniques" and other fancy euphemisms for torture? Is there a role the Republicans can find for him that will keep him and his supporters in the fold? McCain's whole stature in politics for some time has been based on the fact that he was perceived as a highly-possible occupant of the Oval Office. Once that's taken away from him, he becomes highly irrelevant and I somehow don't see him accepting that; not without a fight. Do you?

What shall I link to today? What shall I link to? Hey, I have an idea! How about this commercial for Kellogg's Apple Jacks, a cereal that I used to like even if I could never connect its flavor in any way to that of an apple? Yeah, that'll work.

That's Paul Frees doing the voice of the guy with the apple for a head, and I think Paul is also one of the bullies. The other bully voices sound like Mel Blanc, which I don't understand. Why hire Mel Blanc for two lines when Paul could have done them? Anyway, here's the commercial…

Not long ago here, we had a discussion about newspaper strips that are passed on from their creator to the creator's child or children. Could it be that one of the world's most popular strips is about to undergo a change of management, going from its second generation to its third?

I spent yesterday afternoon at a luncheon held by the Pacific Pioneer Broadcasters, a club for folks who've been in broadcasting for at least twenty years. Among its other activities, it holds these events to honor people who've made important contributions to TV and radio, and today's celebration was all about my pal, Leonard Maltin. There was an impressive turnout of people who cared about Leonard to eat the rotten food that's served at the Sportsmen's Lodge in Studio City.

The dais of speakers was quite impressive. It included Norman Corwin, Bea Wain, June Foray, Margaret O'Brien, Hal Kanter, Stan Freberg, Art Gilmore, A.C. Lyles, Tom Hatten and Daryl Hickman. All spoke of Leonard's vast knowledge of movies, his diligence in researching and documenting history, and his unsquelchable enthusiasm for film. A few razzed him because they felt insufficiently mentioned in some book of his but all praised his fairness as a reviewer and there was a lot of mutual affection up there on the stage.

I don't have much else to report. Did I mention how terrible the food is at the Sportsmen's Lodge? Yeah, I did. The Sportsmen's Lodge is a hotel/restaurant in the Valley that has a wide array of banquet rooms and also outdoor "party" sites. On any given day, it's a veritable strip mall of weddings, luncheons, banquets, Bar Mitzvah receptions, memorial services, business conventions, etc. I keep attending functions there…and it does have a comfy, friendly atmosphere to the grounds. But the food is dreadful and overpriced…and I don't mean it's dreadful and overpriced the way banquet food is always a little dreadful and overpriced. I understand that the logistics and costs involved in such events prevent great cuisine and great value. It's just that the Sportsmen's Lodge goes the extra distance of making you feel personally abused and this doesn't really having anything to do with Leonard, does it? Sorry.

I've known Leonard since shortly before he joined Entertainment Tonight, around a quarter-century ago. The show keeps changing on-screen personnel but he remains since, after all, they need someone there with his expertise. The first time I visited the office, I was waiting for Leonard and someone asked someone else about researching some facts for a story. I heard the line, "We don't need a reference library here. We have Leonard." That's the least of his value to that operation.

Anyway, it was a good luncheon. I'd give it three stars. If I hadn't eaten the salmon, it would be four. Sorry, Leonard.

Varese Sarabande has just reissued Shelley Berman Live at the Improv, a very funny comedy CD that was recorded Guess Where on February 9, 1995 and which received scant distribution at the time. If you're a fan of Mr. Berman's monology (Is that a word? Well, it is now) then I highly recommend it. I was in the audience for the recording and I laughed myself silly…something I wish I could do more often. Way back in this item in 2003, we lamented its unavailability and now you can order a copy so do so. Here's a link.