Category Archives: Uncategorized

Here's one of my favorite commercials from the sixties. The gent behind the counter is the wonderful comic actor, Jack Gilford.

Retired General John J. Sheehan explains why he joined the long list of military men who've declined the post of serving as Bush's War Czar. It is perhaps worth keeping in mind that this is not someone who can be dismissed as a know-nothing, washed-up, left-wing looney. This is a guy that the White House thought knew enough about the military to be in charge of overseeing it near the highest levels. And he thinks the Bush administration is going about things all wrong.

And obviously, one of the guys who went to University High School in the seventies who could have starred in Dumb and Dumber was me. In the previous posting, I confused Jeff Daniels (who was in that movie) with Jeff Bridges (who wasn't).

Thanks to all of you who wrote in to point out my error. All nine thousand of you.

Actually, these are eBay auctions that have already closed but I didn't bid and you wouldn't have, either. Someone was selling yearbooks from my era at Emerson Junior High School and University High here in Los Angeles. Here's part of the listing for the 1964 Emerson yearbook…

I am selling a 1964 Emerson Junior High of Los Angeles, California Yearbook featuring singer Bonnie Raitt, Singer and actor David Cassidy, Director and writer, John Landis, Jayne-Marie Mansfield, daughter of Jayne Mansfield and Mark Evanier, tv writer. See them when they were in Junior High School!

You learn the darnedest things on eBay. I never knew I went to junior high school with Jayne Mansfield's daughter. (I did know about the others. Bonnie Raitt once expressed amazement that I knew who her father was. By the way, the first time I read the above, I thought it was saying that I was the father of Jayne Mansfield's kid.) Here's part of the listing for the 1967 Uni Hi yearbook…

I am selling a 1967 University High School Yearbook from Los Angeles, California. It features the cool actor Jeff Bridges on three pages (two pictoral and one printed name) as shown on the photograph of the index page. He is in two pictures from the high school play, Romanoff and Juliet, he has one school portrait photo and there is a mention of his name on the student council page.

And I never knew Jeff Bridges went to my high school. What's more, I recall seeing that play and also a few unpleasant arguments in the student council meetings. I don't remember Bridges specifically but I knew a lot of guys at Uni who could have starred in Dumb and Dumber. As well as a few teachers.

This is a P.S. to my earlier post about The Spolin Players and about the "Yes, and…" rule of improv. Anna Mathias, who was one of the performers who was so brilliant not just in the show last evening but in everything she's done, wrote to remind me that Stephen Colbert discussed the rule in a commencement address he gave last year. Here's a link to the entire speech but here are the relevant sections…

But you seem nice enough, so I'll try to give you some advice. First of all, when you go to apply for your first job, don't wear these robes. Medieval garb does not instill confidence in future employers — unless you're applying to be a scrivener. And if someone does offer you a job, say yes. You can always quit later. Then at least you'll be one of the unemployed as opposed to one of the never-employed. Nothing looks worse on a résumé than nothing.

So, say "yes." In fact, say "yes" as often as you can. When I was starting out in Chicago, doing improvisational theatre with Second City and other places, there was really only one rule I was taught about improv. That was, "yes-and." In this case, "yes-and" is a verb. To "yes-and." I yes-and, you yes-and, he, she or it yes-ands. And yes-anding means that when you go onstage to improvise a scene with no script, you have no idea what's going to happen, maybe with someone you've never met before. To build a scene, you have to accept. To build anything onstage, you have to accept what the other improviser initiates on stage.

They say you're doctors — you're doctors. And then, you add to that: We're doctors and we're trapped in an ice cave. That's the "-and." And then hopefully they "yes-and" you back. You have to keep your eyes open when you do this. You have to be aware of what the other performer is offering you, so that you can agree and add to it. And through these agreements, you can improvise a scene or a one-act play. And because, by following each other's lead, neither of you are really in control. It's more of a mutual discovery than a solo adventure. What happens in a scene is often as much a surprise to you as it is to the audience.

Well, you are about to start the greatest improvisation of all. With no script. No idea what's going to happen, often with people and places you have never seen before. And you are not in control. So say "yes." And if you're lucky, you'll find people who will say "yes" back.

Now, will saying "yes" get you in trouble at times? Will saying "yes" lead you to doing some foolish things? Yes it will. But don't be afraid to be a fool. Remember, you cannot be both young and wise. Young people who pretend to be wise to the ways of the world are mostly just cynics. Cynicism masquerades as wisdom, but it is the farthest thing from it. Because cynics don't learn anything. Because cynicism is a self-imposed blindness, a rejection of the world because we are afraid it will hurt us or disappoint us. Cynics always say no. But saying "yes" begins things. Saying "yes" is how things grow. Saying "yes" leads to knowledge. "Yes" is for young people. So for as long as you have the strength to, say "yes."

And that's The Word.

I think this is great advice for the stage and almost great advice for life. On a stage, especially in an improv show, the worst thing that can happen is that you ruin a scene and move on to the next one. In real life, the worst thing that can happen is that you ruin a life and — depending on your religion — may or may not move on to another. So maybe a little bit of reticence to say "yes" is a good thing…but certainly not to the point of closing off opportunities, as too many people do. Given the choice of yes and no, I'd err on the side of yes. It gets you places including, alas, places you may not wish to go. But that still can be preferable to not going anywhere.

On one of our cartoon voice panels last year at San Diego, voicing superstar Maurice LaMarche spoke of how he'd looped the part of Orson Welles in the Tim Burton movie, Ed Wood. Vincent D'Onofrio played Welles and as you'll see, he really looked the part. But as Maurice ("Moe" to his friends) told the story, D'Onofrio used a somewhat high-pitched, effete voice for Welles and when Burton got into the editing room, it became obvious it wouldn't do.

Burton was a fan of the cartoon show, Pinky and the Brain, on which Moe played the latter role with a dead-on Orson Welles imitation. "Get the the guy who plays The Brain," Burton said…and indeed, they did. Moe went in and for a nice piece o' change I'm sure, redubbed the part. Here's that scene…shot, I believe, in the Musso & Frank Grill on Hollywood Boulevard — one of my favorite places to eat and, I would hope, yours. If you're familiar with the LaMarche simulation of Welles, you'll note how cleverly and appropriately, Moe "dialed down" the impression from the on-camera (or on-mike) Orson to something that matched the character's mood in the scene.

By the way: One of my favorite "star-spotting" memories occurred not far from the Musso & Frank Grill. Across the street and down a bit is the Hollywood Magic Shop, which like most magic shops caters to a lot of amateurs and beginners. But it also serves many celebs and seasoned professionals, and one day in the seventies when I was walking by, I spotted two men standing out front — Orson Welles and Carl "The Amazing" Ballantine. Carl was heckling tourists who walked by and Orson was roaring with laughter at everything Carl said, which is still not an uncommon response around Ballantine. I stood there for maybe ten minutes, taking in the show until a huge convertible pulled up at the curb and Welles, with great effort, went over and got in. Years later, when I became friends with Carl, I reminded him of that day and thanked him for that moment. It was one of the rare times Hollywood Boulevard was ever as colorful as we all wish Hollywood Boulevard was.

Here's the scene from Ed Wood…

Reader Marc Horowitz wrote to ask me, "I am curious do you think the words that got Imus fired are racist or just a bad joke and if a bad joke, what kind of apology is necessary? Do we go to rehab for saying something stupid?"

Well, I think going to "rehab" has become kind of a stunt and a way of escaping personal responsibility…which is not to say some of the folks who do it aren't in need of medical-type attention. I just wonder how many who do it are serious about dealing with the problem in other than a public relations sense. So kudos to Imus for not going that route.

Beyond that, I'm quite conflicted about the whole matter. I never thought the guy was that entertaining and felt he'd lucked into a vicious circle of success. Because of his huge listening audience, he got a steady stream of important guests who'd never have come near the same program if it was on a tiny FM station…and the steady stream of important guests got him that huge listening audience. Every time I heard him or watched him on the MSNBC simulcast in the wee small hours, he struck me as a monotonous presence who felt his duty was to say something nasty and condescending about every person, place or thing that crossed his gaze.

Were his remarks racist? I dunno. There's a fine line between racist and stupid, and what he said could go either way. As utterances of Imus, they were typical and thoughtless. I guess my reaction, as Free Speech Junkie, is that it's just another one of those things that we have to defend even though we don't like the speech or the speaker. To believe in the First Amendment, you have to do a certain amount of that.

On the other hand, no one has a Constitutional Right to have a radio show…and advertisers certainly have every right to distance themselves from something they find offensive or even bad for business. I think they're usually way too cowardly in this regard, reacting to two or three threats of protest and boycott as if they represented the entire buying public. But they have the right to be craven and they certainly have the right to not sponsor a radio personality they find tacky. If I had a company that bought time on shows like that one, I hope I would have long since turned to my advertising department and said, "Let's see if we can find other programs that give us the same bang for our dollar."

I mention the advertisers because obviously, that's what this is all about. The huge salary Imus drew was because advertisers flocked to him. When they start running the other way, it's not unreasonable for his employers to think they're better off without him. I guess this is kind of how the system is supposed to work: You lose your sponsors, you lose your show. And it doesn't matter if they're bailing because they don't want to be associated with you or because they just don't think your program's worth what they're paying. The only real mystery to me here is why, of all the stupid and possibly racist things Imus and other radio personalities say these days, this one comment did a guy in.

For an interesting (if also conflicted) view of all this from a frequent Imus guest, check out Frank Rich's column in today's New York Times. I won't link to it since it's behind a "pay" firewall. But if you do a bit of Googling or a search at Technorati, it ain't hard to come by.

We were talking here the other day about the new NBC show, Thank God You're Here, and how it isn't real improv comedy. Last evening, I went to see real improv comedy…a performance by The Spolin Players.

The "Spolin" refers to the late Viola Spolin, hailed by many as "The Grandmother of Improv Comedy." She was, among other things, a teacher and an awful lot of fine actors either studied with her or studied with someone who was offering a second-hand version of her curriculum. She more or less invented the idea of Theater Games, a set of little exercises that hone the skills of an improvisational actor. A lot of what they do on Whose Line Is It Anyway? is the kind of thing — often, the same games — that Ms. Spolin invented. There are presently two troupes — one in Seattle, one here in Los Angeles — that carry on her work and do occasional shows.

The troupe at tonight's L.A. show consisted of David McCharen, John Mariano, Anna Mathias, Danny Mann, Harry Murphy, Donna DuBain, Edie McClurg, Gail Matthius and I know I'm leaving someone out. Forgive me, whoever I left out. Everyone was very good in ways that will not mean anything if I start quoting lines and snippets here. The great thing about true improv is that it's in the moment. There's a loose structure for a game and then the audience throws out some specifics: Who are the people on stage? Where are they? What is their relationship? And so on. Then you see the scene created before your eyes.

There are certain regulations, one of the most important being the "Yes, and…" rule. In improv, you must not deny anything that is said. If you enter the scene and someone says, "Ah, you're back with the pizza," then you're back with the pizza and that's part of the scenario. You don't say, "I wasn't going out for pizza." If you're going to take things in another direction, you have to say something like, "Yes, and…" and then append your new information to what's already been established. Once or twice last night when someone violated this rule, you could hear moans from the audience.

That was because the audience was full of actors, most of whom had extensive backgrounds in improv. In fact, I think I knew about half the audience, which included Ann Ryerson, Shelley Long, Dani and Jim Staahl, my pal Teresa Ganzel, cartoon voice director Ginny McSwain and cartoon voice actor Michael Bell. (Michael's the guy we had on the voice panel at San Diego who told the great anecdote about working with Mel Blanc.) I may have been the only one in the place without a SAG card and it was fun watching one group of fine actors be appreciated by another.

Amidst the intermission and post-show chatter, I heard a lot of talk about Thank God You're Here, all of it quite negative…although when I spoke with Edie McClurg, who was on the show (and very good on it), the subject didn't come up. Everyone else though was negative about the series for being edited, for having all but the main actor so well scripted and for violating principles like the "Yes, and…" rule. There seemed to be a general horror that the tradition of improv games had been corrupted so for television, particularly when the real thing would have been far more entertainining…and honest. In fairness to the TV show, it never claimed to be classic improv — though I agree that the kind of thing Viola Spolin taught her students would have made for a much better program.

This troupe of the Spolin Players currently has no future performances scheduled but they'll be back soon. When they are, I'll let you know here in case you watch Thank God You're Here and would like to see what real improv looks like.

It is now possible to pre-order my forthcoming book on Jack Kirby (one of two, with the second still a few years off) at Amazon. That's right. We have an ISBN and everything!

Kirby: King of Comics will retail for forty smackers but you can order it now at Amazon for $26.40 and lock in that price for yourself. There may also, I'm told, be at least one "fancier" edition from a book club but if there is, or if there's a significantly cheaper place to order it, I'll announce it here in plenty of time for you to cancel your Amazon order and get it elsewhere. The thing won't be out until October.

With the help of Jack's daughter Lisa and other folks close to him, I'm finding some amazing treasures to include, including a lot of drawings he did in his teen year, signed with his birth surname of Kurtzberg. There's a self portrait he did of himself during his World War II days that's probably worth $26.40 all by itself. Plus, of course, there'll be lots and lots of Kirby art, some of which you've seen before, some of which you haven't.

The photo above probably won't be in the book. That's Jack at an art exhibition with Frank Frazetta on the left of him and Frank Kelly Freas on his right. Think of it as a picture of three guys who gave the world some of its greatest fantasy imagery.

I'll be telling you more about the book here out of enthusiasm, not as a sales pitch. I figure if you're familiar with Jack's work, you'll purchase this book and if you're not, you won't. If you're unsure where you stand, I leave you with Jack's advice from the cover of one of his books…

Reader Peter Avellino informs me that the name of the new game show pilot hosted by Tucker Carlson is actually Do You Trust Me?, not Who Do You Trust? The online article to which I linked had it wrong, which means the show has no connection to Johnny Carson's old program.

'Tis an awesome responsibility having a weblog like this. A reader named Marc just tipped me off that a site I linked to a few months ago has apparently been hacked. When I linked you to it, it had beautiful imagery of Earth's scenery on it. Now, it holds some pretty awful porn…the kind that no one could find erotic, only disgusting.

I've deleted the whole item but I just wanted to remind you, my fellow surfers of the Internet: It's a jungle out there. Old links often don't work at all…and when they do, they occasionally don't go where they used to. If you see any such thing on my site, please let me know. But don't be surprised.

Another example of why we like Jon Stewart so much…

Conservative pundit Tucker Carlson, who seems to go from one failed enterprise to another, is hosting a game show pilot for CBS called Who Do You Trust? This article tells about the show but doesn't mention if it's a revival of the show by the same name once hosted by Johnny Carson. From the description, I'm guessing someone acquired whatever rights there are to the earlier program but is changing it so much that a comparison seems inappropriate.

I'm a little surprised that they picked Carlson. I (sorta) understand his value to a station like CNN or MSNBC of even PBS. He has solid Conservative credentials so that group can't wail and scream "Liberal media." But he's also good-natured and rarely shrill with his viewpoints so Liberals don't mind him as much as they mind, say, a Glenn Beck or Michael Savage. He's kind of the right-wing version of Alan Colmes, tolerated and perhaps even welcomed by the opposition because he's never going to win an argument.

So programmers overlook his unbroken string of flop shows and they also overlook his wretched track record at predictions. (You know, Hillary Clinton's never going to come close to winning that New York Senate seat she's talking about.) He's especially useful if you're dumb enough to think you can program in a way to attract both rabid Liberals and strident Conservatives to your news channel, which is why MSNBC's ratings for everything but Olbermann are where they are. And besides, in the media today, we never hold always being wrong against a guy who's supposed to tell us what's going to happen.

But…game show host? Well, maybe. He can't predict and he can't dance. Maybe he can do that.

As you all know, David Hasselhoff has been appearing in the streamlined Las Vegas production of The Producers. Though he plays Roger Elizabeth DeBris, the cross-dressing director, Hasselhoff is being billed as the star and his is the only name or image on most of the billboards. To the surprise of many, he's leaving the play in early May, earlier than expected, because of the demands of his "day job," the America's Got Talent TV show. He'll be replaced on May 7 by Lee Roy Reams, who's been playing the role in the Broadway production, which conveniently closes on April 22.

This bit about America's Got Talent probably sounds a little suspicious to some. I mean, Hasselhoff signed for the The Producers knowing full well that his series would need him around this time. How did that schedule not get properly coordinated? I have no inside info here but the obvious (perhaps erroneous) assumption is that it's a cover story to get him out of the show because…well, maybe its producers no longer want him because they don't think its grosses justify his superstar salary. Or maybe he's not happy in the job for some reason.

Or maybe the schedules just weren't as easy to juggle as someone once thought. You never know. Sometimes, someone in show business actually quits a great job "to spend more time with the family" because they want to spend more time with the family.

Right now, the question is what this will mean for The Producers. I have no idea how good Mr. Hasselhoff is in the part but I doubt those who buy tickets will have any less of a time. Reams is a wonderful performer. He was in the first Broadway show I ever saw on Broadway and I saw him do The Producers with Jason Alexander and Martin Short, and he was splendid in both.

The question is how many people are buying tickets. Unlike shows in New York where the grosses are a matter of public record, no one on the outside seems too sure how The Producers is faring at the Paris hotel in Vegas. Anecdotal evidence does not suggest a huge hit but in Vegas, with all the comps and discounts and freebees, it's sometimes hard to tell. Certainly though, the substitution won't help ticket sales. Reams is a great performer but he's not a "name" the way Hasselhoff is a "name." The producers of The Producers obviously thought they needed a star in the show in order to sell tickets and now they ain't got one.

(Or have they? Tony Danza, who recently played Max Bialystock in New York for a while, recently visited the Vegas production. That certainly fuels the rumor mill. Danza is a "name" and while he apparently didn't boost sales in Manhattan, the folks behind The Producers might figure he would in Vegas. And he might be a lot cheaper than David Hasselhoff.)

Why all this matters is that a few years ago, there was a very real belief out there that Las Vegas would become a serious venue for theater, possibly even to the point of challenging Broadway for that honor. Given the finances and facilities of the town, it seemed plausible if — and it's a Big If — Vegas audiences were interested in seeing book musicals there. Then a couple of shows flopped — most notably, Avenue Q, which should never have been booked there in the first place — and lately, theater in that town is kind of on probation. It's too early to tell if the current productions of The Producers, Phantom and Spamalot will prove that musicals can make a go of it amidst the casinos…but a failure by any of the three would not bode well for the future. In fact, if all three fail, it'll probably be a long time before Vegas sees another musical. I mean, if those shows can't attract an audience, what could?

Mel Tormé was my favorite singer. The following is not his finest hour…