Category Archives: Uncategorized

Hey, I have two links for you to good articles about Dick Cavett. First, a huge fan of Cavett's named David Laurell wrote about his interview with the man. Then Lyle E. Davis interviewed him. Two interesting perspectives on the same guy.

Here's a good interview with Stan and Hunter Freberg. Bet you didn't know Stan not only has a Grammy Award but that he's the one who came up with the name for that trophy.

You can order their new CD, Songs in the Key of Freberg here…and you should. Very clever stuff from very clever people. (That, by the way, is not an Amazon link. It's more expensive on Amazon so I'm not linking you there even though I get a commission on Amazon links.)

Kliph Nesteroff scores again, this time with a good interview with comedy legend Bill Dana. In the conversation, Bill spends a lot of time taking credit for the careers of others and the creation of much fine material. As far as I can tell, he's right. He especially made his friend Don Adams into a popular and successful comedian…not that Adams' own talents didn't play a major role in that. I suspect Jose Jiminez made Bill most of his fortune but the character also made people think of Bill just as a performer and to overlook his fine work as a writer and producer. He's one of the good guys and I'm sorry he's not more active today in the TV business.

Brian Jay Jones, who's writing an authorized biography of Jim Henson, writes to give me a little more history on the clip I embedded earlier today of the formative years of Cookie Monster…

In 1966, Jim Henson was approached by General Foods about producing ads for a new snack called Wheels, Crowns and Shells. (They were shaped chips, and probably tasted something like corn chips or Bugles, I'm guessing.) Anyway, as part of Jim's "campaign concept," he drew up a series of characters related to each snack in the box — including a character who would do anything to steal the wheel-shaped snacks from the box. That became "The Wheel Stealer" — and the same puppet was used in the IBM films, the Munchos commercial, and the sketch you see here, then eventually morphed into Cookie Monster (when the snacks were released, by the way, they were changed to Wheels, Flutes and Crowns).

Incidentally, this bit was performed on Sullivan on October 8, 1967 — and in his "Red Book" (a sort of professional diary) Jim called the sketch "Monster Eats Machine." Which, I guess, is an obvious title, really.

Yeah, I do remember a period when The Muppets were appearing a lot on Mr. Sullivan's show and others like it, and I had a friend who was into puppets but not necessarily theirs. He said, "Every bit ends with someone eating everything or blowing up." This routine must have really annoyed him because it involved both. Thanks, Brian. Looking forward to the book.

As many of you know and as few of you care, I'm involved with The Garfield Show, an animated series that is seen in darn near every country on this planet…and in the U.S. on Cartoon Network. My title is Supervising Producer but I don't get to supervise any producers. Mostly, I write episodes and direct the voices. We do these shows in "seasons," each of which contain 26 half-hour episodes. What Cartoon Network has been running since the show joined its lineup in October of '09 is Season One, which they've shown over and over and over and over and over. During December, they also ran a special Christmas episode which we produced for Season Two.

Commencing Monday, February 28, they'll be running the rest of Season Two. We have been warned that the time slot might vary during the next month or three but it will usually air twice a day, Monday through Friday. I have no idea if they'll go all the way through Season Two before they run any of the Season One episodes again or if they'll sprinkle them in or what they'll do. You know as much about that kind of thing as I do.

Production on Season Two was completed a while ago and we start recording Season Three next month. I hope you'll tune in because we're having a great time doing these and it's fun to share that.

I felt I should write something at greater length about Joanne Siegel (widow of Jerry) who left us the other day…but I may have said most of it when I said she had courage and strength as well as beauty and charm. She was fiercely protective of Jerry and of their daughter Laura. She was also grateful to those who loved Jerry and Joe and were supportive of them.

There was a period about a decade ago when every week or so, I'd get a call or e-mail from someone who was working on a documentary on the history of Superman. They had been unsuccessful in contacting the Siegels and they wanted me to act as intermediary and arrange an interview. There was one guy in particular who ordered me around like I was his secretary. I don't think he ever actually made the film he claimed to be making and if he talked to others as he talked to me, I can imagine why. Anyway, because of ongoing legal stuff (Joanne lived much of her life with ongoing legal stuff), she was not giving interviews and I don't think I even had her current phone number so I told everyone who called to contact her lawyer — whoever it was at the time — and suggested a paper-type letter instead of a phone call. The demanding guy actually said to me, "I don't do paper mail."

Anyway, Joanne called one day — and this may be the last time we spoke — to apologize to me that I was getting these calls and e-mails. She felt bad about it…and bad that she wasn't able to give all those folks the interviews they wanted. The only one she didn't feel bad about turning down was the annoying guy I told you about. He'd somehow found her number, called and told her when he was coming by with his cameras so she'd better be ready. She told me she'd informed him what he could do with his cameras…and I can believe it. The man's probably still quaking.

She was very proud of the role she'd played in the history of one of the world's great iconic characters and felt a great responsibility to history and also to the memory of her departed hubby. Jerry was always willing to talk, not just about his own work but about the industry he helped establish, the many people he worked with, etc. One time, he was on the phone with someone who wanted to know which comic contained the first appearance of Mr. Mxyzptlk and Jerry didn't know offhand…so while he talked to the caller about other things, he had Joanne call me on the other line and get the information. (As many of you could have told him, it was Superman #30 and the character then called himself Mr. Mxyztplk. I believe he changed it because it sounded too Jewish.)

Answering the question was no big deal. It took thirty seconds and I was pleased to do it for them. To my surprise, a few days later I received an envelope with a Superman poster signed to me by Jerry and a handwritten "thank you" note from Joanne. That was how nice they both were…and how important it was to them to do right by their fans. (I don't mean me. I mean whoever it was who asked Jerry that question.)

I didn't know them as well as I would have liked. Apart from calls to ask research-type questions, I think I only spoke to or saw them (or after Jerry passed, just Joanne) about once every decade. The last time was about two or three weeks before we lost him. You would have loved what good care they took of each other.

Jerry was excited because in a few months, the two of them were being flown to London so he could sign some new Superman litho cel at a Warner Store over there. They'd be going First Class and there was a per diem and an appearance fee…and when Joanne was out of the room making coffee for Jerry, he leaned over and told me why he was so happy about the trip. It was because Joanne deserved a vacation. He was looking forward to it for himself but what he was really looking forward to was how happy it would make Joanne. There were so many years there where he couldn't provide all (or hardly any) of the things he thought she deserved…and now there was this trip which, sadly, they never got to take. But the point was that he was happy about it because she was happy about it. And she felt the same way about him.

And while I'm not a big believer in any afterlife, it sure is nice to think that if we had to lose her, at least they're together again.

Numerous sources are reporting that playwright Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa has been or may be engaged to help rewrite the book of Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark on Broadway. He is perhaps the logical choice since in addition to plays, he has written Spider-Man comics.

But assuming the reports are true, it's odd to be bringing someone in now to rewrite the book unless (a) they're planning, despite promises to the contrary, to delay the opening again or (b) they're only expecting him to participate in small dialogue rewrites. The show is scheduled to open March 15. That's less than a month from now and it's pretty late in the game to be making major alterations in the book. It would be even if this was a simple musical with simple sets, simple staging and no complicated special effects. I haven't seen the show but I'll wager they're severely limited as to what they can change if they're going to freeze things in time to open on 3/15.

Then again, maybe they're not going to freeze the show. Broadway tradition is that you don't make significant revisions after Opening Night…but this show has already broken all sorts of Broadway traditions. Maybe they're just going to go on fixing and changing things even after they open.

By the by: I must admit that while I've written a lot here about this show, I find myself largely uninterested in going to see it. If it's still running the next time I'm in New York (no idea when that'll be), I might go or I might not. I'm probably more interested in reading that book that you just know somebody's already working on about how this became the biggest surprise smash hit in the history of American theater…or the biggest flop.

I haven't been watching Lawrence O'Donnell, the gent who now has Keith Olbermann's time slot on MSNBC. I actually haven't been watching MSNBC much, if at all lately. I often agree with the politics of its prime-time commentators but that's not enough to get me to tune in.

I'm increasingly aware that a key selling point for that kind of programming — and for talk radio and certain websites — is reinforcement. It's like: Give us your business and we'll endorse every political prejudice you have and shield you from facts that conflict, plus we'll give you more reasons to hate the people you hate, even if we have to make them up. I don't want that and if you don't, good for you. There are way too many people out there, Liberal or Conservative, who do.

Olbermann did some of that but not enough to lose my business. I felt I got something out of watching his show, including a presentation of some issues that was complete enough that I sometimes came to different conclusions than the host's. I like some of Rachel Maddow's show but can only abide her for an hour when I'm in the mood to be lectured, which is almost never. Chris Matthews seems to enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing…and O'Donnell and Ed Schultz are trying too hard to work the Fox News model in a left-wing context. If I were right of center, I'd like to think I had too much respect for facts and mature discussion to watch much of Hannity or Beck. Being generally left of center, I'm not going to avidly tune in to their Liberal knock-offs.

So I missed it yesterday when O'Donnell went after two friends of mine, James Hudnall and Batton Lash, for a recent cartoon they did which depicted the Obamas in a manner he decried as racist and disgusting. Even if he'd been right about that, I thought O'Donnell's segment was overkill and needlessly personal. But I also don't think the cartoon was racist or disgusting, especially compared to a lot of what's said about the Obamas on the web these days. What set O'Donnell off was probably not so much what Jim and Bat said but where they said it…that particular website.

There's loads of stuff there that is racist, hysterical and constructed of outright lies about the Obamas and Democrats. Its operator recently got up at CPAC and said of Liberals, "They're not Americans, they're animals" and he has often said how much he hates and wants to destroy them. This is Andrew Breitbart we're talking about…he of the deceptively-edited videotapes and other smears that responsible Conservatives disavow or at least distance themselves from. In his silly scolding of Jim and Bat, O'Donnell went after what may be the least offensive thing on that site and one that clearly falls within this nation's tradition of political commentary by cartoon. He oughta be ashamed of that.

He wanted the friends and acquaintances of Hudnall and Lash to perform an intervention and get them to stop doing their cartoons. I sure won't do that. If they want to keep doing them, they should keep doing them. What I will suggest to them is that they're doing it on a website that frequently engages in the kind of attacks O'Donnell made (including bogus accusations of racism) and therefore invites them in return. I think Breitbart deliberately provokes that sort of thing. I mean, you don't call people "animals" unless you want them to bark at you. Jim and Batton may well feel that it's worth occasionally wandering into the line of fire in order to reach that site's large readership…but Breitbart's site does throw mud. Hudnall and Lash shouldn't be surprised when others throw it back and some of it, however unfairly, splatters on the political cartoonists.

Gigi was the Best Picture of 1958…or so said the Motion Picture Academy which gave it that award and nine others. I'm not sure why. There were some great songs and Maurice Chevalier was wickedly charming…but ten Oscars? My problem with it was that I could never summon up any interest in the story of a bored rich guy who decides to brighten his life by buying himself a mistress.

In 1973, reversing the usual process, it was adapted for a stage musical. Nowadays, people often turn movie musicals into theatrical productions but back then, it was something new…and unsuccessful. It only ran a few months on Broadway. I guess audiences then couldn't summon up any interest in the story of a bored rich guy who decides to brighten his life by buying himself a mistress.

The Reprise! group which does fine limited-run musicals up at UCLA is currently offering a revival of the stage version and I am just back from Opening Night. The cast is strong (especially Lisa O'Hare in the title role) and the sets and costumes and orchestrations are splendid. Director David Lee has done a terrific job of delivering Broadway quality on a low budget and short-term rehearsals schedule. I'm very glad I saw it but I still can't summon up any interest in the story of a bored rich guy who decides to brighten his life by buying himself a mistress.

This production of Gigi runs through 2/27. If you order tickets here, try entering the word "LOVE" in the coupon code box. I think it'll get you ten bucks off each ticket.

By the way: Betty White was in the audience. Then again, she's in everything.

Another poll — this one a Harris Poll — yields the same conclusion; that while people might say, "We want massive cuts in government spending," when you ask them what they'd cut, they can only point to Foreign Aid and a few trivial nuggets of saving, nothing substantial. In fact, if this poll is correct, America is less willing to do without things we expect from the government than it has been in a long time.

I see a couple of online pundits making a point lately that I think is probably valid. Republicans aren't really interested in deficit reduction. They've taken too many things (like anything resembling a tax hike on wealthier folks) off the table to do anything real about the imbalance. Saying we have a debt crisis is just their way of trying to force cuts in Liberal-type programs like NPR and certain regulatory agencies that they'd want eliminated even if we were flush with cash. And Democrats aren't all that interested in deficit reduction, either. They just say they are so they don't get blamed as much for the growing deficit. So we get a lot of posturing and very little cutting. And that's probably all we're going to get for quite some time.

New York Times obit for Joanne Siegel. I'm still not sure what I want to write about her.

Alfred Walker sent me a link to this article by Linda Holmes about Charlie Sheen and his problems. She's right. Sheen's self-destruction (and that seems to be a proper thing to call this) is no ordinary bout of substance abuse and bad behavior. He's at the core of a very profitable endeavor…one that earns zillions and provides the livelihoods for many. I don't have any answers for the questions she asks…and I'm afraid that may be because there aren't any answers.

The intelligence source codenamed "Curveball" has admitted that he fabricated stories about Saddam Hussein having Weapons of Mass Destruction. He wanted to see Saddam toppled and he thought the lie would cause someone to invade and take him out.

We can all argue about how smart or stupid it was to invade Iraq like that…and I assume that if they hadn't had this man's "intelligence," the Bush administration would have invaded anyway. What I want to know is why anyone believed someone named "Curveball."

The National Enquirer reported that O.J. Simpson had been brutally beaten in prison by a bunch of White Supremacists. The prison now says the story is utterly untrue and now most of the news sources that quoted the Enquirer piece are either retracting it or featuring the denial in such a way as to suggest they no longer believe the story.

That's good. For a minute there, I thought I might have to feel a bit sorry for O.J. Simpson.

Seth Christenfeld corrects me on the Broadway musical, The Life. I mistyped when I implied Ira Gasman was the sole author of the book. He collaborated on it with David Newman and Cy Coleman.

And I should have said The Life was Cy Coleman's last musical to reach Broadway (so far). He completed at least three others — Pamela's First Musical with David Zippel
and Wendy Wasserstein, Like Jazz with Alan and Marilyn Bergman and Larry Gelbart, and Grace with Seth Gaaikema. That last one was in Dutch, Seth says. There was also one in progress — N, which was all about Napoleon and Josephine. He was working on that with Zippel and Gelbart. Thanks, Seth.

Another follower of this site, Jim Van Dore, notes a bit of…I guess you'd call it irony on some level. The Life is basically about what Times Square was like before the massive cleanup (physically and morally) spearheaded by Disney. And then a number of the ladies who played hookers in The Life wound up voicing the Muses in Disney version of Hercules. It's true: Sooner or later, we all end up working for The Mouse.