Tickets to Broadway shows are pretty expensive and, in the past, you've had two choices: Pay full price and book your seats in advance or brave the TKTS booth on the day of the performance you wish to see.  If you do the latter, you get deep discounts but you often face long lines and the possibility that they won't have seats (good or at all) for the show you want to see when you want to see it.

There is another way, though I must caution that I haven't tried it myself yet.  Theatrical producers often send out ads with discount ticket codes, and one website has established itself as a central gathering point for such info.  It's at www.broadwaybox.com and if you go there, you can perhaps find a code number that will save you beaucoup bucks on tickets you order in advance.  Naturally, not all shows are available but it's probably worth a visit.

The snag, I am told, is that some box offices try to weasel out of honoring a discount code unless they know you obtained it via the intended route.  That is, on a given show, they might put a certain code only on flyers distributed in a select area or to a select demographic.  Then, when someone shows up at the ticket window with the number but not the flyer, the cashier argues that the purchaser is not eligible.  The solution is to use these discount codes only for telephone and online orders.  Odd that this should be a concern but I'm told it is.

Trio is a network that is available on a limited number of local cable companies but mainly via satellite.  I like it for its music specials, some of which are quite excellent, and for rerunning old episodes of Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In.  (Alas, they seem to have a limited number of episodes which they recycle.)  The network is about to add reruns of Late Night with David Letterman, the show ol' Dave did for NBC.  The actual airings commence in January but as a preview, they'll be running a 53-hour marathon over Thanksgiving weekend.  If I'm reading the press release correctly, the total package they've acquired from NBC consists of 80 episodes, so they'll probably be rerun over and over and over, the way the same Laugh-Ins get rerun over and over and over.  Which is not to say it won't be great to see those old Letterman shows again for the first few times.

Another example of great humor being ruined can be witnessed on a Saturday Night Live episode that Comedy Central is rerunning on October 26 (4 PM in most time zones).  It's a 1997 SNL hosted by Kevin Spacey but with guest appearances by John Cleese and Michael Palin.  In it, the latter gents performed the famous Monty Python "dead parrot" sketch to tepid audience response.  Maybe they'd done the routine one time too often…maybe the SNL audience is of another generation and taste…whatever.  But as you watch it, you can almost see the two performers exchanging looks of panic and wondering if they shouldn't just bail out of the script and drop trou or something.  Cleese later claimed that they hadn't wanted to do an old piece; that they were doing SNL to promote a movie and Lorne Michaels insisted on it.  Whoever or whatever was to blame, it's rather stunning to see two such skilled comedians die with one of their (usually) funniest pieces.

Quick link: Alan Light (that's right…the same guy who founded what became Comics Buyer's Guide) calls my attention to this article by Tom Shales about problems with publicists and book publicity.

Back in 1951, Phil Silvers wowed Broadway with Top Banana, a musical about a high-pressure TV comedian who was basically Milton Berle, rolled into one.  Berle, in fact, did a number of things to promote it, including bogus threats to sue for slander.  Since he was also one of the backers of the show, he later remarked that it was never so profitable to be publicly ridiculed.  Since then, the show has rarely been produced, perhaps because stars like Phil Silvers are in short supply.  Fortunately (sort of), his performance was preserved (sort of) on film.

In 1953, producer Albert Zugsmith approached the producers of Top Banana about knocking out a quickie film to ride the then-current mania for 3-D movies.  Zugsmith was a producer of cheap, grade-Z motion pictures (you can read more about him in Part 2 of our interview with Irwin Hasen, here) and he had a low-budget idea.  Rather than really make a movie, he just wanted to stick a camera in front of the stage production, film the whole thing in three days and rush it into theaters.  Apparently, they didn't rush enough: 3-D was dying out and the thing was scarcely released in that format.  But it was filmed that way so the image looks muddy and strange in its conversion to 2-D.  The end product is sloppy and full of mistakes, and the cast often doesn't seem to know how to time the delivery of material that they usually performed with an audience out front howling in laughter.

If you want to see what Mr. Silvers later described as a "totally surreal film experience," it runs on Turner Classic Movies, the evening of October 27.  Here and there, you get a sense of how wonderful this show must have been on Broadway…but only here and there.

Have to recommend another Paul Krugman column.  Maybe from now on, I should just tell you which ones not to read.  This one should not be missed.

For deeper insights in the realm of sketch comedy, check out Bill Zehme's new interview show, Second City Presents, which runs weekly on Bravo.  In each episode, Zehme does a pretty good job interviewing someone of prominence in the world of humor, not necessarily from Second City.  This week's, featuring Tracey Ullman, reminds us that there may be no funnier woman alive.  Up next is Martin Short.

I lost much of an afternoon reading Live From New York, an oral history of Saturday Night Live, compiled and annotated by Tom Shales and James Andrew Miller.  They talked to a hefty sampling of cast and crew members, NBC execs and guest hosts and pretty much just printed what was said.  Much of it is interesting in a gossipy sense as it recounts feuds and romances, and there are insights into how the show has always been assembled, though perhaps not as many as one might like.  One nice thing is that it does cover the years produced by Dick Ebersol which are rarely discussed…and, since Lorne Michaels controls the repeats, rarely rerun.

There is much about deceased cast members like Belushi, Radner, Farley and Hartman, though almost nothing on Andy Kaufman.  There is very little about living cast members who weren't interviewed unless they were Eddie Murphy.  (The book spends more time on marginal player Damon Wayans, who spoke to the authors, than on Dennis Miller and Rob Schneider, who didn't.)  Some folks come off as petty; others as afraid to speak less than glowingly of Lorne.  A lot of them really, really didn't like Chevy Chase.

Though a hefty volume, I found the book rather incomplete, breezing over whole years and major players.  Advance knowledge of SNL history may help you understand some of the anecdotes and no one seems to have the vantage point to step back and put it all into a larger context.  It's all about getting on the show, getting your sketches on the show, and surviving in its environment.

Still, if your interest in Saturday Night Live reaches beyond the level of casual viewer, you'll want to read this.  If not, not.  You can order a copy from Amazon.Com (and give us a teensy commission) by clicking here.

One of our readers, Mark Thorson, sends in a correction: In this piece, I incorrectly identified a Nash Metropolitan as a Nash Rambler.  This is one of those things that I should have known but didn't.  Thanks, Mark.

I missed them when they were first posted months ago but just noticed that Greg Hatcher did a couple of good articles for Comic Book Resources, covering two of the panels I did at the San Diego Con.  Click here to read highlights of the one I did with Bob Oksner and here to read about the one I did with Herb Trimpe.

If you're interested in the history of DC Comics, you won't find a better repository of info than Mike's Amazing World of DC Comics, a fact-filled corner of cyberspace.  According to Mike, DC has so far published 28,794 comics (I don't know as of when) and he has 82.5 percent of them.  I think that's about my batting average, as well.

As a kid, I occasionally hung out on the set of Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In, watching them tape the world's fastest-paced comedy show at about the speed of a snail.  It always seemed to take forever, but that was fine because you got to see the cast members screwing around between takes, and bitching as the schedule stretched into triple-golden overtime.  Most of them seemed to be having enormous fun and I suspect the off-camera camaraderie had a lot to do with the on-camera success of the show.  Several members of the Laugh-In cast have either set up websites or fans have set them up unofficially.  Most don't have that much on them yet, but you might like to check them out.

(The bio on Judy Carne's site is a pretty good summary of a pretty awful series of life tragedies.)

• www.lilytomlin.com
• www.ruthbuzzi.com
• www.larryhovis.com
• www.joanneworley.net
• www.judycarne.com

Several outraged delicatessen-goers in Los Angeles wrote in to protest my omission of Nate 'n Al's in Beverly Hills from the list of the best delis on our turf.  Actually, it was the L.A. Weekly's pick of the four best but it concurs with mine, and I'd probably put Nate 'n Al's in the same class.  I used to enjoy it as much for the clientele (Milton Berle, Phil Silvers, Doris Day, etc.) as the food, but the food has always been good.  I'm just not a fan of the parking, the hours of operation, or those cramped booths.

A site called www.reelradio.com archives "air checks" (i.e., recordings) of disc jockeys, past and present, around the U.S.  They're currently spotlighting some samples of the late Al Lohman and Roger Barkley.  You can hear them if you go there and if you have RealAudio installed on your computer.

We recommend this article by Paul Krugman in today's New York Times magazine.  We don't necessarily agree with it but we think it's worth a look.

Here, we see Bob Crane reading the Hogan's Heroes comic book (drawn, as I recall, by Sal Trapani and an array of ghost-pencilers, including Steve Ditko) and eating lunch from his Hogan's Heroes lunchbox.  What kind of man was Bob Crane when he wasn't playing Colonel Robert Hogan?  I don't know…and I find it hard to believe that the makers of a new movie about his life have any more idea than I do.  Certainly, the folks who worked closely with the man thought he was a heckuva nice guy and a good actor, and they weren't at all sure about his "other" life.  I guess that's what bugs me a bit about the film, Auto-Focus, and why I probably won't see it until it hits cable, if then.

I never knew Crane but I've known a lot of people who did…who spent 12-hour shooting days with him for years.  And not a one of them professes to the kind of insight claimed by the makers of the movie, most of whom never inhabited the same zip code as Robert "Bob" Crane.  I see Greg Kinnear (who plays Crane) and director Paul Schrader all over the media dissecting the man's character and discussing the childhood events that obviously motivated him to spend so much of his adult life making dirty movies with waitresses from Barney's Beanery.  The cause-and-effect connections involved in such simplified psychology always seem tenuous to me at best…but even if I buy them, I have to wonder how a bunch of total strangers could know "the real Bob Crane" when those who knew the real Bob Crane didn't know "the real Bob Crane."

Is it possible that a certain sham is being perpetrated here?  That the filmmakers have taken the broad strokes of the man's life and used them to construct a largely-fictional character whom they have named Bob Crane?  That it would have been more honest but less commercial to fictionalize further and not pass this off as the true story of Bob Crane, star of the beloved situation comedy, Hogan's Heroes?  Or have they really, from afar, homed in on the essence of a man who was an enigma to those who actually spent much of their lives with him?

I dunno.  22 years after you die, do you think people you never knew could make a film of your life and know all the things about you that your friends and family don't?

Here's a little pet peeve of mine…one that's true of many hotels these days but I'll bitch about the Aladdin Hotel in Las Vegas for doing it.  If you go to their website and look up the description of their cheapest rooms — which for some reason, they call "Deluxe Rooms" — here's what it says you get…

• Your option of a King or 2 Queen Beds
• Iron/Ironing Board
• Blow Dryer
• Armoire
• Computer with Internet Access Standard Features
• All guests receive complimentary Valet Parking or Self Parking

Okay, based on the above, is there an additional charge for that Computer with Internet Access?  The answer is that there is — it's $9.95 per 24 hours of access — even though the service is listed among features for which they don't charge extra.  The price of the room includes the bed(s), the iron, the ironing board, the blow dryer and that doubtlessly-wonderful armoire.  I'll bet the room also has an alarm clock, a TV, a Gideon Bible, a toilet, a sink, a bathtub and other luxuries, all covered by the rate you'll be quoted over the phone or on their website…and don't forget about that free parking.  (They make it sound like a perk of staying at the Aladdin.  Actually, no hotel in Vegas charges anyone for Self Parking and most don't for Valet, apart from the expected tip.)

The only thing on that list that costs extra is the Computer with Internet Access.  I'm guessing there are other features that cost…pay-per-view movies, laundry service, maybe a coffee maker or mini-bar…but they don't advertise them as features of the room.  Nor do they tell you the rate for this Internet Access unless you specifically ask.

Okay, it's a little point, and a lot of hotels do it.  But it still seems misleading to me.

• An Ugly Tale of Corporate Greed by The Editors, Washington Times
• Nobel Winners and Losers by Richard Cohen, Washington Post
• Springtime for Hitler by Paul Krugman, New York Times

Here in this picture, famed comedian and money-raiser Jerry Lewis learns a vital lesson.  It's that it's not humanly possible to outmug Harpo Marx.  Can't be done, don't even try.  One wonders what these guys were saying to each other…discussing the accounting procedures at Paramount?  Comparing notes about working with Frank Tashlin?  Debating whether Dino was more Italian than Chico?  Whatever.  Thanks to Earl Kress, who forwarded this photo to me after receiving it from a friend.  Just to reward Earl, I'm going to let him eat lunch with me today.  I may even use the utensils.

Speaking of photos of silly-looking people: Some time ago, I posted this rare photo of Moe, Curly and Shemp, three brothers who were members of The Three Stooges, though not all at the same time.  Today, I received this info on the pic from Stooge expert Brent Seguine…

It was taken during production of Hoi Polloi (1935). Although Shemp was still based on the east coast, doing Vitaphone comedies for Warner Bros. ('33-'37), this was during one of his west coast visits, presumably to visit his brothers and Larry.  Specifically, it was taken on Larchmont Ave., where Hoi Polloi did a location shoot in front of the Larchmont Bijou, now the site of Blockbuster Video.

Larchmont Avenue (about two miles east of where I live) has been used in a staggering number of movies and TV shows over the years.  It's wide, rarely busy, and close to both Paramount Studios and the old Columbia lot, which is now Sunset-Gower Studios.  I wonder if it doesn't hold the record for the most location shoots of any non-landmark part of Los Angeles.

The four best delicatessens in Los Angeles are, in no particular order, Canter's, Langer's, Art's and Junior's.  Recently, their proprietors were gathered together to discuss the deli trade.  Here's a bit of that discussion.

For some reason, I had the TV news channels on today, which meant that I heard a lot about the Washington Sniper.  As with the recent coverage of the Chandra Levy murder, it struck me that everything that was really known with any certainty could be summarized in around five minutes, but that TV time had to be filled…

…so filled it has been with rumors, highly-peripheral testimony (CNN had on a guy who talked about being stuck in traffic a few blocks from the latest shooting) and my favorite — speculation on the identity and motives of this guy that no one knows anything about.  We don't know who's doing it, or even if it's only one person, and we don't know why.  The police don't even have enough input from the few witnesses to assemble a composite sketch.  But experts sure have a lot of theories on what might be on his mind, what kind of training he might have had, what he perhaps had for breakfast this morning, etc.  I so long to hear one of these talking heads say, "Okay, here's all we know and there's no point in speculating further, so let's talk about a topic we know something about."

On the other hand, I am watching.  And maybe that's all that matters.