• State of the Enron by Frank Rich, New York Times
• The Bush Shell Game by Molly Ivins, Creators Syndicate
• Tortured Thought by William F. Buckley, Jr.
• An Orgy of Defense Spending by Robert Scheer, Los Angeles Times
• Lay: Have a Nice Cruise by Murray Waas
• Kenny Boy's Quiet, With Good Reason by Joe Conason, New York Observer

Okay, so British actor Henry Goodman will be taking over for Nathan Lane in The Producers, opposite a Leo Bloom to be named later.  The AP news story says this will be Goodman's Broadway debut but, in fact, he was there in the play Art a few years ago.  Having never seen Mr. Goodman in anything, I have no idea how he'll be except, of course, you have to figure the producers of The Producers looked long and hard, and had their pick of darn near everyone.  In the meantime, gossip columnist Liz Smith says that Jason Alexander and Martin Short are pretty much a lock for the West Coast production, whenever that occurs, though she presently seems to be the only one who thinks so.  It sounds so obvious that I'm a bit skeptical…

Every so often, we come across photos that we think need to be shared.  Here we have one of the few pics I've ever seen of the Hurwitz boys — Jerry, Samuel and Maurice, better known as Curly, Shemp and Moe…members of the Three Stooges, but not all at the same time.  (To see a larger version of the picture, click above where it says.)  At no point was the Stooges' act actually comprised of the three brothers.  Shemp appeared in various permutations of the team when they were in vaudeville, providing comic relief to the terminally unfunny Ted Healy, who fronted the act.  Then Shemp left to go it alone and Jerry/Curly took his place.

Eventually, sans Healy, The Three Stooges (Curly and Moe, plus Larry Fine) began making shorts for Columbia.  Then Curly suffered a stroke and had to give up performing.

Many years ago, an actress named Carlotta Monti (now best recalled as the mistress of W.C. Fields) told me that Shemp had returned to the act largely under duress.  She said — and this differs slightly from the way the tale is usually told — that when Curly took ill, Moe initially did all he could to keep it secret, lest it mean unemployment for the act.  Eventually though, he had to tell the Columbia Studios biggies that Curly would not be reporting for their next picture, at which point the arguments began.

According to Ms. Monti, who was apparently a close friend of Shemp's, Moe initially wanted to change the act to The Two Stooges but Columbia would have none of that.  "Theaters will want to pay two-thirds as much for the films," they joked, though their main concern was that Moe and Larry couldn't carry a film.  The studio wanted to hire a rotund comic — someone built somewhat like Curly — so that the change would be less blatant and so that old stock footage of Curly (or his stuntman) could be reused.  Already, to save money, a lot of the Stooges films were recycling earlier scenes.

At this, Moe balked.  He didn't want a stranger in "his" act.  Moreover, Ms. Monti claimed, they were then trying to keep Jerry's spirits up by telling him that if and when he got better, he could return to work.  Moe suggested that they have Shemp fill in and then, when Curly was ready, it would be easier to have a brother step aside than to dump a non-kin Stooge.  "Everyone knew Jerry would never work again," Ms. Monti told me.  "But deep down, Moe didn't want to believe it."

Shemp was already making a name for himself as a solo comic and, when Moe nominated his sibling, the boys at Columbia grudgingly said they'd accept him…though they did have the concern that Shemp wasn't as physical as Curly and also that he looked too much like Moe.  At this point, Moe and other members of the Howard (formerly Hurwitz) family confronted Shemp, who wasn't wild about giving up his solo career, mainly in features, to sign on with an act that did low-budget shorts.  But he was told that "for the good of the family," he had to, and so he did.  Curly never did get better enough to reclaim his old position, but he did do one cameo in a short called Hold That Lion.  (The footage was reused six years later in Booty and the Beast, released after Curly's death.)

A few years later, Shemp died but they didn't immediately replace him.  In a somewhat ghoulish procedure, the Stooges actually made four shorts by having Moe and Larry appear in new scenes — some with Shemp's stand-in, Joe Palma, who kept his back to the camera — and integrating them with old footage.  Finally, Joe Besser was hired as the third Stooge and he finished out the team's time at Columbia.  Joe De Rita eventually replaced Besser.

That's the tale of the Hurwitz Brothers.  I'm Mark Evanier with your Hollywood Minute.

Anyone get the feeling that the current behind-the-scenes scrambling among the Enron biggies is all about determining who's going to be the scapegoat?  I mean, they can't all have been "out of the loop," right?  That excuse only works if someone falls (or is shoved) onto his sword.  In the meantime, the excuse of, "Enron never received any special treatment from the government" seems to not be playing in Peoria.  Lists keep popping up of favors and helpful legislation.  Here's one from Common Cause that's already two weeks out of date.

My pal Russell Myers has been drawing Broom-Hilda for close to 32 years with no end in sight.  He just signed another ten year contract and, even if he quit tomorrow, he's always about a year ahead on the thing.  One day, about a decade ago, we were talking on the phone and he said, "I've gotta go.  I have a deadline crisis."  And for him, it was a crisis: He'd been ill or playing hooky or something and, somehow, a chunk of his lead had evaporated and he was only (gasp!) ten months ahead.  There are syndicated artists who go their entire careers without ever getting as much as a month ahead…and here's Myers fretting because he doesn't have his usual year-long stockpile.

Anyway, I've always enjoyed the adventures of the short little witch lady and often make a point of checking out her exploits…which you can do at the syndicate's website.  You can also read a nice on-line chat/interview with her maker by clicking on this link.  Do one or the other.

Woke up this morning to fifteen (count 'em — 15) e-mails from folks who noted I'd written the following in the previous news item…

But what he lacked in talent, Burton more than made up for via sheer talent and ingenuity.

I've corrected the line.  Thanks to the lot of you and I wish I could blame it all on some HTML coding error or something.  If you spot an error, don't hesitate to let me know.

More thoughts about Chuck Jones, who passed away last Friday at the age of 89.  It's a jolt to realize that all of the major directors of the classic Warner Brothers cartoons are gone: Bob Clampett, Tex Avery, Robert McKimson, Friz Freleng and now Chuck.  (That's Friz with Chuck in this news photo I found.  I suspect, given what I recall of their relative heights, Friz was standing on something — probably an animator — when this picture was taken.)  Norman McCabe, who directed 11 WB cartoons during World War II, is still with us but I'd bet even he would agree that, with the lost of Jones, an era has passed.

Chuck Jones directed several hundred cartoons in his lifetime.  He directed poor cartoons, good cartoons and an astounding number of the best cartoons ever made.  An oft-heard remark among animation buffs is, "I never thought of Jones as my favorite director…but when I sat down and made a list of my favorite cartoons, I found more of his films than anyone else's."  I agree with those who feel that What's Opera, Doc? has been praised far beyond its worth but leave that aside — in fact, toss out One Froggy Evening, Chow Hound, Rabbit Seasoning, Duck Amuck, Duck Dodgers, Rabbit Punch, Cheese Chasers, Robin Hood Daffy and all the Road Runner cartoons.  Throw away any fifty great Chuck Jones cartoons, look at what's left and you still have an incredible body, not just of work but of timeless work.

Chuck, we can all be happy to remember, lived to see it discovered anew by several generations, each of which appreciated it as not just entertainment but as an integral part of their ongoing childhoods.  When I do chalk talks on cartooning at schools, the kids invariably shout catch-phrases from the films — and that is not a shallow measure of something's worth.  When you say, "I knew I shoulda turned left at Albuquerque," people smile and even laugh, because it reminds them of a wonderful cartoon that made them smile and even laugh.  Does anyone doubt they'll be smiling and laughing at The Rabbit of Seville and other great Chuck Jones cartoons a hundred years from now?  (That's about when Warner Home Video will probably start releasing them on DVD…)

Early in the nineties, there was a period wherein I found myself routinely commuting to Las Vegas for odd combinations of biz and pleasure.  During this time, I paid no less than a half-dozen visits to the Hacienda to see Lance Burton in a show that was short on price tag (approx. $20) and budget (not many sets, some of them leftover from a shopworn Minsky's Burlesque revue that had preceded him at the shopworn — now extinct — casino).  But what he lacked in funds, Burton more than made up for via sheer talent and ingenuity.  I've seen enough magicians to know when I'm watching the very best…and Lance Burton was and is the very best.  His little show was so good that no one was surprised when he signed a multi-million buck, 10-year deal with a new hotel that was then under construction.  In fact, the showroom at the Monte Carlo was named for him and designed to his specifications and now he performs there.

A great show it is…a bit less charming than the one at the Hacienda because, among other differences, it lacks intimacy and underdog status.  But magic doesn't get much better than what Mr. Burton offers on that stage.

All of this is a roundabout way of leading up to a recommendation.  I just got a copy of Lance Burton: Secrets of Magic, a low-priced (under 12 bucks) DVD that you can purchase from Amazon-dot-com by clicking on the picture above.  It's really a bargain for magic fans, as it contains two of those fine NBC specials that Lance did a few years back, plus another magic special that he's in but does not headline, as well as a few extras.  The magic is terrific and it's photographed with great integrity, meaning that the director didn't "help" the magician by doing little time compressions or cutaways to omit what you might have caught, had you been there live.  I believe this DVD is on closeout, having been discontinued, so if you want one, buy now.

We continue to refute the rumor that will not die.  The latest issue of the otherwise excellent Alter Ego reports that, according to Al Feldstein at a recent San Diego convention, the actor Martin Landau assisted Wally Wood on some of his comic book work for EC.  This is not true.  I have it from Martin Landau's own, Oscar-winning lips that he never worked in comic books.  This is presumably another confusion with a comic book artist named Ken Landau who is no relation and certainly not the same person.

For more on this oft-screwed-up situation, see this Incessantly Asked Question, right on this here website.

Here's an excerpt from an e-mail that asks a question I've been getting often, as of late with regard to the movie, It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World…

I wondered if you could help me with a bit of info.  Is Santa Rosita a real place?  Does the Big "W" exist?  If I ever got to visit California is there any advice you could give me as to visiting any of the film locations?

Santa Rosita, home of Captain Culpepper, is not a real city.  Most of those scenes were filmed in and around Long Beach, California.  The park containing the Big "W" was constructed for the film on a piece of private real estate on a cliff in Palos Verdes, and the fabled four palm trees were transplanted there.  Today, at least two of them have fallen.  The "park" is part of a private arboretum which is not generally open to the public.  (A few fans have asked politely and gained access, but I'm told the owners of the property prefer not to have its landmark status publicized.)

I've heard from quite a few Mad World fans who have tracked down various shooting locations.  Some of those places are in the middle of nowhere; others have changed so much that nothing recognizable remains.  The most accessible unchanged location is probably the spot on Pacific Coast Highway, not far from Santa Monica Pier, where something called the California Incline leads down from Ocean Avenue.  This is where the scenes were filmed of all the stars getting out of and then rushing back into the taxis to pursue Spencer Tracy.  Also, several earlier scenes were filmed there, such as the one where the police escort cars leave Tracy alone.  If you go to Mapquest and do a search for "California Incline" in Santa Monica, CA, you'll see its whereabouts.

Jackie Mason was (past-tense) one of the greatest stand-up comedians but he has long since turned into someone doing a sad, unfunny impression of Jackie Mason.  In an attempt to hasten his descent into embarrassment, he co-authors occasional political columns with a lawyer named Raoul Felder.  They're not particularly clever and rarely in sync with reality, and I have to remind myself that, just because I once liked Mason, I don't have to read them.

The Washington Times — which is nearly incapable of criticizing a Republican or praising a Democrat — sometimes runs them.  They ran one the other day which included this line which I find incredible, even for a rabidly right-wing newspaper…

Remember the Paula Jones case? That was when Mr. Clinton, the president, supposedly the representative of the highest American values, was fined $1 million when he was convicted of sexual harassment.

Did I miss something?  I don't recall Bill Clinton being convicted of anything in that matter.  I recall the judge tossing Jones's case out of court as without merit.  Then, when it looked like it might get reinstated, Clinton settled out of court for $850,000.  Mason and Felder even got the amount of money wrong.

I'm kinda dismayed to see this in a real newspaper.  Did the editor not read it?  That would be gross incompetence.  Did he read it and think it was true?  Also, gross incompetence.  Did he read it, know it was untrue and print it anyway?  That would be pretty irresponsible.  An editorial page can present a wide range of opinions but those opinions are supposed to be based on some genuine facts.

It's also dismaying to see this coming from Jackie Mason, a man who has spent his career claiming — with some merit — that he'd been unjustly lied about.  He was effectively blacklisted when Ed Sullivan claimed Mason had made an "obscene gesture" on a broadcast.  He had bullets fired at him when it was erroneously reported he'd ridiculed Frank Sinatra in his act.  I seem to recall several other such incidents, including a paternity suit from a stripper.  (Mason claimed it was bogus.  Wonder if he settled out of court…)  Of all people, you'd think Jackie Mason would be certain that when you convict someone of wrongdoing, you have your facts right.

I doubt there will be a retraction or correction.  The Washington Times doesn't like to do that, and the column will not attract much attention, anyway.  I just felt I oughta remark that my low opinion of a once-admired comedian has hit rock-bottom.  (Here's a link to the entire column if you want to read it, God knows why.)

Josh Marshall's wonderful Talking Points website — oft-plugged here — has a new URL.  The new address is www.talkingpointsmemo.com.  Highly recommended, especially for making sense out of the Enron chaos.

I've never met Fred Hembeck.  We've corresponded occasionally but I don't think I've even spoken to him on the phone.  Still, I feel like I know the guy.

For one thing, my dumb articles and his clever cartoons have been turning up in the same comic book fanzines for a couple of decades.  For another, he's interested in all the same comics as I am…and interested in the same, strange aspects of them.  He sometimes does groaner puns like the above; other times, he offers personal, interesting insights that remind us why we like the comics we like.  You can find an array of Hembeck cartoons over at this website and it's well worth the trip.

The on-line magazine Salon, has been way out in front on the Enron brouhaha.  The other day, they came up with details on the aspect of this case that may cause the greatest amount of public outrage.  It's that, even as the company was declaring bankruptcy, laying people off and reneging on their severance packages, it was also doling out more than $55 million in bonuses to its top executives.  (Here's a link to the story.)

Someone once said — or someone should have said — that a scandal is driven by the simplest, one-line description of wrongdoing.  Nixon and his lieutenants covered up White House involvement in the Watergate burglary.  Reagan claimed his administration hadn't traded arms for hostages when, in fact, they had.  Clinton had an affair with an intern and lied about it.  In all three cases, there were extenuating explanations and all sorts of spins that could be put on the matter…but a large part of the public never got past the simple fact of wrongdoing as defined in one sentence.

Most of the Enron story is too complicated to make for a good scandal.  The public never got worked up over Whitewater, partly because so many accusations against the Clintons were unsupported but also because no one understood what they'd supposedly done wrong.  It didn't approach being a juicy, bring-someone-down scandal until it morphed into the easily-explainable Monica mess.  Enron is becoming very easy to explain in layman's logic: The company went kablooey, the investors and employees got screwed but the top guys all ran off with millions apiece.  That's all most people have to hear.  There are explanations and rationalizations.  "Retention bonuses" — paying top execs to remain aboard a sinking ship — may be oily but they are not unprecedented and probably not illegal.  No matter.  The one-liner on this one is bad enough that it can't be explained away…a fact that seems to be lost on the few Enron execs who aren't invoking the Fifth Amendment.  The one who testified on Thursday was like a murderer standing amidst the bodies, holding the bloody knife and saying, "Wait…I can explain!"

The question is whether the Enron one-liner will be expanded to include George W. Bush or replaced by a one-liner about him — i.e., "Bush arranged for legislation or government neglect that allowed his pals to loot the company."  So far, there's no solid evidence of that and I'm still skeptical there ever will be.  But if one of those sentences ever becomes the least bit credible, this could make Watergate look like an overtime parking violation.

Important, possibly prescient article by Paul Krugman over at The New York Times.  It deals with something we've alluded to on this site — that other companies may soon go the way of Enron.  But of course, we're just guessing, whereas Krugman seems to know what he's talking about.  Here's your link.

Yes, we still think Enron will not harm Bush directly.  But if a couple more companies go bust like that, it will not take much to make most of America hate overpaid CEOs more than they now hate guys named Osama.  And to the extent that the Democrats can link George W. to such profiteers — and possibly, given his past business ventures, paint him as one — he could suffer some pretty potent body blows.