Monthly Archives: August 2007

I haven't set foot in the place for twenty years but I bet it hasn't changed much. I'm talking about Acres of Books, which is located in Long Beach, California and which is usually acknowledged as the largest second-hand bookstore in the world. It's a huge place that almost seems to live up to its name. Back when I was buying old books, I often spent an entire afternoon in its aisles…which is what you kind of have to do if you even set foot in the place. You don't just pop in for a quick check of a few shelves. I've known people to plan visits like one plans a vacation, including lunch at a pre-selected nearby establishment.

I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I haven't been in any old book shop in quite a long time. I used to hit them all, hauling home dusty volumes by the crate. At some point though, I reached a point of diminishing returns. There weren't that many old books I knew of, wanted and didn't have. It came down to a little list I carried in my wallet. I'd go into stores, ask for those books and the staff would laugh at me. The books I was seeking were, I was told, impossible quests. After many fruitless bookstore visits — and with many such establishments going out of business — I found myself breaking the old bookstore habit. I just stopped going to them. Eventually, the Internet arrived and it gave us online bookstore searching and eBay…and one lovely afternoon, I found and ordered every book on my little list from the comfort of my computer chair.

That's how I broke my habit…which is not to say that I don't sometimes miss it. But once I no longer had that list in my wallet, my attitude towards places like Acres of Books changed. It became like the attitude so many Southern Californians take towards Disneyland: We don't go because we know it's there and we can go next month. Or the month after. Or maybe the month after that.

Now, every so often, one hears reports that Acres of Books is not long for the world; that this or that redevelopment project is going to cause its block to be refurbished into a row of Pinkberry Yogurt shops or something. It's happening again. According to this article, the city has a yearning to have something else on that land — some sort of condominium deal with art galleries on the ground floor or something. A battle is transpiring…and while a possible result is that Acres of Books will be moved, I have a feeling this squabble will end as the past ones have: With nothing changing down there.

Here's a link to the Acres of Books website where you can read a nice essay by the man who may be its most famous steady customer, Ray Bradbury. You can also get info on where it is and when it's open in case you'd like to go there and work the aisles…and you might not want to put it off the way I do. I refuse to believe it's ever going to close down or even relocate but I've been wrong about this kind of thing before.

You all know of my friend Frank Buxton…actor, writer, director, voice of Batfink, TV host, etc. To all his many vocations, we now add Theatre Critic. Last night, Frank attended an important evening in the theater and since I trust his tastes, and am curious about the show in question, I asked him to report back for us. Here's Frank…

Last night, August 7th, 2007 was the first performance before a full audience of Mel Brooks' new musical, Young Frankenstein, at the magnificent Paramount Theatre in Seattle, Washington and we were there. Seattle has become a "try-out" town where musicals such as Hairspray and plays like Angels in America have their pre-Broadway runs before heading to New York just as they used to do in New Haven and Boston. It was a treat to see this big, big show in our wonderful town, forgive the pun.

In a nutshell, it's going to be a big hit, as big, if not bigger, than Brooks' The Producers. Young Frankenstein is a three-hour romp, staged at a breakneck pace. There's hardly a pause in the action. Whether you loved the movie or never saw it (there are those people) you'll be more than satisfied and you'll have a great evening in the theatre.

It has a number of things going for it. It's almost a beat-for-beat reproduction of the Young Frankenstein movie complete with all the scenes and jokes we know and love from "what knockers" to "where wolves, there wolves" and the inevitable whinny after each mention of Frau Blucher. This is not a bad thing. It works. I would have to re-run the movie (not a bad idea) to be sure but it seemed to me that everything from the movie was included. There were a few extra moments and, of course, about twenty new musical numbers (music and lyrics by Brooks) some of which worked but some of which were a puzzle. The ones that didn't work will get cut or trimmed since the running time is about twenty minutes too long, especially in the first act which runs an hour and forty minutes and since they're in try-out mode anyway. Incidentally, we're going back to see the official opening on the August 23rd and it will be very interesting to see the "improvements."

The evening belongs to Susan Stroman, the choreographer and director. She has staged it wonderfully and made almost every musical number a rouser. The "eleven o'clock number" is "Putting on the Ritz," a number that will be remembered by theatre-goers as long as they live much like us oldsters remember "Fugue for Tinhorns," "There is Nothing Like a Dame" or "With a Little Bit of Luck" from the great musicals of the past. The "Ritz" number incorporates elements of the Fred Astaire version in Blue Skies (1946), including the line-up of dancers behind Astaire mimicking his every move. They also use the "Me and My Shadow" gimmick to great effect. Stroman builds this number beautifully from the moment when there are only two people on stage to the climax when the entire cast is involved. It's a great number, as are many others.

Stroman has also staged the comedy scenes with a strong sense of how to lay out the jokes and present the physical comedy. She is aided by a wonderful cast who sing and dance with great skill and are very adept at comedy. There isn't anybody in the cast who is wrong for the part and if casting is 90% of a production's success, they've struck gold.

Oddly enough, Christopher Fitzgerald emerges as the most appealing and funny character as Igor, he of the movable hump. Fitzgerald, as do all of the actors, reminds us of the originals (in this case, Marty Feldman) but has a stronger appeal than Feldman in creating a sympathetic character. He has an English accent and it's startling to hear a voice that sounds like Feldman's come from Igor but you soon get used to it. Fitzgerald is also a strong singer and dancer and a bundle of energy. He rules the stage.

In the Gene Wilder part, Roger Bart, holds back on the zaniness that Wilder had (especially in the moment when Frankenstein decides to follow in his grandfather's footsteps) but he handles the role competently. It's not an easy role, which calls for our liking and understanding him while laughing at his antics. Bart is fine, though, and ignore my quibbles.

I'm sorry to say that the beautiful Sutton Foster, who was wonderful in The Drowsy Chaperone, doesn't do much with Inga, the Teri Garr part. Actually, she doesn't have much to do except aid and abet young Frankenstein and Igor. When she does have something to do, as in the "Roll in the Hay" number she shows her chops, singing and dancing wonderfully.

Andrea Martin as Frau Blücher (horse whinny) really delivers, as we should expect from this wonderful actress. She belts out the musical number "He Vas My Boyfriend" and stops the show. (Of course, everyone belts out his or her numbers. That may not bode well for audience members who needs a breather.) Martin is a treasure and makes the most of every moment.

Shuler Hensley, who was the only good "Poor Jud" in Oklahoma I ever saw, assays the monster and, again the inevitable comparison to the late Peter Boyle, brings the creature to life. (Stop me before I pun again.) He can sing. The Monster can sing! And dance, too.

Now, to Megan Mullally who plays Elizabeth, she of the "don't touch me" persona. In fact she sings a song called "Please Don't Touch Me." Mullaly is a true musical comedy star with a voice that could shatter glass. She plays Elizabeth with the archness that we've come to expect from the TV series Will and Grace and is a perfect successor to Madeline Kahn in this role. However, if you'll recall from the movie, Elizabeth disappears for a good amount of time emerging towards the end to fall for the creature and help the love plot. Since they're dealing here with a major star (Mullally) they've had to insert Elizabeth to no great effect in a couple of "fantasy" sequences in the middle of the plot which don't quite work. She does them well, of course, but you wonder why they are there. It'll be interesting to see what becomes of these numbers and whether Mullally will be happy with the results.

Fred Applegate plays both Kemp, the Inspector, and the blind hermit. He is fine as both, especially in a lovely song the hermit sings about loneliness, "Please Send Me Someone" which is capped by the creature smashing through the wall of his hut. Why he plays both parts is a mystery except that he does have an excellent singing voice which Kemp never really reveals. But the make-up change is huge from Kemp-to-hermit and why they don't have another actor in the hermit part is a puzzle.

The chorus boys and girls are all exceptional and makes me wish I had studied harder in ballet school. (Just kidding.) And the other small parts are well done. No quibbles there.

A great deal of the success of Young Frankenstein has to be attributed to the phenomenal set and lighting design. Even though last night was the first preview there were only one or two small gaffes in the set changes and lighting with huge sets, props and backdrops flying in with ease. The set for Frankenstein's laboratory is a triumph. They even have an electrostatic generator and I think I saw a Tesla coil. Lightning flashes and thunder roars and strobe lights flash when they bring the creature to life. It is an evocation of that wonderful cinematic moment in the original Frankenstein as well as Brooks' Young Frankenstein. It's worth the price of admission for that set alone. They could ease off on the strobe lights, though, as many of us had to shield our eyes from time to time.

As far as the songs are concerned there are no memorable ones to take with you. Most of them serve the plot and are joke-filled so even if a current recording artist (are there any?) released a recording of one of the songs it would die a quick…and deserved…death. Brooks lacks the musical skill to write a strong melody and, as I said, the lyrics are plot pushers or joke fests. You leave the theatre humming the sets and the costumes rather than the songs.

The plot and jokes are standard Mel Brooks, which is not a bad thing. He tends to be vulgar, as you know, and if you can live with his kind of humor you'll laugh and not be offended. What next? Blazing Saddles? Twelve Chairs? High Anxiety? Probably not but I'm happy with Young Frankenstein. And you'll have a grand time, too.

I'm not sure why but I watched the debate yesterday…the Democratic candidates appearing before an AFL-CIO gathering, answering questions from the audience and host Keith Olbermann. Nothing of particular wisdom is ever said in these forums; not when the candidates are given sixty seconds to answer important questions. What could anyone say of substance in so brief a time? The debaters have almost stopped trying. Instead, they've learned to more or less not let the questions interfere with them saying over and over, "You should vote for me," as if the goal is to hypnotize the audience into doing so. I don't think anyone comes off that well talking about themselves like that.

Insofar as I could tell, no one harmed their candidacy and no one did themselves a lot of good. If I had to vote on who "won," I'd probably say it was in inverse order to their current standings in the polls. Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich — who between them will be lucky to have three delegates at the convention — were the most impressive. Kucinich seems to now be operating with the attitude, "I have nothing to lose," so he can say anything he wants. Those who might have a chance of getting elected don't have that luxury…or at least don't think they do.

But frankly, no one impressed me a lot. Hillary Clinton continues to come off as smarter and more human than her detractors have painted her to be but she still doesn't strike me as having that all-important ability to connect with the audience and still seem like a leader. Then again, George W. Bush only had it by comparison to John Kerry or the 2000 model Al Gore.

The most interesting moment in the whole debate came not from a candidate but from a questioner in the audience — a disabled, retired steel worker named Steve Skvara who choked back tears to tell how he'd lost his pension and health insurance. I didn't think the reply by John Edwards was all that great but the question framed a large part of what this election is going to be about. I'd like to see everyone running for president given five or ten minutes to respond to it. And I'd like to see the ones who felt it was vital to keep Terri Schiavo breathing asked if they care even half as much about the health of Mr. Skvara's family. Here's the video…

There's a little controversy going on in some circles about a U.S. soldier named Scott Thomas Beauchamp. He wrote some articles for New Republic about brutality by our troops serving overseas and instantly, Conservative bloggers and pundits denounced his accounts as bogus. This article by Phillip Carter explains the squabble and then makes what I think is an important point about how the "truth" of what's happening. It's that with this war, more so than usual in our public discourse, people believe whatever they want to believe is true. And anything that goes against that obviously has to be a lie.

I've been enjoying a new website, Trailers From Hell, and thought I'd share one with you. On this site, they feature trailers from old exploitation films and some noted current filmmaker provides commentary. This one is X: The Man With X-Ray Eyes, and it's hosted for us by Mick Garris.

It's not a bad trailer for not a bad little suspense/horror movie…though I regret that the trailer-makers didn't include any of the really embarrassing scenes that Don Rickles has in the film. They do have a few shots of the great character actor, Harold J. Stone. Many years ago, in a tale I've related elsewhere, I had a hand in casting Mr. Stone to play Gabe Kaplan's father on Welcome Back, Kotter. One day during the rehearsal of a scene he wasn't in, I found myself sitting outside the rehearsal hall with him. The TV was on and this movie was on the TV and we watched his entire part — he gets killed off early — together. It was not one of Mr. Stone's prouder performances but his attitude was "work is work," even when it's work like this…

My friend Bob Elisberg makes a very good point about Hollywood and press coverage of the business end of things. There's a tendency to quickly type a new movie as a smash or a flop…and that characterization often doesn't change no matter how much the film grosses. Studios have made an awful lot of money off alleged flops.

If, like me, you're fascinated with the birth of the new baby panda at the San Diego Zoo, here's where you want to be. This weblog is updated by the zoo staff to report on what's going on around the facility and there are many postings about the little black-eyed new arrival. The zoo has many webcams around to satiate your voyeuristic tendencies and on this page, you can usually see a panda taking a nap or eating. Most often — since this her den is where the news is — it's Bai Yun, mother of the new kid. Supposedly, one can catch occasional glimpses of the baby. My mother had the same kind of set-up when I was born but since there was no Internet in 1952, no one watched.

We've been following (with great sadness) the story of one-time SCTV and Saturday Night Live cast member Tony Rosato. Here's the latest with our thanks to William Sinkins for letting us know.

Happy day of birth to America's greatest satirist, Stan Freberg, who is mumble-mumble years old today. In addition to creating brilliantly funny records and radio shows, Stan is an actor, an author, a cartoon voice specialist, an advertising genius and a personal hero. He is seen above with his lovely wife Hunter, who has been taking care of this wonderful force of nature for several years now and has done a superb job of, as the hillbillies say, youthening her man.

I've said many things elsewhere on this site about what Stan and his work have meant to me. And it isn't just me. Every time I've been with him, at least one person approaches the guy and gushes. One time, we were dining in Matteo's and the waiter brought over a note written on a napkin. Another diner in the restaurant had written, approximately, "Mr. Freberg…you don't know me but your work has meant so much to me over the years.  It's an honor to pay you back in even a tiny way by paying for your dinner tonight."

Stan gets this kind of reaction wherever he goes and with good reason.

Another time, Stan and I were standing in a parking lot at a recording studio where I had just — ahem! — "directed" him in something. (How To Direct Freberg: Hire Freberg, hand him the script, let him do whatever he wants.) A shiny sportscar was racing through the back alley doing about 80 MPH. It passed us and twenty yards down, it braked to an abrupt stop, then backed up, also doing around eighty. When it got back near us, the guy in the car yelled out, "You Stan Freberg?"

"I am," said Stan Freberg.

"You're a frriggin' genius," the driver yelled. Then he zoomed off doing about ninety to make up for lost time and I thought, "Well put."

Enjoy your day, Stan. And all others that follow.

Sez here that the New York Times is giving up on TimeSelect, their subscription section that charged people fifty bucks a year to read Maureen Dowd and a few other op-ed columnists. Also sez they had less than a quarter-million subscribers, which doesn't sound like a lot for a paper of that scope and importance. I'm wondering how many of those subscribers were libraries or companies that just ritually pay for a lot of online info services without paying a lot of attention to what they're getting for their moola.

In the case of TimeSelect, one of the things that obviously did them in was how much of their content was freely bootlegged and posted on free sites. I just did a quick search and without a lot of trouble, found Frank Rich's most recent column on twenty sites. A lot of the material behind the subscription firewall is also simply not worth paying for. I mean, it's not like there's a shortage of free stuff to read on the Internet.

The 24th Congressional District covers a lot of Ventura County and Santa Barbara County in California. Since 1987, it's been represented in the House by a Republican named Elton Gallegly, who votes a pretty consistent G.O.P. line: Against stem cell research, against abortion rights, against gay rights, against Medical Marijuana, etc. On Iraq, he's been right there with the Bush Administration. This probably does not put him in accord with most of the voters he ostensibly represents, and some observers say his seat in Congress may be ripe for Democratic takeover.

Who's the Democrat who can take it over? Well, some of us are hoping it'll be Elliott Maggin. Some of you may know that name because you're comic book readers, and Elliott was a pretty prominent comic book writer back in the seventies and eighties, primarily on Superman and the many books featuring The Man of Steel. (He was credited then as "Elliott S! Maggin," with the exclamation point after the middle initial.) Elliott's a friend of mine and a darn smart guy. We've had some long and interesting discussions about government and society, and though we didn't always agree on everything, I've certainly respected his views, and I think he'd make a dandy Congressperson.

He ran once before…in the 1984 race for a seat in New Hampshire. He didn't win but that was then, this is now…and I'd like to think '08 will be his year. Here's a statement from Elliott to his "pop culture brethren," which I guess means "comic book readers." We'll be monitoring this race and though I don't live where I can vote for the guy, I'm going to do what I can to help out.

Fifty years ago today, the world lost Oliver Norvell Hardy, one half of the greatest comedy act of all time (imho) and maybe our greatest comic actor. Unless you've seen as many old comedy movies as I have, you may not realize how revolutionary and special he was. He was darn near the first film actor to be funny moving in human rhythms. Hardy's mannerisms and movements in silent film were overflowing with delight and personality. It was funny and fascinating just to watch him ring a doorbell or pick up a pen. Before him, a comic either played it deadpan like Keaton, frantic like Chaplin or had no visible style to his humor. It's impossible to imitate the gestures of Harold Lloyd or Snub Pollard or Ben Turpin…but everyone can "do" Hardy. He was a big reason the cameramen at his studio stopped undercranking the cameras and began filming at normal or near-normal speeds. Hardy's timing was so delicious that it needed no enhancement.

His partner, Mr. Laurel, matched his pace and they became a seamless whole. When talkies came in, the switch was effortless for the men. They both had stage backgrounds so they knew how to speak. More importantly, sound meant that motion pictures could no longer be undercranked and the change didn't affect Laurel and Hardy. Their comedy was already moving at real speed.

Let's watch a couple minutes of The Boys. This is the scene from The Flying Deuces where Hardy, jilted in a love affair, decides to do away with himself and further decides that his partner has to join him. The clip ends a bit abruptly but it's Laurel and Hardy so it's good.

As noted in this article, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law. Despite this, Bush has signed an executive order that directs the Treasury Department to seize any and all assets of individuals who are deemed to pose a threat to the United States.

I don't know which is more annoying: Democrats who look the other way when this kind of thing is done…or Republicans who say it's necessary when you know darn well they'd be starting impeachment proceedings against any president named Clinton who suggested such a thing.

Oh, well. At least Abe seems to be okay.

It's been a while since I've checked to see if Abe Vigoda is still alive. Let's all go check together, shall we?

This runs eight minutes but they'll be eight minutes of your life well spent. In the mid-sixties, Jim Henson and his Muppet crew did a series of highly entertaining commercials for LaChoy Canned Chow Mein. How entertaining were they? A lot of people mistook them for Stan Freberg commercials. That's how entertaining. But they weren't by Stan (whose birthday, by the way, is tomorrow). Henson did them and even performed the role of his new character, the LaChoy Dragon.

And what we have here is a sales film for that ad campaign — something they showed retailers and wholesalers, I guess, to tell them about the upcoming commercials. At the end, there are some of those funny spots but the stuff that leads up to it is pretty good, too…