Monthly Archives: November 2008

You following the Coleman-Franken recount in Minnesota? The latest headlines say Coleman is ahead by 120 votes but if you read a little further, you realize that number is kinda meaningless because there are more than 3000 challenged ballots that haven't been figured into the total. No one knows how many of those will eventually yield countable votes…and those aren't even random ballots which one might assume would break roughly along the same ratio as the already-tallied ballots. These are ballots that the Coleman or Franken observers specifically had pulled out of the piles for later examination. There are also hundreds — perhaps thousands — of disqualified absentee ballots that have never been counted and some of those may wind up being tallied.

In some cases, it appears that the two campaigns are playing a little game here, trying to manipulate current news reports. The premise here is that if you can look like you're ahead (or gaining) for a while in the news, that will give you a certain legitimacy as the winner, above and beyond what the final totals say. If Coleman loses when the vote is ultimately certified, he'll be out there arguing that the results are a lie and saying, "I was ahead for weeks! Suddenly, at the last minute, they claim I lost!" But of course, he may be "ahead" right now because of which ballots have been removed from the count and put into that "challenged" pile or which absentee ballots simply have been wrongly disqualified and therefore uncounted. Franken's side is probably challenging ballots with something similar in mind — to win the daily press coverage, claiming that the gap is narrowing, as a means of winning the election.

There are a lot of statisticians out there, trying to predict the outcome. Nate Silver, who had a superb track record in forecasting the election, is seeing a Franken win by between 48 and 136 votes…but it seems to me that there are too many unknowns (including which ballots the judges will admit) for any prediction to have much gravity right now. And even Silver says his analysis could be off by "at least" 200 votes…which kinda means he thinks Franken will win unless the other guy does.

I don't think anyone knows as much about who will win as they think. All I think we can say is that Al Franken's in a good position. He's either going to get a Senate seat or a very interesting book out of all this.

Reader Jim Engel called the company that has released those Howdy Doody DVDs I plugged earlier today. They told him that the episodes on the shorter DVD are all included on the longer one. As I mentioned, Amazon is selling the two on a set so someone's going to be pissed.

I suggested back in this message that all the protests over Proposition 8 in California were a waste of time; that all the energy put into marching and yelling would be better diverted into prepping for a battle on the next ballot. I may have underestimated the power of protest. A recent poll by SurveyUSA asked if the demonstrations had changed the minds of many of those who voted for Proposition 8. They concluded not many had switched…

Of the adults who tell SurveyUSA they voted FOR Prop 8, 90% of them told us recent rallies held by "No on Prop 8" Protesters have not changed their minds about the issue. 8% say protesters have changed their minds.

Okay, so 90% are still against the notion of Gay Marriage. But 8% is significant. Proposition 8 passed 6,775,560 to 6,203,012…or a difference of 572,548 votes. If 8% of the "yes" voters have changed their minds, then — someone check my math on this — 542,044.8 voters now wish they'd voted the other way.

Before you get excited about this, remember that the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3% and there's no data as to whether anyone who voted against Proposition 8 has changed their mind in the other direction. And of course, we don't believe any one poll that far about anything. Still, it bolsters my belief that the next time California voters get asked to vote about letting two people of the same sex be man and man (or wife and wife or however they describe it), it's going to pass and maybe pass by a wide margin. The momentum on this issue has only ever moved in one direction.

This is a little macabre but it's also Show Business History. Actor-comedians Albert Brooks and Bob ("Super Dave" Osborne) Einstein are the sons of a comic named Harry Einstein, who was big in radio playing a character named Parkyakarkus. Yes, that's right. Albert Brooks was named Albert Einstein before he changed it.

Sadly, one of the things Pa Einstein is remembered for these days is how he died. Fifty years ago yesterday, he appeared at a Friars Roast for Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz in Beverly Hills. He gave what was later reported as a hilarious speech and then, as he returned to his seat, he collapsed from a heart attack and never recovered.

Half the great comics of Hollywood were present that evening and some later said things like, "When I have to go, that's how I'd like to go…with the audience still applauding how funny I'd just been." I've heard about this evening for years, including a too-graphic description from Milton Berle, who was the one who caught Einstein when he fell. (Berle was one of the comedians who said what I just said a lot of funny people said.)

The Los Angeles Times has a blog where they reprint old newspaper pages and headlines. They've posted the page from the morning after here. In case you're interested.

Here's a New York Times article about what went wrong in a box office sense with Young Frankenstein on Broadway. What it all comes down to is the sin of acting like you're a smash hit before you give audiences the chance to decide that.

One point I may not have made clear in yesterday's post about the Screen Actors Guild is that SAG will be asking its members for a Strike Authorization Vote, not a Strike Vote. The difference may turn out to be moot but maybe not. Essentially, the authorization is a show of solidarity, a way of saying, "If you keep refusing to negotiate, we will strike." In theory, if the Strike Authorization Vote is high enough, it will intimidate the AMPTP into improving the offer that's been on the table, largely unchanged, since July.

So before the ballots are due, SAG will make the following argument to its members: If enough of you vote to authorize a strike, that will scare the studios into bettering the deal…and a strike will not be necessary. Friends of mine in SAG seem unsure as to how effective that argument will be. Certainly, the AMPTP will presume that not everyone who votes for the Strike Authorization is willing to carry a picket sign for months or even weeks in lieu of working. But the AMPTP is also aware that any sort of labor stoppage by actors is going to cost the industry an awful lot of money.

The Strike Authorization Vote empowers the negotiators. It gives the SAG Board the ability to call a strike if the bargaining committee recommends it as necessary. Usually, alas, it is.

The AMPTP will, of course, say "This is a bad time to strike." During the '88 Writers Guild strike, I was present when the producers' chief negotiator, the aptly-named Nick Counter, said that. I couldn't help asking aloud, "Say, when would be a good time to strike?" Because to the bosses, any time is a terrible time for a strike. They're like Republicans saying, "This is a bad time to raise taxes." When I said what I said, Mr. Counter chuckled. A lot of what these guys say and do is to them, merely a matter of how the game is played and everyone knows it.

The studios will make the point that actors will lose X million dollars a week every week that they strike…and that's usually true to some extent. Strikes are generally only cost-effective when you factor in the loss you suffer if you lose the ability to say no to a really rotten deal. In this case though, SAG is being offered a really rotten deal. There's no way to really crunch the numbers because there's no way of knowing how many weeks of striking will equal what kind of better deal. The stakes are such that even leaving aside future rollbacks if the union collapses, this particular strike may well be cost-effective and to many, necessary.

I hope it doesn't come to a strike because we've had enough economic chaos in this town — blame for which I lay wholly at the feet of Mr. Counter and his minions — but it might. And if it does, I hope SAG has the fellowship and unity of purpose to not inflict a half-assed, half-hearted effort on itself and the industry. That union turned out in droves for the writers when we were out there with the cardboard signs, and I expect we'll all be out there for them. But I still don't have a good feeling about how all this is going to end.

Forrest J Ackerman is the gent who edited Famous Monsters of Filmland magazine. He's a lifelong authority and devotee in the area of horror movies and science-fiction, and is credited with coining the term, "sci-fi." He's been an agent, a writer, an editor, an actor, a lecturer and a professional fan. And for much of the last decade, friends of his have been telling everyone he's about to die.

That has never seemed unlikely. Forry was born a long time ago in 1916 (you do the math) and he's been in and out of hospitals a lot the last ten years. In May of 2002, for example, Locus — the preeminent news source for the science-fiction community — reported he'd had a heart attack and was not expected to recover. He recovered. Seriously, I've lost track of the number of times I've been told or emailed to get my Forry obit ready because the ol' Ackermonster, as some call him, couldn't possibly last out the month. I think he's now outlived at least one person who told me that.

About three weeks ago, an email was circulated that told us all that this was it…it was a matter of days…any minute now. He couldn't possibly make it until his 92nd birthday.

Well, guess what. Today is Forry Ackerman's 92nd birthday and as far as I know, he's still with us. So we wish him a happy one and at the same time, I've decided I'm not falling for this any longer. As far as I'm concerned, he's not going.

A lot of us have wondered for many years just what it was that George W. Bush and his crew thought they were going to accomplish in Iraq. What would be achieved that would make it worth all the deaths, all the shattered lives and limbs, all the money?

In an interview recorded for Japanese TV today, Bush said the Iraq War was a "success" and that he was "very pleased" with what's happening there. So apparently, that's the answer. We did it all to get what we're going to get.

It's just been announced that Young Frankenstein will close on Broadway as of the January 4th performance. There had been rumors that its producers were negotiating with Cloris Leachman to come in and recreate her film role as Frau Blücher (click here for horse whinny) but either those rumors were false or they couldn't come to terms…or maybe grosses are so low that the producers decided it wouldn't be cost effective.

Exactly what the show has grossed is a mystery because in a break with Broadway precedent, the backers of Young Frankenstein are keeping that information a secret. Given the show's constant availability at the TKTS booth and reports of empty seats, the run has to be disappointing, especially when one remembers the huge budget, the advance hype and how they once asked sky-high fees for "premium" tickets.

When Young Frankenstein closes, it will have run 484 performances. By contrast, the previous Mel Brooks musical — The Producers — ran 2502 performances.

I enjoyed Young Frankenstein when I saw it a little more than a year ago but it did strike me as a flawed product, especially the ending. Had it not come in with so much advance hype, as well as the expectation of matching The Producers, I think it would have done better. A national tour is supposed to launch in September of '09 and that presumably means a simpler production with less grandiose sets and special effects. Oddly enough, that might help.

January's going to be a big month for shows closing in New York. Hairspray and 13 close the same day, Spamalot ends a week later and the week after that, Spring Awakening goes to sleep. Three of those four shows won the Tony for Best New Musical in the years they opened.

Are you watching the late night black-and-white game show reruns on GSN? On the What's My Line? that runs tonight (or tomorrow morning, actually), they're running one from September 29 of 1957 — the only episode of that show's original run with a guest host. John Daly was away on a news assignment so panelist Bennett Cerf filled in for him…and didn't do a very good job, I'm afraid. (There are two mystery guests…singer Julie London and industrialist Henry Kaiser.)

Meanwhile, right after What's My Line? each night/morning, GSN has been running an episode of The Name's the Same. They recently completed the short run where Bob and Ray served as hosts and they're now into a series of shows hosted by Clifton Fadiman. Of special interest is the episode that will run Tuesday night or Wednesday morning. The special guest is Chico Marx.

Thursday night, they're running a Thanksgiving-themed I've Got a Secret from 1964 in that second time slot. Then next Monday night, they run the last episode of The Name's the Same and on Tuesday, December 2, they begin again with reruns of To Tell the Truth, starting way back in 1957.

This is another one of those books I'm recommending to anyone who has the slightest interest in the subject matter. In this case, the subject matter is Joe Kubert, one of the most respected and popular comic book artists of all time. That's Joe you see in the photo at above right, posing with someone named Sergio Aragonés.

Joe got into comics when he was barely a teenager and he was soon hailed as a wunderkind — a guy whose drawing ability left his alleged peers openmouthed with amazement. Alex Toth, on whom many of the same things were said, once remarked, "It was impressive for an artist to be that fast or that good. To be both at the same time just made others red with jealousy." For a long time, Kubert was typed as a "war comics artist," mainly for his work on strips like Sgt. Rock and Enemy Ace, but over the years he drew every kind of adventure comic…with an emphasis on heavy testosterone. He also founded a very successful school for comic artists which can boast a high number of graduates who currently work in the industry.

I enjoyed interviewing Joe a few months ago at Mid-Ohio Con but we only had an hour and many questions went unasked or answered. Fortunately, they're all addressed in a new biography of Joe…Man of Rock by Bill Schelly. Bill, a fine artist himself, is a historian of comics and comic fandom and he has assembled a book worthy of its subject. Above and beyond the factual recital of Joe's long, impressive career, there's a keen understanding of the challenges and changes of the form. It's really an excellent portrait not just of Joe Kubert but of that generation of comic creator and what it took to produce excellent, innovative work over so many decades.

This is one of the best books of its kind and, like I said, if you have the slightest interest in what it's about, you need a copy. You can order one from Amazon by clicking right here.