Monthly Archives: November 2013

• I haven't heard of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford doing anything stupid or illegal for a couple of days now. I hope he's okay.

Hey, have you heard about that agreement with Iran? The one that will whittle down their nuclear program? Well, Fred Kaplan thinks it's a real good deal. And if it's good enough for Fred…

This is for folks in and around Los Angeles who'd like to spend the evening of Saturday, December 21 laughing themselves silly. There are many fine improv comedy groups around but the best (and the cheapest!) I've seen is Instaplay, featuring a whole bunch of friends of mine, most of whom are top comedy writers. They don't do this for the money or the exposure…and they don't do this very often. Mostly to keep in practice, they do one performance every month or two and they have one coming up on 12/21/13 in Culver City.

The theater is a tiny dive with folding chairs but the talent is first-rate. Before your very eyes, these superb players will improvise an entire musical comedy based on a title suggested by the audience. There are a lot of troupes that do this now but Instaplay, which has a long and glorious heritage, was the first I'd ever heard of doing it. I have seen dozens and dozens and I've never not had a great time. (I've also never seen them repeat anything, which is rare in the world of comedy improv.)

The tickets are seven bucks each. Seven dollars! (See what I mean about how they don't do this for the money?) You can order here and I'll bet you have a very good time. Just try not to sit in front of me.

Sarah Silverman has a new HBO special debuting tonight. I haven't seen it but Variety scribe Brian Lowry, who has, laments that she appears "…determined to prove she can be as dirty and distasteful as the boys." Shannon Kelley thinks there's something very wrong with Lowry holding women to a different set of rules than men. I usually like Lowry but I think Kelley's right.

Ms. Silverman is very clever and very funny. If she's not funny in this particular special, then that's the problem; not the topics she addresses or the words she uses. But I gather she is funny, at least to Lowry, or he'd be writing about that. I guess I'm just amazed in this day and age that anyone is still writing that a comedian is "too dirty." "Too dirty for a specific audience" might be a valid criticism. The venue and the audience more or less defines what's appropriate and if a comic misreads that (or doesn't care), okay, fine. They're inappropriate. But I don't know how any comedian, male or female, could be too dirty, at least verbally, for their own HBO stand-up special. Much of America has outgrown being horrified by the "f" word or any kind of speech. How long before we all recognize that?

On January 31, 1968, Johnny Carson devoted most of a 90-minute Tonight Show to New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison. Garrison was then making the news with a series of claims that he'd solved the Kennedy Assassination and that he would start by prosecuting a local businessman, Clay Shaw, for his role in a grand conspiracy. Later on, most reporters who covered Garrison would decide he was reckless, that he was throwing out charges with no basis whatsoever, and that he didn't have the slightest sliver of evidence against Shaw. A jury later acquitted Shaw in a matter of minutes…to the surprise of no one who followed the case.

Garrison was rehabilitated as a hero played by Kevin Costner in the Oliver Stone film, JFK. The movie was a mix of reality and fiction that seemed calculated to get audiences to accept the fiction as factual. I thought it was a terribly dishonest film and one scholar even issued a list of 100 errors of fact and judgment. There are a lot more than a hundred.

Johnny, it is said, later regretted having Garrison on, feeling he'd given a lot of airtime to a con artist. In this short clip, you can see how unhappy Johnny is, not just with what Garrison was saying but also with the fact that they hadn't prevented the D.A. from packing the audience with supporters…

Here's a nice little rundown on sugar substitutes. I lost most of my "sweet tooth" a few years ago but even when I had it, I didn't consider the safety of Aspartame, Sucralose, Saccharin or a couple of others that came and went. I didn't let them into my body because I thought they all tasted terrible. Now, I'm not even wild about sugar. I do use a protein powder that's flavored with Stevia and occasionally a lemonade mix.

My pal Kim "Howard" Johnson continues our back-'n'-forth about the looming Monty Python reassembly. And as predicted, he corrects the date of when I saw them at the Hollywood Bowl. He probably knows where my date and I had dinner that evening, too.

I started to write a post about where I was when Kennedy was shot and paused halfway through the first line to wonder, "Didn't I write this once?" A quick search reveals that I did, ten years ago today. I have nothing more to add to it other than that I think the consensus for "Oswald dunnit and he dunnit alone" is growing at about the pace that glaciers migrate…but it is growing. And as I read this piece now, I think I overstated my negativity towards J.F.K. It's not that I think he was a good or bad president; more like his grade should be "Incomplete." That may be one of the most tragic losses of Dallas; that maybe we lost him before he could become a truly great president.

Anyway, here's what I wrote ten years ago..

Today's the day when, I guess, we're all supposed to answer the musical question, "Where were you when you heard JFK had been shot?" I was in Mr. Totman's third period math class at Ralph Waldo Emerson Junior High in West Los Angeles. The principal, Mr. Campbell, came on the public address system and told us in very cautious, non-alarmist terms what was being reported on the news. For the rest of the day, there was no other topic and no grasping of the situation.

Mr. Totman was the kind of math teacher who was always looking for reasons to talk about things other than math. His mind wasn't on Algebra and he could tell ours weren't, either so we all sat around, pointlessly speculating on what it all meant. Fourth period for me was English and we also just sat around, pointlessly speculating on what it all meant. I recall that our English teacher, Mr. Cline, didn't have any more idea than we did. Then after fourth period was Lunch and again, a lot of sitting around, wondering what had happened and what would happen.

At the time, there was a rule at Emerson that students could not bring radios to school, and the officials had been enforcing the rule with great vigor, seizing radios and punishing their possessors. You would have had an easier time carrying heroin at my junior high school. But suddenly at lunchtime, several students were openly playing news broadcasts on their little transistors and not only was no one confiscating but teachers were among the many crowding around to listen. I went to Mr. Campbell's office and suggested they pipe the radio news coverage over the P.A. system and this was done.

There was a very real fear that the shooting of Kennedy was Step One in a dastardly plot that would lead to more assassinations, invasions, nuclear bombings, whatever. Imaginations ran rampant and even after it became apparent that other catastrophes were not on tap, imaginations continued to rampage about whodunnit. They still do.

For a time in the late sixties and early seventies, I joined the throng that believed in a conspiracy. I even attended a conference of "buffs" (as they sometimes call themselves) and found about 90% of them to have some sort of obsessive, emotional need to defend wacko theories to the death, even sometimes multiple wacko theories that contradicted each other. But around 10% made good, rational arguments against the Warren Commission and I have since seen those arguments grow ever less compelling.

I eventually came around to the opinion that the "lone nut" explanation made the most sense. Yes, there are anomalies and oddments but in this country, we decide murder trials by the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." We do not demand that every evidentiary point be nailed down because we acknowledge that almost every case does have anomalies and oddments; that if the defense digs hard enough, they can always find something that can be framed as a counter-argument. Reluctantly, for I love to see government lying and cover-ups exposed, I had to conclude that Oswald acted alone, that the single-bullet theory that I had once denounced as science-fiction was probably so, and that Jack Ruby was just a deranged night club owner.

I also concluded that it was pointless to try and convince anyone else of this; that those who had an opinion had already had it bronzed and placed on the mantel. Too many had too much invested in not believing "the official version," and as I have a certain admiration for skepticism, I don't know that this is a bad thing. So I am absolutely not attempting to get you to see it my way; just reporting that I moved from one viewpoint to another. Most people, I am well aware, do not believe it…but they also do not believe in any other particular theory. They believe "they" killed Kennedy without really identifying who "they" are. I'm afraid that is how it will forever be in the history books.

Lastly, I came to the conclusion that the death of John F. Kennedy did not mean the end of Camelot. The more I read about Kennedy, the less I think of him, except perhaps as a symbolic figure. If his assassination plunged America into a downward spiral, that was largely because we allowed it to…a mistake we sometimes seem to be making, though not as badly, regarding 9/11. I think the country is strong enough to survive the murder of one man or 3,000 men and women. Still, we sometimes forget that, and it is that forgetfulness that does the real damage.

Drew Carey himself posted this video of a day at The Price is Right. I used to watch that show often and not because I liked Bob Barker or even the games. I liked the pace…and I was fascinated by the skill of the production. Before that series went on, if you'd walked into a network and described that show in a pitch, the response would have been, "That's impossible. It would take hours and hours to tape one of those." Getting the pricing games on and off stage, getting the prizes in position, making sure the models were in the right place and the cameras were in the proper positions and that the music and announcer v.o. synced up…a logistical nightmare, even for the original, half-hour version. That they figured out how to do it at all was impressive and that they they made it an hour — well, it's now commonplace but I'm still impressed…

Yes, I know Walmart used to spell it "Wal-Mart" and that they changed a few years ago. Frankly, I think they laid off the hyphen to save money on its salary.

I am informed by my friend Jeff Abraham, who was in turn informed by our mutual friend Robert Bader, that Groucho's episode of Celebrity Billiards was shot on 7/19/68 at KTLA in Los Angeles. It first aired on 10/12/68 and was seen in syndication for a few years after that. Others have done research and informed me that the series debuted in September of '67. I seem to remember it popping up on local TV in Los Angeles at the darnedest hours, often without being in TV Guide. It was like the station always had a reel of it ready to go and if they couldn't find the film or tape they were supposed to air, they'd slap on an episode of Celebrity Billiards.

I didn't mention it but on Monday night/Tuesday morning, I had some problems with my knee — my other knee, not the one that was operated-upon several months ago. Both seem to be working okay now but when I get the chance, I will tell you what happened. You do not want to go through this…ever.

My pal Kim "Howard" Johnson is the go-to guy for all things Python. He works with the Monty Python guys and knows so much about them that they call him with questions about themselves. He's also a fine author and an expert on other nodes of comedy. Today on his blog, he writes about the upcoming Python Reunion…

Several people have also asked me about the Pythons getting up there "at their age" and doing their old sketches. My feeling is that is if a championship pole vaulter decided to make a comeback at age 70, he may be missing a step or two. But with comedy, particularly the Python style of comedy, they can perform as well as ever. I saw John Cleese perform a couple of months ago, and believe me, he hasn't lost his sense of timing, and the others are every bit as sharp. This is going to be fun.

I don't disagree with any of that…and by the way, I suspect the Pythons will take the opportunity to parody the occasion by having, say, Cleese come out to do the Silly Walks sketch with a walker…or doing a sketch that once featured Graham Chapman with his role played by a funereal urn.

The point I want to make though is that an event like this isn't really about comedy. It's about devout fans paying money to be there and cheer them and love them, and then to be able for the rest of their lives to say, "I saw John Cleese and Michael Palin do the Parrot Sketch!"

I saw all the Pythons perform together in 1981 (Kim will let me know if I have the year wrong) at the Hollywood Bowl. It was a great evening and it wasn't about comedy, either. Everyone in the audience knew 90% of the material as well as anyone on stage. In fact, a few times, Cleese or someone went up on a line and hundreds of voices rang out with the missing wordage. None of us cared if they were funny or not. We laughed at the fact that they were there, period. The biggest reaction most sketches got came when we realized which one they were doing: It's the Whizzo Chocolate sketch! It's The Argument Clinic! The first time a Gumby came on, he practically got a standing ovation.

I think it's great that these guys are doing this reunion show, which will apparently be in London, at least at first. They ought to tour everywhere they're known and loved, and give everyone a chance to go see them and cheer them and join them in a rousing chorus of "The Lumberjack Song." When Eric Idle gets up there and starts doing "Nudge, Nudge" (and he'd better), it'll be like Tony Bennett singing "I Left My Heart in San Francisco" or Sinatra doing "My Way." You don't go to a show like that for the entertainment. You go for the history.

If you are awaiting an opportunity to register for Comic-Con International in 2014, read this.

Stephen Colbert had Rick Santorum on the other night. I don't like to embed Comedy Central videos here because they do odd things to this site but if you missed it, you can see it here. A lot of my friends think Santorum's an idiot. I don't. I think he's like a lot of prominent folks who infest our politics these days: A person who's found a way to profit from controversy. There's a passionate group out there that likes his message, as homophobic and regressive as it is. That group can be exploited for lots of things but most of all, money.

There are people who run for president because they want to be president, and there are people who run for president because it's a good career move. Pat Buchanan is a smart enough man. He knew he was never going to get one electoral vote, let alone enough to move into the Oval Office. I find it hard to believe that in the last election, Herman Cain or Michele Bachmann or Jon Huntsman or Ron Paul ever thought they had a shot at the nomination. Donald Trump certainly didn't. Newt Gingrich, maybe. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney — significantly, both former governors — did…and if Perry hadn't said so many dumb things, it would have come down to him versus Mitt.

Santorum never had a chance and he knew it. He still knows it, which is why he went on with Colbert. But of course, he can't say it, just as Sarah Palin has to keep her supporters hopeful they have something to support. Either of them might run for the publicity but they're never going to be elected. To even have a real shot at it, they'd have to appeal to a wider audience and if they appealed to a wider audience, they'd lose their most fervent supporters…the ones they're planning to spend years exploiting.

The problem Santorum had with Colbert was that he didn't know to what extent he was supposed to play along with or argue against Colbert's parody of Santorum-brand conservatism. Colbert tells his guests before the show, "My character's an idiot so set me straight…challenge me on the stupid stuff I say." But Santorum knew two things. One was that to disagree with Colbert too much would set him on a collision course with his own positions. And secondly, he knew the value of the appearance in promoting the Santorum brand and he wanted to be invited back. Even if all he did was to sit there and let Colbert use him as a punching bag, he got the promotion he wanted.

11 Reasons To Love Costco That Have Nothing To Do With Shopping.

And I have to add this: The ones I've been to have the nicest, most helpful employees I've encountered in a large store.

Hey, remember that Spider-Man musical on Broadway? Well, as of 1/4/14, it will no longer be on Broadway. There's talk of it being remounted in other cities — Las Vegas is the first one mentioned — and maybe as an arena show (a la Cirque du Soleil) more than in a Broadway-style configuration. I gather a lot of people feel that's what it should have been in the first place.

According to this article and other sources, it will close in New York with record losses, perhaps as high as $60 million. It will also close as the 16th highest-grossing show in Broadway history. (The top five, in case you're interested, are in order: The Lion King, The Phantom of the Opera, Wicked, Mamma Mia! and Chicago. All of those have shown pretty hefty profits and all of them are still running with no inklings of closure.)

The news stories I've seen about it moving to Vegas do not mention a venue, which means no deal is in place. The producers don't even say, "We've been in discussions with various hotels there." I suspect if the show ever does get there it won't bear much resemblance to what's been playing in Manhattan. The above-linked article makes a point of blaming the score so that might well be the first thing to go.

In other Vegas news: Twelve figures of Marvel characters from recent movies (Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, etc.) are being unveiled today at Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum at the Venetian. Stan Lee will be in attendance for the ribbon-cutting on that exhibit and on a new Marvel "4-D" movie theater. This prompts speculation that if the Spider-Man musical alights anywhere in Vegas, it'll be at the Venetian…which certainly has room for it.

If you're there, look around for a Spider-Man or Star Wars slot machine as it may be your last chance to ever play one. Disney is getting out of the business of licensing its characters for slot machines…for reasons I don't understand. The stated motive is that too many casinos are encroaching on the turf of Disney World in Florida and the Disney organization wants to draw a clearer dividing line between its wholesome franchises and the sordid business of gambling. But if that's the goal, why open this big attraction at a Vegas hotel-casino? And why try to move the Spider-Man musical there? It's enough to make one suspect Disney has plans to enter the casino business and they're just cancelling licensing contracts so they can make the slot machines themselves and have them exclusively in their own casino.