Monthly Archives: September 2016

Kevin Drum explains why there isn't and never has been any real scandal in Hillary Clinton's e-mail handling or in the activities of the Clinton Foundation. This is how I feel, too…and I'd throw in Benghazi and certainly this whole ginned-up attempt to convince people they shouldn't vote for her because she's secretly very, very ill.

The first three have been investigated and scrutinized and in some cases, she's even been cleared by Republicans who were repeatedly investigating, hoping to find a smoking gun on their fifth or sixth inquiry. Then on the health front, you have guys like Rudy Giuliani running around, screaming (actually screaming) that she's really on death's door but when pressed, Giuliani had to admit he has no evidence.

It would be one thing if the opposition to her was built on an actual fear or criticism of what she'd do as president. I'm not comfy with some points about her seeming fondness for military intervention and maybe a few other things. But it's like her opponents made one or both of two decisions: That they couldn't beat her on policy and/or that the American people were too dumb to understand that stuff.

No one who's tried to lecture me about the e-mail thing or Benghazi or the Clinton Foundation has convinced me that there's anything there…or even that they would be outraged if the exact same thing was done by their side. And some of these things have been. Colin Powell did much the same thing with his e-mail as Secretary of State and no Republican cares that much. There were deaths aplenty at American embassies during the George W. Bush years and no one cared then or now. The Trump Foundation had all sorts of questionable conflicts along with the added negative of not having done much good for anyone but Trump.

No one cares. If you want to convince me Hillary did something that disqualifies her for the office, at least try to act like it would bother you if your guy did it…and he probably did.

• I'm giving up Meatball Hot Pockets. They changed the recipe for the bread, reduced the amount of cheese and removed the headphone jack.

We're coming up on another anniversary of the 9/11 attack. I just spent some chilling moments reading an article from 2002 I hadn't seen before: The account of Michael Wright — who was working on the eighty-first floor of the World Trade Center when a plane hit it that day — and how he survived.

And here's a debunking of some of the conspiracy theories about that day. It has been my experience that people who want to believe in conspiracies (or in the evil of certain politicians they are inclined to hate) will believe no facts that get in the way of what they sense in their souls. If they think Martians killed John F. Kennedy, then any evidence that proves otherwise is simply fake evidence…and since there's fake evidence, that's further proof of the Martians.

Here's a short essay on lettering in comic books. The gent who did it knows a lot about his subject but no one seems to have told him that nobody in the business ever refers to the shape around the words as a "bubble." It's a "balloon." The word "bubble" refers to the bubble shapes that serve as a pointer on a scalloped-edge thought balloon (one that tells us what someone is thinking rather than what they say). Other than that, good video…

Jerry Lewis is giving interviews again, in this case to promote his new movie, Max Rose. I find Jerry Lewis interviews fascinating, not necessarily in a good way. He loves being interviewed and most of his public appearances these days are all or almost all Q-and-A with the audience. About half the Qs seem to be audience members who are thrilled at the opportunity to tell Jer how much they love him and to ask nothing of substance.

The rest go like his press interviews do, which is that he's asked for his viewpoint or about some historical point and he bristles if the question touches upon one of his many, many sore points…and then his A is either hostile or incomplete, or he just plain talks about something else altogether. I heard that his appearance last week at the Aero Theater in Santa Monica was pretty coherent and friendly but the times I've seen him, he seemed guarded and afraid…and sometimes angry if someone asked him to talk about something he didn't want to talk about. And yet he professes to love the Q-and-A format.

Naturally, we are interested in the fate of the Nutty Professor musical. Jerry used to keep announcing it was all set to open on such-and-such a date or at such-and-such a theater when clearly no such arrangements had been made. It did play a limited engagement in Nashville to fair-to-good response, Jerry announced it was definitely going to Broadway by a certain date…and then it disappeared. In this interview, we get this…

There had been discussions of Lewis' The Nutty Professor heading to Broadway in musical form. Under Lewis' direction, the musical version premiered at the Tennessee Performing Arts Center in 2012, and Lewis said the musical had a "bright future" in 2014.

But during his latest interview, Lewis said the classic 1963 comedy, redone by Eddie Murphy in 1996 (with a Murphy sequel in 2000), should be left alone.

"It's too important to leave it just like it is and not take advantage of it," says Lewis. "You don't steal from yourself, at least you try not to. But it's a constant problem, because it was perfect. You want to see how you can revamp it to make it work again. But that doesn't work. Kiss it goodbye and get on with the new stuff."

What the heck does that mean? When he says "it was perfect," does he mean the original movie or the musical? Which one does "you can revamp it" refer to? Beats me but since he doesn't say otherwise, I guess there are no plans to do the musical anywhere again.

Then in this interview, we get this…

It was reported in 2015 that Lewis' archives were going to the Library of Congress and that The Day the Clown Cried may at last be available for public view in 10 years' time. Lewis has other thoughts on the matter.

"Never," he said as to whether the film would finally be shown publicly. "After I'm dead 30 years you won't see it. I've got it worked out so there's nothing to show."

Anyone want to hazard a guess what that means? I mean, apart from the obvious fact that Jerry likes to keep his interviewers off-balance with cryptic answers? No wonder he loves Trump.

Want one of Dave Letterman's old suits hanging in your closet? Or a prop used on his show on your desk?

A trove of props and costumes from The Late Show With David Letterman TV show — over 3,000 items, many to be offered in multiples, including articles of clothing worn by Mr. Letterman and his guests, costumes worn in comedy skits, and props from innumerable bits done over the years — will be sold in a series of five online-only auctions, September 19-23.

Information here. There's also stuff from Dave's old NBC show in there so maybe they even have Larry "Bud" Melman or the Suit of Velcro.

Got eighteen minutes? If so, you might want to watch this documentary about the history of the Volkswagen and especially its groundbreaking advertising. Thanks to Scott Marinoff for the tip…

Chris Bieniek wants to know about a cartoon show from my youth…

I have a simple question: Why can't I purchase a complete, unedited collection of the 1966 Marvel Super Heroes TV show on DVD or Blu-Ray? I know you think it's awful, but I'm sure there are a lot of people who would be interested, and I've never seen any kind of informed discussion about why it hasn't happened yet. If you don't know, would you be kind enough to hazard a guess?

Well, I don't think it's exactly awful. Most of the stories and drawings were taken from the comic books — without, of course, paying an extra nickel to the guys who did that work for low comic book rates. A lot of the material was so strong that even the cheapest-possible animation and voice work couldn't render it unentertaining…and I kinda like some of the theme songs.

Why isn't it out for home video? Well, this is somewhere between a guess and a real answer: At least twice, folks who were attempting to assemble an actual, non-bootleg release contacted me to ask if I had any idea where they could find negatives or better copies than they had…because they simply didn't have good enough source material, especially of the opening titles and closing credits. I dunno if the masters were lost or destroyed or what — but at that point, they just didn't have prints that didn't look like they'd been taped off Channel 9 onto Betamax cassettes.  I was of no use to them.

Has anyone since found good copies of everything?  If they haven't, that's probably your reason. If they have, there's probably no one at Disney who thinks the material would generate enough interest. Generally speaking, when something is not out on home video, one or more of five reasons apply…

1. There's a rights dispute over who owns the material or controls the home video rights. That's what held up the Adam West Batman show for some time.  Twentieth-Century Fox (which produced the series) said if anyone was going to put those out on DVD, said it would be them.  Time-Warner (which owns the characters) said it would be them.  It took a while to negotiate an arrangement.
2. There's music in the shows or films that would be very expensive to clear and so the material might not be cost-effective to release. This is the case with some of the early Hanna-Barbera cartoons.  Once in a while also, someone else had a contract, written before anyone envisioned a home video market, that causes complications.  Companies got worried about that after Disney put out Lady and the Tramp on VHS and singer Peggy Lee, who worked on the film in several capacities, pointed out that her old contract from 1955 didn't allow for that.  A jury awarded her a few million bucks that the studio wasn't cheerful about paying.
3. They would release it but they can't find copies of all the material…or copies that measure up to the necessary video standard. A lot of old shows simply do not exist or exist in such bad condition that expensive restoration work would be necessary and that reconstruction might not be cost effective. At one point, I believe it looked like I'm Dickens, He's Fenster would never be out of DVD for that reason but someone finally took the chance.
4. Someone in a position of power just doesn't think there would be enough customers for the material in question to justify the investment. I believe the Walt Disney Treasures DVDs came to an end because the sales caused some at the company to believe there just plain wasn't an audience for certain of the less well-known Disney films and shows.
5. They just haven't gotten around to it yet. This is less and less a reason as time goes by but years ago, there were a lot of angry animation fans who couldn't understand why all their favorite Hanna-Barbera or Warner Brothers cartoons couldn't all come out on home video at once. The company had determined, rightly or wrongly, that the market could only handle X number of releases at a time and so they wanted to space them out.

In some cases, more than one of these reasons can apply and at times, changes in management (or desperation for new product) has prompted the issuance of something on DVD that previously seemed like it would never be released that way. Also of course, it happens that rights problems get cleared up or someone in the warehouse stumbles across old negatives or tapes they didn't know they had.

In the case of the Marvel Super Heroes cartoons, it's probably Reason #4 but it might also be Reason #3 as well.  Maybe someday, neither will apply.

My first iPhone was the iPhone 3 and I now have a 5. I had kinda figured I'd just stick with the odd-numbered models but the iPhone 7 announced today doesn't give me a whole lotta motivation to upgrade. The camera is better (they say), there's no more headphone jack and it interfaces better with the Apple Watch. Other than that, I don't see a whole lotta difference.

I tend to use an actual camera when I want an actual photo of something, only using the cellphone camera for emergencies and to take visual notes. I don't like wearing a watch of any kind and I only use headphones on airplanes, which isn't often lately. So I may just wait for the next one, which doesn't appear to be far off.

You'd think they'd make an effort to include one cool and new must-have feature in each new iPhone. I might buy a 7 if it could tell me when the 8 is coming out, what's it going to do that the 7 doesn't and why it's going to cost me a lot in new accessories.

That's a photo of my friend Jewel Shepard. I would tell you how long I have known Jewel but you wouldn't believe it since it's more years than she looks to have lived on this planet. Let's just say it's been a while.

Jewel is an actress whose screen credits have included Hollywood Hot Tubs, Hollywood Hot Tubs 2, Party Camp, My Tutor, Zapped!, Caged Heat 2 and The Artist. That's right. She was in all those B-Movies and in The Artist, which won the Academy Award for Best Picture for 2011. She didn't have any lines in it but then neither did John Goodman. She was also in the cult classic horror film, The Return of the Living Dead.

She's done a couple of horror movies and these present a problem for me since I don't care for horror movies, especially the kind they make today with loads of blood and no Vincent Price. If you like 'em, fine. I don't. You probably eat cole slaw, too.

Anyway, she has a new one out for which she's getting rave reviews (like this one and this one) and she's real proud of her role as a truly crazy lady.

The film is called slasher.com and it's about a couple that meets online and then they go on a date out into the isolated woods of Missouri. There, they rent a cabin from two insane people, one of whom is played by Jewel…and I don't know that much about what happens after that but it involves violence and blood and gore and it actually sounds a bit worse than any first date I ever went on.

As you might imagine from the notices she and it are receiving, Jewel is very proud of this film and she has asked me to mention it on my blog. Not having seen it — and not being up on the standards in this genre — I can't give it a recommendation other than to say if you like this kind of movie, this looks like one of the best. I did see enough of it to decide that Jewel is real good at playing a woman who should be locked up immediately, lest she murder, maim or vote Republican this November.

If it means anything to you, she never asked me to plug any of her other films, not even The Artist.

I'm not sure where you can see this movie except that it's being shown later this month at this horror convention. But it'll make the rounds so keep your eye peeled for it and for Jewel in it. She's always worth watching.

• How Trump says he'd defeat ISIS: He'd give our generals 30 days to devise a plan for wiping them out. My gardener could do that.

As a devout lover/expert of the movie It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, I get a lot of questions about it, one of the most common being, "Can I go see the Big W in person?" Answer: No. That filming location was on private, inaccessible property and it's all been bulldozed and cleared in recent years. There are other locations around where scenes were filmed…and most of them don't look anything like they did in 1962 when the movie was shot, either.

I could direct people to one location: The California Incline, a sloped street out in Santa Monica which connects down to the Pacific Coast Highway. Several scenes in the film were shot there and when I first saw the movie in 1963 — at the Pacific Cinerama Dome in Hollywood — everyone in the audience whooped in recognition. They recognized a number of spots where scenes were shot but they all recognized the California Incline. And until May of last year, it still looked pretty much like it did in the film.

In May, they closed it down, tore it down and started rebuilding it. It was supposed to be finished by Memorial Day of 2016 but you know how these things go. It reopened earlier this week and it's very lovely and probably much safer and more efficient. It just doesn't look quite like it did in the movie now. Here's a time-lapse video…

I should have told you about this earlier. Turner Classic Movies is running a "free, flexible online exploration of Slapstick comedy" class in connection with films they're running tonight and intermittently through the month. They have silent movies on this evening and tomorrow night. (The best film tomorrow night is Buster Keaton's Steamboat Bill, Jr.) Info on the course and the full schedule can be accessed here.

I'm a bit puzzled as to what definition of the word "slapstick" applies to the films selected — they mostly just seem to be broad comedies — but hey, I'm all for running broad comedies. On Wednesday the 21st, they have It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World followed by The Great Race, which I'm going to think of as a brief, unintended Marvin Kaplan Film Festival. More on Mad World in the next posting here…

I have no desire to watch this weekend's Comedy Central Roast of Rob Lowe. I don't particularly care about Rob Lowe one way or the other and apart from occasional moments with Jeff Ross and/or Gilbert Gottfried, find those roasts hard to take at all. A lot of them feel like a cavalcade of people who don't know the roastee but they need a job and/or exposure enough to show up, read nasty remarks someone else wrote about the "honoree" and force smiles and fake laughter at whatever shots are taken at them. The Friars, back when they started this tradition, used to say "We only roast those we love." Now it's more like, "Hey, gimme the check and let me outta this place!"

David Sims has more to say about it, especially about the odd inclusion of Ann Coulter as a roaster. Ms. Coulter makes a fine living saying vile things about certain people to the delight of an audience that wants to hear vile things said about those people. But then, that's kind of what "roasts" are becoming, isn't it?

Matt Taibbi on the Trump campaign. Here's my favorite line in it…

Apart perhaps from his most hardcore fans (and the occasional Wall Street Journal columnist), nobody seriously believes Trump has been trying to reach out to African-American voters. If he had, he might have spoken to some actual black people, and taken a position on an issue black audiences care about.

And speaking of the Republican nominee's ability to even speak to black voters, let alone win them over, read Jonathan Chait on the late Phyllis Schlafly. I cannot imagine the kind of person who would go to their graves proud that they did all they could to block equal rights for women and minorities.