Monthly Archives: May 2017

The previous posting here prompted Paul Dushkind to write and ask…

I was wondering who drew the black-and-white caricature of Don Rickles in the frame with the big head on the Jimmy Olsen cover.

We don't know. When Rickles' publicist gave the approval for Don to guest in the comic, he sent over a few publicity photos he had around so Mr. Kirby could use them for reference. Jack picked out one for the cover of that issue and one for the next. The caricature was one of the photos sent and it was unsigned. A lot of people seem to assume Jack drew it but he didn't.

In the meantime, Jeff Watters found an old interview in which I said that my then-partner Steve Sherman and I helped with the writing of those issues and he jumped to the conclusion that we had written some of the Rickles-style dialogue. The jump is wrong. There was a subplot in those two issues about the Newsboy Legion and Jack had us write out an outline for that…and then he didn't follow much of it.

We wrote no dialogue and no part of the panels that involved Rickles or his look-alike. We did give Jack a page of insults that Don Rickles could hurl at Superman, as well as a few to be lobbed at Clark Kent, but Jack never got around to having Rickles meet either character.

When people hear that I — someone they know as a writer — assisted Jack Kirby, they often assume I did some of the writing on those comics. And that might be a logical assumption but, you know, not all logical assumptions are correct. I'd certainly be proud to say I did because I think the writing on those books is superb…but it ain't mine.

As I've explained many times, I wrote one page in one issue of Mister Miracle. I dialogued one story that was intended for Spirit World but which ran elsewhere with incorrect writing credits. I wrote the outline for the first issue of Kamandi, which mostly consisted of typing up Jack's ideas, and Steve and I wrote some outlines for portions of Jimmy Olsen, the Deadman appearance in Forever People, and a few of the mystery stories, plus we wrote any text pages that had our names on them. In the case of the outlines, they were all for stories drawn by Jack and he didn't follow them that closely, not even when we were regurgitating his own ideas back to him.

All in all, it adds up to very little and nothing of particular importance. It was more like "busy work" because Jack wanted to find an excuse to pay us some money, and because he hoped to convince DC to let him edit some comics he didn't write or draw, and was trying to sell them on the idea that we were writers who could be trusted.

I've said this on many occasions and so has Steve. Still, people write me or ask at conventions if I wrote this or that in some issue of Jack's New Gods. I fixed a couple of what were basically typos in Jack's New Gods — and not even that many of them — and that was all. Maybe it's too alien a concept in comics for someone to not claim credit for someone else's ideas, especially when that Someone Else is Jack Kirby.

Neil Anderson wrote me and said…

I assume you're going to write something about Don Rickles at some point, and was wondering if you'd discuss the two issues of Jimmy Olsen by Jack Kirby where Don Rickles guest-starred. I was confused by those stories, because it seemed like a natural that there would be a scene where Don Rickles meets Superman, and spends a few pages cleverly insulting him, but no such scene appears. Instead, there's this weird plot involving an evil twin of Don Rickles. I didn't know what to make of it at the time, and still don't. I'd be interested to know your thoughts.

I received quite a few questions about this even though I think I've written about it at least a dozen times. Here's a quick overview of what happened. This is from the big, exhaustive (and exhausting) biography of Jack that I've been writing and which I'm now able to finish. Which I will do soon…

The most famous plotline in Jimmy Olsen was probably a two-parter that guest-starred insult comedian Don Rickles. The event had originated with a suggestion from Steve Sherman and myself that Rickles — who boasted he "never picked on a little guy, only on the biggies" — make a brief cameo and insult Superman. After all, who was a bigger biggie than Superman?  Jack liked the idea and permission was procured from Rickles via his publicist for what was then planned as a sequence of but a page or two. At Jack's request, Steve and I wrote a batch of suggested Rickles lines. One went like this…

Rickles: "Hey, where you from, Big Boy?"

Superman: "I'm from the planet Krypton."

Rickles: "Just my luck. I got insults for every nationality on this planet. I gotta run into a yo-yo from Krypton!"

Then DC's own publicists decided that this presented an opportunity for promotion in other venues, and Kirby was asked to do two whole issues with Rickles, both to feature him prominently on their covers. One of those covers would display what cartoonist Scott Shaw has called the greatest line of ad copy ever done in comics: "Kirby says…Don't ask, just buy it!" The resultant issues were weird but wonderful, though Jack somehow never got around to actually having Rickles meet or insult Superman.

The comedian himself was less than thrilled by it all. He'd agreed to a cameo without remuneration, and felt exploited when it turned into two cover-featured guest appearances. He was further offended by a request from a DC publicist who presumed Rickles would gladly take the comics onto talk shows and promote them. Years later in an appearance on Conan O'Brien's NBC talk show, Rickles was less than delighted when the host hauled out a copy of the comic book and asked him about it. "Put that away," he said. "I had nothing to do with that."

Someone on the 'net recently wrote that it all came about because Rickles was a friend and neighbor of the Kirbys. I don't know where they got that because Don Rickles and Jack Kirby lived fifty miles apart and never met unless, of course, they have since Rickles passed away.

For what it's worth, I really like those issues. Liked them at the time when Jack did them, like them more now…and I think I like them for the exact same reasons that some people don't: Because they don't read like "normal" DC Comics or like what we longtime DC readers had come to expect when we picked up an issue of Jimmy Olsen. I sometimes wish Jack — and this goes for a lot of other folks in comics, past and present — could have been freed from some notion of what a DC or Marvel comic "should" be like. This applies to self-imposed restrictions as much as those dictated by editorial folks. The closer Jack got to doing that, the more successful his work was both financially and creatively. But he could have gotten even closer, especially when he was in full command of his creative powers.

Saturday Night Live cast member Bobby Moynihan departs the cast after tonight's season-ending telecast. He recently commissioned MAD's star caricaturist Tom Richmond to do this terrific drawing of the participants in this past season. You can enlarge it by clicking on it…and when you do, note that Tom did not do a drawing of Alec Baldwin or Donald Trump. He drew Alec Baldwin as Donald Trump. It's really a lovely piece of work.

We're aiming for a Trump-free weekend on this blog and, more importantly, in my head. So I'll just say this here and then go work on Groo…

I'm not as confident as some people that Donald Trump will not be president much longer. Yeah, he's done many things that would have caused a Republican congress to insist President Hillary had to go but so what? We don't remove elected officials — presidents or their Congressional protectors — for hypocrisy. I guess I'm leery of predictions because one of the main complaints about Trump is he's too unpredictable; how he doesn't conform to past norms of presidential conduct. His popularity will continue to suffer from the slow drip-drip-drip of self-inflicted scandals and stupid statements but I'm not sure of much else about this guy. Like I said, too unpredictable. If there's one big misdeed that will knock him out of office, either it hasn't come out yet or he hasn't committed it yet.

Caught a few snippets of Jimmy Fallon trying to be rougher on Trump, presumably because that's what seems to be helping ratings in Late Night. Mr. Fallon has many talents but being rough on people is not among them. The same with James Corden. (I was about to type that Corden, being British, isn't all that convincing attacking American political figures but then I remembered how good John Oliver is at it.)

Every so often here, I have to remind some readers of this blog of the following: I do not post obits for everyone who dies. I feel like I do too many of them as it is. I post them for one or more of these reasons: (1) I knew the person really well, (2) I think I have something interesting to say about the person, and/or (3) I feel like if I don't post something about this person's passing, no one else on the 'net will. It does not mean I don't care about them. Most of the time when followers of this site write me and say "You must have some issues with this person since you didn't write about their death," the answer is that I didn't know the person and feel I have nothing to add to what others have written. No snub is ever intended.

The other day, I got one of those calls where from the room tone before the person even says anything, you know it's someone calling from a roomful of other people making calls. A woman who obviously learned English as a second (or third or fourth…) language told me she was from "Computer Technical Support" and there was a terrible virus on my computer. Since she was lying to me, I felt it was okay to lie to her and I told her I didn't own a computer. I said, "I don't want one because I heard there are really evil, criminal people in the world who call you and tell you they're from someplace like 'Computer Technical Support' and they try to get you to let them access your computer and then they steal data and plant viruses. Can you believe there are such sick, horrible human beings in the world?" She agreed with me that was pretty awful and then she hung up.

There may be more here later but I don't think you'll see me here until tomorrow. I have to go write Cheese Dip jokes…

From 2007: Regis Philbin interviews Don Rickles, the man who said such witty things as "You hockey puck, you," "Why don't you sit in a hot tub and watch a duck sink?" and "What do you want me to do? Drop my pants and fire a rocket?"

Here's a batch of behind-the-scene pictures from the making of the movie Goldfinger.  There must be something wrong with the home video market because it's been at least six months since it was time for me to buy this film in a new format.

Legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin explains why firing James Comey was an abuse of power and he also writes about the rules under which Robert Mueller will conduct his investigation. Apparently, it will be up to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to decide how much of Mueller's report will be made public. So we're looking at fights over what Mueller will subpoena and what he can learn, and then we'll have the battle over how much of it will be kept secret. This is going to take a while, people.

Alas, we can't ignore him for long, which is one of the things some of us don't like about D.J. Trump. I wake up each morning now, reach for the iPhone on my nightstand and think, "Well, let's see what horrible things he's done so far today."

Maybe I shouldn't say that here. I know that one of the things some of his fans like most about Trump is that he annoys people like me. There is a powerful "them or us" attitude in this country and to some folks, whatever "us" does is great and perfect and commendable if it upsets "them."  We don't even have to understand it to be happy about it if the right people are unhappy.

Browsing the 'net, I see a lot of people who figure anything Trump does that makes Liberals mad must be a good thing, especially if it undoes something Obama did. As long as he can, I don't think Trump will let those people down.

Some links…

• Trump has shown little talent for public speaking before audiences who aren't already on his side. If you already love him, he's kind of ingratiating and charming but if you don't, he's arrogant and contemptuous. He's about to deliver a major speech in Saudi Arabia. Jennifer Williams is, like a lot of us, thinking this will not help U.S.-Saudi relations.
• Rumor has it that Trump may install Joe Lieberman as the new director of the FBI. As Daniel Larison explains, this would be a terrible idea. So unless a worse one comes along, Trump will probably do it.
• Members of the House of Representative Committee on Science, Space and Technology recently sent a letter to Trump. It expresses concern that the information he is receiving — and on which he is presumably basing some of his decisions — is "misinformation and fake news." I'm imagining Trump reading the letter and saying, "So —?"
• Obamacare may actually fail soon, as Kevin Drum notes. If and when it does, there'll be a nasty debate in this country: Did it fail because it was always a bad idea? Or because Republicans, once they were in a position to do so, sabotaged it? I can't imagine most Americans believing the former unless the G.O.P. actually comes up with a plan that provides better health care for more people for less money. Which they really aren't even trying to do.

The death of Roger Ailes raised the oft-raised question of how respectful one should be of someone who was not respectful of others. A friend of mine once said, "When a person dies, you show the proper manners by following their lead." If you believe that, go ahead and read Matt Taibbi. If not, wait a week or so.

I told this story to someone the other day and they said, "Hey, you should put that on your blog." Okay, so here it is on my blog. It might not be the best anecdote I've told here but it is guaranteed to be 100% Trump-Free…

I have written here about my friend Bridget, a very lovely actress-dancer who for some reason was willing to go out with me for a few years in the late seventies and early eighties. That's Bridget on the left in the photo above, in which we were all trying to pretend we were posing for a soup ad. The lovely blonde lady on the right is Linda Hoxit, another actress-dancer who was a friend of Bridget's. The pic is from one afternoon when for some reason, they decided to come over and make me lunch, which is not what this anecdote is about. It is, however, from around this time…

In addition to acting and dancing, Bridget sometimes earned money as a model. Her biggest gig was a few years as a Nexxus Hair Care Girl but there were others. Two or three times a year f'ristance, she would spend a day or two being photographed for the catalog of a very popular seller of sexy lingerie. The pay was pretty good and there was a bonus in that the models were allowed to take home the remnants of any outfits which were destroyed in the process.

As she explained to me, to make the lingerie fit perfectly and to enhance how it enhanced the figure, she would sometimes be sewn into the garments along with much judiciously-placed padding. They didn't do this with bras and panties but anything that covered much of the body would have had most of its seams removed before the shoot. The photo stylist and dresser would literally construct that kind of lingerie on the models' bodies, using a hand-held sewing device to baste this and sew that and tighten everything where they wanted it to be tight. When they were done, it would be necessary to literally cut her out of it.

Usually, everyone was in a hurry to get onto the next item to be modeled but sometimes, there was time for Bridget to perform some deft surgery and free herself from a garment without totally destroying it. Later, she could re-sew it so it could be worn again — and the last thing she wore, she could wear home and take all the time in the world to get it off.

Naturally though, one does not drive home in a something black and lacey — though she and another model once discussed whether it would help if they got pulled over by the police or make the pulling-over more likely. Bridget thought it would make it more likely so she would arrive at each shoot dressed in a pair of baggy sweats. She'd look over the rack of lingerie she'd be modeling and select the one she wanted to keep most intact, then she would get the photographer to agree to do that one last. Once those pics were taken and she was done for the day, she could put the sweats on over the selected item, wear it home and carefully remove the temporary stitching.

Upon arrival at one session, her selection was instantaneous. Among the pieces she'd be wearing was a red satin bustier. Actually, she called it a bustier but I would have called it a corset. In fact, I did and whenever I called it a corset, Bridget said, "No, no…it's a bustier!" By any name, it was gorgeous and hand-made and covered with lace and jewels and gold piping and it was very expensive. The corset bustier was $2000 in 1985 and if the company is still making 'em, it's probably more than twice that by now. It looked great on its own and even better with Bridget in it and I'm kicking myself that I didn't take any photos of her wearing it.

Just trust me. Stunning.

She wore it for her last photos of the day, pulled her sweatsuit on over it, then realized it would be tough to escape from on her own. They'd sewn her into it from the back and she couldn't reach the stitching…so she phoned me. I didn't live that far from the photo studio.

She came over and I took a pair of nail scissors and an X-Acto knife and ever-so-carefully began removing stitches. This may sound like a fun pastime and I guess it was for about the first three minutes. After ten, my index finger and thumb were aching from the scissors. After twenty, it was agony. I did get a brief intermission when the phone rang. I said to whoever was phoning, "I can't talk to you now. I'm cutting a beautiful model out of her underwear." Saying that was the only fun part of the experience.

But we got it off her without doing too much damage to it. Bridget took it home and sewed up the parts of it that were supposed to be sewed-up and — voila! — she had herself a $2000 bustier — or as I put it, a $2000 corset. Sweet. A few weeks later, it got even sweeter.

She got a call to go audition for a part in a commercial for some brand of ale. The commercial was set in a saloon in the old west and Bridget was trying out to play a dance hall girl. She put on the thing I called a corset and she called a bustier, put her sweats on over it and went to the audition.

All the other ladies there to audition had dressed up real fancy and they were baffled by the one in the waiting room who had shown up in unflattering, baggy sweats. Then when it was Bridget's turn, she went into the room where the casting was done, pulled off the sweats and instantly got the part. The producer said, "You're our girl if you wear that — what do you call it? A corset?"

She said, "Yes, yes…it's a corset!" If I'd been hiring her, she would have let me call it that, too. So she wore the red satin whatever-it-was in the commercial when it was filmed and made about a thousand dollars.

The commercial was edited and shown to Arthur, the man who owned the ale company for his approval. He loved it but, alas, someone didn't. That would be Arthur's lady friend who was there when it was screened. She loudly announced, "Arthur, we have to talk!" Then she took him to one side and demanded to know, in a voice so loud with outrage that all could hear it, "Why didn't you have me play the dance hall girl?" She was young enough and lovely enough that she could have but the folks who made the commercial didn't know of her at the time and her wealthy male friend Arthur hadn't thought to suggest/demand it.

For days after, the argument continued and all his apologies and gift offers couldn't placate his lady love. She kept demanding that the commercial be reshot with her in lieu of Bridget, and after a week or so of withheld sex and angry and/or tearful upset, Arthur gave in. He called the agency that had made the commercial and said, "I know it'll cost me a lot of money but reshoot the spot with Helga" — or whatever her name was — "as the dance hall girl." And he added, "Oh — and she insists she absolutely must wear that same red corset thing."

So Bridget got a call. "We have to reshoot," they told her and she thought, "Oh boy! I get to make another thousand dollars." Then they explained they weren't going to use her. They just needed to borrow the corset.

"You can't have it," she said defiantly. "It's mine and I'm the only one who wears it. And by the way, it's a bustier."

They said they'd pay her the same fee again, plus she'd still receive whatever residuals might be paid when the ad aired. She said no. They offered her $1500. She said no.

They offered two thousand dollars. She said, "Let me get this straight. You want to pay me twice as much to not be in the commercial as you paid me to be in the commercial?" They said yes. She thought for a second and said, "Make it $2500 and you've got a deal." They agreed. Bridget was blonde but she was in no way stupid, except occasionally in her choice of male companions.

So a week later, Bridget was on the set again but only to keep an eye on her beloved bustier. Not only was Helga (or whatever her name was) there to wear it but Arthur was there to watch the love of his life make her acting debut. Helga looked fine in the bustier and Bridget, who'd emotionally committed to being a good, well-compensated sport about it, admitted that Helga was fine in the part.

After they wrapped, Helga herself carried the bustier on its hanger over to Bridget, who was going to drop it off at the dry cleaner's on her way home. Helga thanked her and said, "They told me they paid you again for it so look at it this way. We each got a thousand dollars for wearing it and you made another thousand for loaning it to us."

Bridget said, "Well, to be honest, they paid me $2500 to let you wear it." And as she left with it, she could hear Helga storming across the studio and yelling, "Arthur, we have to talk!"

I think I'll take the rest of today off from paying attention to what's going on with Donald Trump, the target of the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history. And don't you kinda admire in a strange way how everything Trump does is the single greatest ever? If he eats a piece of chocolate cake, it's the single greatest piece of chocolate cake ever and if he were to go bowling, he would probably throw the single greatest gutterball ever. Can't wait to see him bragging over the ratings his resignation speech will get.

One thing to note by those of us tracking how Trump's crisis apes and does not ape Watergate: A lot less of Nixon's problems were self-inflicted. Some were…but Nixon was a little better at taking a bad situation and not making it ten times worse. With his "witch hunt" claims, Trump is setting up in advance — as he always does — the excuses if he loses. If he'd lost the election, it was because the whole process was rigged, remember? He's still flogging that as the reason he lost the popular vote. He doesn't know enough to greet the appointment of a Special Counsel with "Happy to hear it! Robert Mueller is a man of integrity and I look forward to cooperating with him in every possible way to clear up this matter so we can get on with the nation's business."

But that's it for today…I hope.

Rowan Atkinson interviews Elton John. Or maybe it's John Elton…

So I'm figuring that if the current Trump scandals unfold the way Nixon's did — and they may not — what happens next is a flurry of polls which G.O.P. leaders read to say, "If we don't get on top of this and we look like we're protecting and enabling this guy, we're going to lose the House and/or Senate." One of the things that did Nixon in was that Republican lawmakers saw their base splitting. If you were a Congressperson or Senator of that party, you saw that you could lose half of the Republican vote if you protected Nixon and half if you didn't. It's almost impossible to win another term if anywhere near 50% of your own party deserts you. It also makes you extremely vulnerable to a challenger from your own party.

I always thought one of the key "Nixon is doomed" moments of Watergate came when an obscure, well-meaning little rabbi named Baruch Korff started turning up everywhere in the news, identified as "Nixon's Chief Defender." You would have thought that Nixon's Chief Defender would have been a prominent Republican Senator, Governor or Congressman — but no. All those guys were hiding under their desks, afraid to link their future with their president's. I thought of that last night when several news stories said that Fox News was having trouble getting anyone important to come on and speak on behalf of Trump.

Rabbi Korff suddenly got a lot of air time because there was this void. No one else wanted to be Nixon's Chief Defender and the media — especially the three major TV networks and especially CBS — were desperate to have someone speak on his behalf. If they hadn't, they would have given credence to the argument that the press was biased against Nixon and ginning up the whole Watergate mess. So Korff was suddenly everywhere and though he meant well, I thought he did Nixon more damage than good.

Korff was a bad surrogate. He didn't know how to speak in sound bites and give short, quotable answers. He knew very little about Washington and nothing about the "spin" Nixon and his people wanted to put on his actions, so often the Rabbi's "defense" admitted things Nixon was trying to deny and vice-versa. (There's another parallel there to Trump. A lot of the official spokespersons who've been out there saying things on behalf of Trump have immediately been contradicted by other spokespersons or by Trump himself.  Nothing makes you look guiltier than not being able to get your story straight.)

Korff also had been a genuine hero during World War II helping Jews escape the Nazi onslaught. There were so many such heroes that his deeds had gone largely unheralded and he sometimes seemed less interested in championing Nixon than he was in talking about his own accomplishments. When Dan Rather asked Korff for a thirty-second statement about the latest Watergate revelation, he often got a ten-minute story about liberating concentration camps.

The rabbi looked silly with his self-promotion and sillier still when some of Nixon's anti-semitic remarks on the tapes came out…and of course it was not lost on some people that Korff was out defending Nixon because no one else would do it.

It may not play out quite that way with Trump because due to gerrymandering and polarization, more Republicans are probably in "safe seats" and less afraid of losing them. Then again, even those G.O.P. officials are afraid of Democratic victories and with Trump's growing unpopularity getting in the way of tax cuts, Medicaid cuts and other items on the Republican wish list. Already, some Republicans are at least looking like they support full investigations and maybe a Special Prosecutor.  Depending on what James Comey says in the coming days, there may be a stampede.

My long-held view though is that Nixon wasn't forced out of office by Democratic attacks so much as he was ousted by Republican defections. When Barry Goldwater said even he'd be voting yea on at least one of the impeachment counts, Richard M. Nixon knew it was all over. One wonders if Donald J. Trump will be as wise.

Let's go to the links…

• Jonathan Chait reports on the latest Republican spin: Trump didn't mean it when he asked Comey to shut down investigations. He was just joking. You're in lot of trouble when that's the best your supporters can come up with to support you.  ("Ladies and gentlemen of the jury…when my client took that gun and the note demanding cash up to the bank teller's window, it was just a prank…")
• Dylan Matthews explains what happens when a sitting president is accused of a crime. It doesn't work the way it would if authorities found out that you and I are operating that series of illegal cockfights.
• Paul Ryan is still supporting Trump, says Steve Benen. I suspect Ryan will defend Trump to the death…or until he gets big tax cuts for the rich, whichever comes first. This seems to have been a dream Ryan has had since he was about seven. At that age, I was dreaming of working for Hanna-Barbera writing Yogi Bear and Paul Ryan was saying, "When I grow up, I want to take away the health insurance of poor people so that rich people get even richer!"
• And Daniel Larison thinks that Trump is about to make things a lot worse for America in its relationship with followers of Islam. Trump making something worse always sounds like a safe bet to me.

Jimmy Fallon sorta/kinda regrets that when he had Trump on The Tonight Show, it was all fun and games with nothing of a serious tone. Before we pillory Fallon for not being harder on the guy, we oughta ask if Jimmy Fallon is even capable of being harder on anyone. I suspect that once the booking was made, it couldn't have gone any other way. At least Fallon didn't try to get Trump to play a round of some old TV game show…although To Tell the Truth might have been an interesting choice.

Farley Elliott, who covers the Los Angeles restaurant scene and once interviewed me, argues with a recent survey that showed people preferring the Five Guys burger chain to In-N-Out. Naturally, since I have the same preference, I think the survey is inarguably correct. All polls and surveys are correct when they agree with you and they're deeply flawed and biased when they don't. That's Trump's Law.

In fact, I'll go farther with this: I used to be an In-N-Out fan, as I think long-ago posts on this blog will confirm. My last few visits to an In-N-Out left me deciding those would be my last few visits to an In-N-Out. I'm not sure if they've done something to their burgers or if my tastes have somehow evolved but I thought the burgers were pretty unimpressive.

One caveat: I take mine without most of the usual toppings. I'm allergic to some and don't like others. I suppose one could argue that an In-N-Out burger is not an In-N-Out burger unless it's dressed the way they usually serve them. Faced with that position, I might then argue back that any burger from anywhere can be made better or worse based on your topping selections and that the true test is of just the beef patty and bun. In that contest, not only does Five Guys beat In-N-Out handily but so do most chains.

I recognize this is heresy coming as it does from a native Californian. Not loving In-N-Out here is like not loving Vin Scully and, yes, you can be deported for it. But in this world, we have to stand up for what we believe and I believe that Five Guys makes better burgers than In-N-Out…and don't get me started on their fries.

Our pal Leonard Maltin mourns the demise of VHS tapes. Well, not really. He's actually mourning the loss of some great packaging and certain movies which were available in that format and haven't made it to DVD or Blu-ray.

I have a shelf downstairs of Betamax tapes of shows and movies available nowhere else and every so often, I have my assistant transfer a few more of them to digital format. One of these days, I'll start on the shelf of VHS tapes that I didn't toss once DVDs came out of the same material.

While we're on the subject of Maltin: Last Monday night, Leonard emceed a wonderful program at the Academy of Motion Pictures theater — a screening of Bambi preceded by some fascinating "extras." At the reception preceding the program, I got to spend some time talking with Peter Behn, who at age four supplied the voice of Thumper. I can't imagine what it would be like to be part of something so beloved and historic at that age, and to go through life with people telling you how what you contributed to at age four was so meaningful to them. It was a fun evening even though Bambi is far from my favorite Disney film.