Speaking of the number "Sit Down, You're Rockin' the Boat" in Guys and Dolls, here's the way they did it in a 2015 London revival in which Richard Kind — you'll see him for a few seconds — played Nathan Detroit. I did a mess o' Googling and was unable to ascertain the name of the gent playing Nicely-Nicely Johnson.

We were talking about Guys and Dolls and about the show-stopper of a number, "Sit Down, You're Rockin' the Boat." The wonderful Shelly Goldstein sent me this link to that number as it's currently being performed in a rousing revival of that show at the Bridge Theatre located near Tower Bridge in London — just in case you're in the area. If I were there, I'd go just to see and hear this in person…

And before they got to that number, I'd enjoy this one…

This year, I'm delighted that we'll be having Piotr Michael on the Saturday Cartoon Voice Panel. Wanna hear a small (very small) sample of who this guy can sound like? Watch this…

Piotr and five other talented folks will be on the Saturday Cartoon Voices Panel. It's on Saturday, July 27 in room 6BCF and it starts at 1 PM, right after the Quick Draw! Come for one, stay for both.

A lot of Liberal-type folks are angry at The New York Times for urging Joe Biden to step down for the good of the country. A lot of them are saying "That paper never urged Donald Trump to step aside for the good of the country," as if Donald Trump would ever forego fame, power, money and not going to prison for the good of anyone or anything. Now, some are mad because of a guest opinion piece by George Clooney called "I Love Joe Biden. But We Need a New Nominee." He makes a damned good case.

I've been saying on this blog and to friends for some time that it wouldn't surprise me if the November election wasn't between Biden and Trump. That's looking a little more likely now than it once did. It also wouldn't surprise me if Biden has decided to withdraw but has reasons for doing it when he does it. I'm not predicting that will happen; just saying it wouldn't surprise me.

I have a flurry of e-mails asking me about this article which basically says that Comic-Con International is threatening to move out of San Diego if certain local hotels near the S.D. Convention Center don't cease rate-gouging. I have no inside info on the negotiations or discussions but I'll stick with my long-time prediction that Comic-Con will not in our lifetimes — well, mine at least — move out of San Diego County.

I base that on my belief that the hoteliers, merchants and officials in S.D. could not possibly be brain-dead foolish enough to let it go. Comic-Con is what put the city on the map as a convention destination and it brings in way more cash than any other event that could possibly occupy the convention center on those dates. They'll make the necessary financial accommodations to keep their accommodations accommodating Comic-Congoers for a week every July.

The wonderful Debi Derryberry has been heard on a staggering number of cartoon shows, voicing an array of the most interesting young ladies (and sometimes young men) in animation. Here are some samples of her work…

And you can see and hear her in person at Comic-Con International this year, particularly on Sunday, July 28, when she joins five other sensational voice actors on the Sunday Cartoon Voices Panel at 11:45 AM in Room 6A. She'll also be a part of the Business of Cartoon Voices where actors, agents and I advise wanna-be cartoon voice actors on how to get into the business and how to not get swindled on the way in. That's in Room 7AB at 3 PM, again on Sunday.

Plus: Debi will also be signing in the Sails Pavillion at the con on Thursday (2:30 PM – 5:30 PM), on Friday (10 AM to 2:30 PM), on Saturday (10 AM to 2:30 PM) and on Sunday (1 PM until 2:30 PM). So you have many chances to meet and hear this extraordinary lady.

In 1939, Fleischer Studios — the folks who brought you Betty Boop, most of the good Popeye cartoons and many others — released Gulliver's Travels, their first animated feature. It was a pretty big hit so they immediately made another feature…Mr. Bug Goes To Town, which was made for the 1941 Christmas market. It turned out to have two problems, one being that a few days after it was previewed, Pearl Harbor was bombed and America turned topsy-turvy. The other problem was that a lot of people didn't like Mr. Bug Goes To Town, at least not as much as they'd liked Gulliver's Travels.

In short, Mr. Bug did not go to town. The film did not do well and led to Max and Dave Fleischer losing their studio. The film was re-released a few times, often under the name Hoppity Goes To Town, which is the name you'll see on the video below if you deign to watch.

I have a vague memory of going to a movie theater with my parents when I was around eight or so to see an afternoon matinee of cartoons. Greater affection hath no parents than to sit through five or six Casper and Buzzy the Crow shorts but even my folks' love for me and my love of cartoons both had their limits. Maybe twenty minutes into whatever the feature below was called then, we left and I think it was my idea. I know we weren't the only ones.

But that was then and this is probably now. There are plenty of things I didn't like then and do like now…and vice-versa. I have friends who think it's a great movie…and it does seem to have good animation, good gag writers, good voice people and songs by some of the best songwriters of the day. So when I get the time — which may not be until after Comic-Con — I'm going to give it another chance…

My buddy Bob Bergen has been the voice of Porky Pig most of the times when Porky has appeared since the great Mel Blanc became the late Mel Blanc. He's also spoken for several of the other Warner Brothers characters and many other great animated personalities, plus his is the voice you hear on promos for the new MeTV Toons channel. Here are some golden moments with Mr. Pig as performed by Mr. Bergen…

Wanna hear Bob do some of his amazing vocal gymnastics in person? He and five other great toon voicers will be on the Saturday Cartoon Voices panel at Comic-Con this year. It's Saturday, July 27 at 1 PM in Room 6BCF, hosted by the guy who runs this blog. And if you're smart enough to get there earlier, you'll have a good seat for Quick Draw!, the fastest and funniest panel at Comic-Con. Same day, same room but it starts at 11:45 AM and usually fills up well before that.

My old pal Pat O'Neill took exception to my belief that in the movie of Guys and Dolls, Frank Sinatra should have played Sky Masterson. Here's what he sent me…

Why do so many people think this? Sky Masterson has to be big and imposing, so that his threats have weight behind them. At this stage of his life, Sinatra was still a skinny little runt. Sure, he had the voice for the role (maybe — it's written for a belting baritone and Sinatra was a tenor), but not the look.

Who should have played Sky? Well, why not the guy who originated the role on Broadway — Robert Alda?

Why not Ethel Merman in the movie of Gypsy, Carol Channing in the movie of Hello Dolly, Stephen Douglass in the movie of Damn Yankees…or a dozen others that readers of this blog could name? (I started to type in "Zero Mostel in the movie of Fiddler on the Roof" but I think that was just a matter of Zero wanting too much money, not someone's idea of a more marketable lead. How about Julie Andrews in the movie of My Fair Lady?)

Hollywood has rarely operated that way and Samuel Goldwyn wanted movie stars in his movie. And here's an interesting consideration: Do we think that if Sinatra or Brando had wanted to play Sky Masterson on Broadway in the original production and had been willing to work for the same money Robert Alda got, that Alan Alda's daddy would have gotten the part?

If you want to argue that the person who originated the role on Broadway should always get the movie…or that the best person actor-wise should always get the movie regardless of star power…okay. We can have that discussion. I'd be on your side in many cases. But like I said, Hollywood has rarely operated that way.

I think Sinatra should have played Sky Masterson. No, he was not as physically intimidating as Brando but I think he was a good enough actor to pull it off. More importantly, he was a singer — one of the most popular singers ever. And they put him in a role that was tailored for the non-singing Sam Levene and instead put the non-singing Marlon Brando in the singing part.

Which of course led to someone there saying, "Sinatra fans will be really disappointed if they buy tickets to this movie and he doesn't sing" so they added in the wholly-expendable, not-up-to-Frank-Loesser-standards song "Adelaide" and stuck Nathan in the title number where he really didn't belong. (You know who I think should have played Nathan Detroit in the movie? Phil Silvers. A fast-talking gambler who tries to weasel out on deals and not even commit to his longtime fiancée? Tell me that isn't a Phil Silvers role.)

A lot of folks don't know this but years later when Sinatra had his own record label — Reprise — and could do anything he wanted, he recorded a studio cast album of Guys and Dolls, recruiting Dean Martin, Bing Crosby, Dinah Shore and others. Debbie Reynolds did the Adelaide songs and Allan Sherman sang (opposite her) the one song Nathan Detroit had in the stage version, "Sue Me." Frank, of course, sang all the Sky Masterson songs and he was great. (Oh — and Sammy Davis Jr. sang "Sit Down, You're Rockin' the Boat.")

There's a long story that I'm not sure I know well enough to relate here about the original soundtrack recording of the movie. It was a small record with just a few songs and it wasn't until years later that there was an LP with all the songs from the movie on it. If someone who knows more about this can explain it, I'll run the explanation here. I just kinda think the movie was disappointing in a musical sense — it also dropped some great songs from Broadway — and it wouldn't have been if Frank had been Sky. And Phil had been Nathan.

This does not appear to be a bootleg or unauthorized upload. It's the complete movie of Guys and Dolls on YouTube. See Marlon Brando play Sky Masterson! See Frank Sinatra play the wrong part instead of the one Brando played! If nothing else, fast forward to 2:18:45 (or click here) to see Stubby Kaye stop and steal the show with his rendition of "Sit Down, You're Rockin' the Boat." Or you can just watch the whole movie…

I have a number of friends who want to discuss the "Should Biden drop out?" matter with me.  I really don't want to have the same conversation over and over with a dozen different people so here, in lieu of discussing it with each of them, is how I see the matter at this moment.  And one thing we should all have learned from any election in which Donald Trump is involved is how things can change from moment to moment.

The polls have or haven't budged a lot depending on which one you read and precisely what question they're asking.  At this moment, 538.com says — and I cut 'n' pasted this — "Trump and Biden have about an equal chance to win." If Biden is replaced by Kamala Harris, the numbers are about the same. She's a point or two back which is (a) still within the margin of error and (b) before the voting public knows as much about her as they'll wind up knowing if she winds up at the top of the ticket.

Will she? I dunno. But I'll bet the Trump contingent is already planning to spread the word about the Harris Crime Family. And if by some chance — which seems unlikely but so much that is unlikely seems possible this year — we wind up with a different Democratic nominee, we'll be hearing about the Newsom Crime Family or the Whitmer Crime Family or the Buttigieg Crime Family…

A lot of this may come down to how cognizant/healthy/sharp Joe Biden really is and how likely he is to stay that way for a while…and while we can all make our assessments based on one debate and a few speeches and interviews, I'd be curious to know the viewpoint of people who are close to him when he's not in front of cameras. That would include his doctors though anything they say to the public is not likely to change a lot of minds.

I also think that if the current president does move outta the way, he has to keep saying "I'm absolutely, positively staying in the race" until everything is arranged for him to move outta the way. Remember how Chris Christie vowed he would never, ever in-a-million-years stop pursuing the Republican nomination? How he was going to take it all the way to the convention, no matter what? And he was insisting this until about a minute and a half before he dropped out? That's how it usually works.

Also remember that if Biden does step aside, this becomes a race between two people who have yet to name their running mates. In a contest that could be this close, those selections might be the difference between carrying and not carrying one or two key swing states. So looking over the polls, I don't get the sense that they're solid in terms of any trends.

And looking over articles about how a transition between nominees could be made, I don't get the sense that anyone is that sure how that would work. That would include the people who profess to be that sure about how that would work, especially with regards to all that cash the Biden-Harris campaign has in its war chest. And the Biden and Trump camps seem to be saying exactly what you'd expect them to be saying no matter what Joseph R. Biden is going to do or how he really is…

…and this all means that this is another one of those "I dunno" posts that I do when I dunno. But at the moment, I dunno and when I dunno, I think the best thing is to admit that you dunno. It puts you a wee bit closer to understanding what's going to happen than those who dunno but claim they no.

Back in this post a few years ago, I mentioned there was a business in Hollywood with a sign out front that said "Bordello." I wrote then, "I don't know what kind of business it was but because of that sign, the least-likely possibility was that it was a bordello."

I don't recall who and I can't find the e-mail now but someone wrote that I must have been fibbing and/or hallucinating because no one would be allowed to operate a business with that on its shingle. If you're the person who sent that message, take a gander at this which I recently found online…

And actually, it was more scandalous than I recalled or noticed because as you can see, another sign there said, "House of Pleasure." Isn't that just begging for a visit from the vice department of your local police department or someone?  They must have investigated and found it was just an extreme example of false advertising…so I'm not only curious as to what actually went on in there but why it was allowed to do whatever that was.

As I recall, it was there for a few years and they didn't close it down.  I think though the cops or someone did close down the Carl's Jr. in the background…and rightly so because those places are dangerous.  And you often don't know what you're getting in one of them, either.

Tanya McLeod write to ask…

I was so excited when I heard there was going to be a cartoon channel, MeTV Toons. But as my luck always has it, Shreveport doesn't get it. The only way it looks like can get it is to get Frndly or Philo streaming service. Who would I contact about my area getting the over-t-e air channel? I have no cable, satellite or internet. Antenna is it. I've done a rescan several times…smaller cities close by have an over-the-air channel but Shreveport doesn't. It makes me very sad to be on FB and see all the cartoons I could be watching but can't. I get MeTV but not the new Toons channel.

Well, you must have some Internet connection since you sent me an e-mail…but I gather it's not the kind that could get you a watchable TV signal. What I would do is call whatever over-the-air channel in your area is the host channel for MeTV. If my Googling is correct, that would be station KPXJ. It can't hurt to give 'em a call and say, "I'm sick of all the reruns of Land of the Giants! I wanna watch The Flintstones!"

Understand that MeTV Toons is a new channel and the folks behind it are out there now, selling it like crazy to cities that don't have it yet. A little demand from the viewer side might help those salespeople get it in your town. It may also pop up there soon without you but wouldn't you feel powerful if you felt you helped get it picked up locally?

From Late Night with David Letterman for May 26 of 1982, let's remember how funny the late Martin Mull could be…

On the Internet forums I visit, I see a lot of debates — some about important stuff, some about trivial matters, much of both about things that aren't going to change one bit because of any online discussion. You and I could fill several Facebook Forums arguing over whether Joe Biden should stay in the race, Donald Trump should be in prison, this side in the Israel/Hamas War should make this concession, that side in the Ukraine/Russia War should make that concession, et cetera, et cetera…

…and all those bytes won't change a thing except maybe (maybe!) one of us will feel some moments of triumph in this battle that won't change anything or some onlooker will be comforted to see one of us agree with him.

Those are the Important Stuff debates I was just talking about but I'm also talking about the Trivial Matters variety. And a lot of those debates are about matters in the past like which was the best Star Wars movie, who was the best James Bond, who drew the best Spider-Man…that kind of thing. So nothing's really going to change. One self-described "Three Stooges Fanatic" practically wanted to challenge me to a duel with live ammo over my opinion that there were good performances by Third Stooges not named Curly.

(Actually, if he was a real "Three Stooges Fanatic," his weapons of choice would have been cream pies at ten paces. "Turn and lob!")

At times, I kinda enjoy the Trivial Matters Debate because they're spectator sports. No one dies. No blood is shed. Generally, no one even loses money. And most people don't lose in any sense because, for example, it's not a fact (in the real sense of that word) that the best Star Wars movie was The Empire Strikes Back, the best James Bond was Sean Connery and the best Spider-Man was drawn by Steve Ditko. The only way you can really lose that kind of debate is if you make the mistake of stating your opinion as an established fact…

…like "Everyone agrees that Calvin & Hobbes was the greatest comic strip ever."

Someone said that on a Facebook Forum once and the next seventy zillion comments were along the lines of "I don't." And just for the record, I don't.

Debates about Things That Really Matter can get really nasty at times, especially when someone seems to be stubbornly defending some unlisted Constitutional Right to state a belief and not have to see anyone offer a competing one. Or sometimes they cite the First Amendment and argue that it can have a "Chilling Effect" on their Free Speech if anyone else enjoys The Right of Rebuttal. Or if someone — gasp! — exercises any sort of right to not listen.

I'm writing this, I guess, because it's 123 days until this country picks its President for the next four years and I'm already sick of debates. I don't mean like the Trump/Biden kind because that kind, for good or ill, actually matters. I mean like the ones certain friends want to have with me like we're going to settle the whole matter on the phone. I'm especially weary of "No one could disagree with…" statements with which a great many people obviously disagree. Your candidate, whoever it might turn out to be, is not likely to win this thing unanimously.

I'm also writing this because recently while searching my e-mailbox for a message about something-or-other, I came across the following exchange. A fellow I don't know had been engulfed on some web forum duel-to-the-death over who was the best of the many inkers who, over the many years, inked over the pencil art of Jack Kirby. As some consider me kind of an authority on Mr. Kirby and his work, this person wrote to me for The One Right Answer…

All these guys in the discussion are saying it was Wally Wood or Mike Royer or Chic Stone or someone else. You and I know the absolute best inker Kirby ever had was Joe Sinnott. Could you please give me a statement I can post online so we can settle this once and for all that it was Sinnott?

My reply went something like this. (Well, not "something like this." I cut-and-pasted it so it went exactly like this)…

That's an opinion. You can sometimes settle factual matters once and for all, though even then someone may call your fact a fake and their fact a real fact. With regards to Kirby inkers, some folks prefer the kind of inker who didn't impose his own style on the work and who let what Jack drew shine on through and some prefer the guys who fixed this or changed that and toned down some of the extremes. Once upon a time, I was in the latter camp but as I've grown older, I've moved to the former camp. I like Kirby art that looks like Kirby art and keeps all the power and emotion largely intact. Obviously, those two camps will never agree on a single name.

I do not see any reply from this person in my emailbox but I recall that later, someone sent me a link to the discussion forum. And on it, the guy who wrote to ask me wrote, "I checked with Mark Evanier and he says the best inker for Jack Kirby was Joe Sinnott. Case closed." Well, I guess that settles it.