Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:07 AM

FOURTH STOOGE CONTROVERY: Emil Sitka's website labels him as the Fourth Stooge (I discuss his career here). Monkeyboy (who sent us that link to the Spanish Stooge site) wants to know how that can be if Shemp is the fourth Stooge.

While there have been six Stooges, only three at a time appear in a particular film (with an exception to be noted in a minute). So since Emil appears frequently with three Stooges, he is arguably the fourth Stooge.

Now the exception to only-three-Stooges-per-film is that there are two Shemp films where Curly makes a quick guest appearance (The Stooges see a guy asleep with his hat covering his face; they lift the hat and Curly does his patented Curly snore). The key question is: was Emil Sitka in those films? I will endeavor to find out because I care about you, the loyal reader.

UPDATE: In fact, I give the answer here.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 7:47 PM

Today was the 100th anniversary of the first double play of Tinkers to Evers to Chance. Article here (with the poem that made them famous).
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 7:42 PM

Speaking of the Stooges, here's a link to a Spanish fan-site for Los Tres Chiflados.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 7:38 PM

An LA Times article(cptspaulding/cptspaulding) about how Emil Sitka's kid is preserving his legacy. Emil Sitka was a frequently-used straight man of the Three Stooges. He also was, at one point, going to replace Larry (publicity photo).

Here's how to join the fan club. According to the article, a benefit when Sitka was alive was that he'd show up at your wedding and shout "Hold hands, you love birds."

UPDATE: Perusing the article a little more carefully, I notice that an Emil Sitka book is in the works. And yes, I do want a copy if it comes out near Chanukah or my birthday.

UPDATE 2: Is Emil Sitka the Fourth Stooge? I say more on this important controversy here.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:30 AM

Last Friday, I went to the Other Network, a show which shows failed pilots and has the creators talk about the show's creation.

The first show was episode six of the Super Adventure Team which, although broadcast, qualified snce MTV buried the show. The show is a funny parody of Thunderbirds. Co-creators Dana Gould and Robert Cohen told of pitching the show as a goof and getting it picked up. They also told of getting very talented people like Adam West and Mike Meyers to do teh voices but MTV nixed it saying the kids wouldn't care about them (One note said Adam West sounded too old). Vodkapundit (a Dana Gould fan) might be interested in knowing that they were going to get the show on DVD with audio commentary. However they discovered at the last minute that MTV, when threatened with litigation by Gerry Anderson (creator of Thunderbirds), simply gave him the rights to the show. They are now in litigation with MTV.

Next was comedian Robert Schimmel's sitcom, hosted by co-creator Mike Scully of Simpsons fame. Schimmel's show was actually picked up by Fox. The problem was the titular star was diagnosed with cancer before production. That obviously delayed things. Schimmel went into remission but just as they were to go into production, Fox cancelled the show. A shame. The show is a fairly typical three-camera-sitcom about a family. But the jokes have the decency to be funny.

The third show and the reason I was there was Next!, Bob Odenkirk's sketch show. Odenkirk did a videotaped introduction explaining that he created the show for Fox and Fox executives didn't like it. He then said "If you like the show, please get a job as the head of Fox and put the show on the air." The show was decently funny. The format was to cut to a sketch, cut to other sketchs and then cut back to the first and so on. Zach Galifinakis played a guy at a piano bar making bad pickup lines to women while he played.

There were two funny commercial parodies, both for Essey Bros. Used Cars. The first was from an Essey brother who admitted that he wasn't very bright or knowledgeable about cars or money. For example, he sold a car valued at $15,000 for $200. So hurry up before his brother's back in town. The second was from the other brother who said he told his brother not to sell cars or make commercials. He's asking people to bring the cars back. For example, one car was valued at $15,000 and sold for $200, Monopoly money. Another car wasn't valued at anything becuase it was his car and not for sale. Both commercials did the wacky car commercial font.

And TV's Matthew Perry brushed past me on his way back from the men's room.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:40 PM

Equal Time with Jewish Kitsch?: Here's a dopey comic book called Mendy and the Golem designed to teach Jewish kids lessons about Judaism. Someone bought me a subscription to this funny book when I was a kid. Another childhood artifact I foolishly got rid of.

UPDATE: I'm an idiot. I put the link in. Sorry.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:30 PM

As we've established earlier, everybody loves kitschy pictures of Jesus. So here's some more. As his story reveals, this gentleman woke up with the revelation that the Lord wanted him to draw special drawings of Jesus involved with the tasks of everyday people. I see no picture of Jesus with a comedian but that's probably appropriate. Even Jesus doesn't care for flop sweat.

UPDATE: Not everybody loves kitschy pictures of Jesus. I posted the two kitschy pictures of Jesus links on an email list I'm on. Someone (who was originally just trying to start a fight between me and someone else but has now convinced himself that he's offended) asked if I posted these links "because only Christians do silly things like that, right Daniel?"

I hadn't really thought about it but let's see...In Islam, pictures of Mohammed are considered blasphemous. Judaism, to my knowledge, doesn't really have a human face to the Good Lord and probably considers pictures of Him blasphemous also. In terms of kitschy pictures of that which one worships, I suspect maybe it is a Christian phenomenom, yes. I would love to see counter-examples if anyone has any.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:45 PM

Talking of Popeye, here's a funnyish Popeye site. Here's an Israeli site plugging Popeye & Son with other Popeye related stuff. And here's a site about six-count-'em-six Popeye statues in America.

This page states that Popeye first appeared in a Betty Boop cartoon. Having Betty Boop meet comic strip characters was apparently a common practise of the Fleisher Brothers to test the popularity of the comic strip stars in their own cartoons. Kind of like how popular sitcoms used to have episodes that were essentially pilots of new shows (Hell, Star Trek did it).
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:41 PM

Combustible Boy (aka the Blazing Blogger) wants me to answer this question: "How exactly was it that grizzled, pipe-chomping old salts came to be typecast as avuncular grownup playmates for little kids?" He expresses skepticism that it's because of Popeye.

I would suggest that Popeye is, in fact, the origin of the archetype. I say this, for one reason. Thimble Theater, the comic strip Popeye debuted in, was not a comic strip for kids. Nor was Popeye intended for kids. He swore (or comix-swore) and punched people with little to no provocation. I remember a book about the history of Popeye which showed a strip of Popeye punching a horse (to its death) for being too slow. So anyhoo, E.C. Segar gets an emergency telegram that kids love Popeye. This is unexpected and Popeye's rougher edges are softened (He only hits when provoked).

So given that nobody expected a grizzled sailor like Popeye to be popular with the yung'uns, I would suspect that Popeye was the birth of that archetype.

Regarding kiddie show hosts as sea captains, my suspicion is the origin is partially due to many of these hosts showing Popeye cartoons (like this dude). Perhaps, I'll get a copy of this book and look into the matter (after I obtain that history of Popeye book from my childhood that I foolishly ditched at some point in my life).

Combustible is under the misimpression that Captain Spaulding is a gruff-but-loveable sea captain. He is, of course, as the song lyrics on the left say, an African explorer.

UPDATE: Conbustible Boy got an email suggesting that the captain from the Katzenjammer Kids is a precursor. I dunno. He doesn't seem the archetype. Of course, I'm only familiar with the Kids Katzenjammer through MAD parodies and the Warner Brothers Christmas cartoon, so what do I know?
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:16 PM

I'm on this email list and 9/11 is being discussed. The usual oil pipeline myth was stated and a couple of people pointed out that such a pipeline is idiotic (Afghanistan is unstable and Russia won't want to give up control of such anything). I posted this article about how Unocal didn't want the pipeline. Two folk replied with essentially "See what an idiot Bush is. He's making a pipeline no one wants."

When one of those two also said that the WTC and the Pentagon were justifiable targets, I had to stop participating in the discussion before I flew a plane for the purpose of punching somebody. Grr! Hulk Smash Puny Liberal!

Thinking about this is annnoying the hell out of me. I'm going to talk about Popeye now.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:26 PM

A Palestinian stabs his mother because he thought she was dating a Jewish man. Story here.

You know, this is the sort of thing that gets counted as a Palestinian casualty when people make the "Palestinian casualties are greater than Israeli casualties" argument.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:46 AM

A map showing the distribution between calling carbonated beverages sodas or calling them pops. All I learned was that there's a huge swatch of the country in the west that could give a rat's ass. I notice that "two cents plain" isn't listed. Anti-Semites.

The other term listed is "coke". I had a friend who kept ruining takes of a TV show he was in by referring to sodas as cokes. Coca-Cola doesn't want coke to be a generic term; look what happen to Duncan when yo-yos were considered part of the language.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:28 AM

To calrify my post below, obviously Hal Douglas is the guy in the Comedian trailer. I'm not denying that. I'm just not convinced that Hal Douglas is the in-the-world guy.

I wonder if, of LaFontaine and Douglas, one is the guy you get when the other is booked. Like how if Paul Lynde was booked, you'd get Charles Nelson Reilly.

Speaking of Paul Lynde and Charles Nelson Reilly, I used to convince people that casting directors would have Charles Nelson Reilly's number scribbled on Paul Lynde's Rolodex card because they only called Reilly when Lynde was unavailable.

Almost as good as my tall tale that Edgar Bergen was blackballed from TV for doing the "You should talk; you have your hand in my ass" joke.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 2:45 PM

So Roger Ebert identifies the guy in the Comedian trailer (scroll down) as Hal Douglas who Miramax identifies as "perhaps the most recognizable trailer voice in the business."

So who the hell is the "in a world" guy? This site has voice samples of both. It also has numerous samples of LaFontaine's other voiceover work.

This is why you have to trademark cool phrases you come up with.

UPDATE: The file of Hal Douglas doesn't work on the page I gave. So try the file on this one.

I swear I can't tell the difference between the two. I wonder if they have some sort of animosity towards each other; I imagine there's enough work for the both of them.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 9:58 PM

Eric Mulkowsky and Max Power and others rightfully compliment this funny trailer for Comedian.

Here's an article about Don La Fontaine, the real-life "in-a-world" guy. It's a shame he didn't think to trademark "in a world" like Michael Buffer trademarked "Let's get ready to rumble".
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 4:32 PM

Neilsen Hayden quotes this passage from a New York Times Book Review review of 9/11 books:

Harlan Ellison, the science-fiction novelist, [...]tells a story in September 11: West Coast Writers Approach Ground Zero(Hawthorne, paper, $16.95) of being invited to appear on the TV show ''Politically Incorrect'' just weeks after the attacks. Ellison accepts, eager to promote his name, but then realizes shortly before the taping that he has nothing to say, and begs off. The producers go ape, but Ellison stands fast. There is such a thing as heroic modesty.

This is similar to why I've been yapping about Buzz Aldrin punching people rather than today's anniversary. What the hell do I know or can I say that hasn't been said better by others.

I will recommend the CBS 9/11 documentary tonight and the HBO "In Memorium". How one can walk away from either and say "Americans should examine what they did to deserve that" is a mystery to me.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 2:02 PM

The website of Bart Sibrel, the guy Aldrin punched. He sells a video with "smoking-gun" footage.This site saves you money by debunking him and his dopey footage.

Meanwhile it turns out the page my pal Monkey Boy sent me (discussed here) was by Sibrel. This page specifically debunks that page.

As you might guess, Bart Sibrel has a history of bothering people involved with the Apollo mission as this guy says (pre-Aldrin-decking).
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:33 AM

BUZZ ALDRIN DECKING A GUY UPDATE: Aldrin releases a statement.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:04 PM

A good article debunking astrology. Included amongst arguments I had heard before (astrology did not discover the existence of Uranus, Neptune and Pluto; because of precission of the equinoxes, your star sign is actually the one before), is a new one to me: Why is your star sign based on your birthday and not on your conception day? Shouldn't the stars have had influence on you while you were in the womb?
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:41 PM

Update on a post months ago about whether the lunar landing was faked: Buzz Aldrin punched a lunar landing "skeptic".

Now the next step is to get some astronomers to beat the crap out of some astrologers.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 9:06 PM

Do ya like kitschy pictures of Jesus? Sure, we all do! This site has more than one man can take of Jesus pictures and more every week! (Thanks again to Eric Mulkowsky.) Here's puppet Jesus.

A funny comedian and cartoonist by the name of Joey Waldon (unfortunately no website) once said he was going to illustrate his joke: "As embarassing as the crown of thorns were, I think a balloon hat would have been more humiliating."
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 9:02 PM

Aaron Sorkin admits that the last-minute, post-9/11 season premiere episode of West Wing last year wasn't very good.

Josh Marshall said the funniest thing about that episode:

I'm really glad The West Wing has all those ex-Clintonites on hand as consultants to give the show that seamless verisimilitude. Otherwise I never would have known that, in cases of a terrorist incursion into the White House, policy dictates that the Chief of Staff is in charge of interrogating the suspect.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:33 AM

A happy Rosh Hashanah, L'shanah Tovah, and happy new year to my Jewish readers. It is the Jewish year 5763. I keep writing "The Year of the Snake" on my checks.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:56 PM

Matt Welch, editor of the LA Examiner, debunks the myth of the stifling of dissent since 9/11.

On a similar note, if one more person does a joke of the structure of "If we don't do X, then the terrorists have won", then the terrorists really have won. Yes, the phrase grew old. But so has the mockery. Which is why I now mock the mockery.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:38 PM

While discussing a Larry King appearance with Sylvia Browne, James Randi gives an example of why psychics are scum of the earth:

Larry asked me, as I expected, what's the harm in what Sylvia does? Let me give you an example, sent to me by a viewer. Many months ago, on another show that featured Sylvia as a guest, the grandmother of a local missing child was also on the program. The child was a six-year-old named Opal Jo Jennings, from north Texas. She had been in the news a lot because of her disappearance. On national TV, Sylvia said that the child was still alive but had been sold into white slavery and was currently in Japan! She even gave a city name. But there is no city in Japan by that name. Currently, there is a man sitting in prison in Texas who has confessed to Opal Jo's abduction. "What's the harm?" How about false hope? To tell such a far-out and freaky tale just for TV ratings....?

Meanwhile that appearance took place on September 3, 2001. It's a shame she or other psychics didn't predict a big event on the way.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:29 PM

A few days back, an LA Times columnist wrote this article about the mess o' TV shows with psychics. Although he does, in the best traditions of media both-sides-ing, say "believers in psychics cling passionately to that view, and I wouldn't expect or wish to shake their faith even if I could" (Gosh, I thought it was skeptics who were close-minded!), he illustrates how Wesley Snipes was fooled by James Van Praagh using the "Who's Jimmy" method (You ask "Who's Jimmy" More likely than not, they know a guy named James. Otherwise you move quickly along.)

So anyhoo, James Randi wrote this letter to the editor about why he can't get a show on the air.

Inevitably, the marketing reps have insisted that for them to support such a project, "at least 20% of it must be shown to be true." This is simply not so, and the foundation has refused to promote or support that fiction.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:34 AM

Eric Mulkowsky (who you can, on occassion, see on Max Power's site) gave me a link to a NY Times article about a show which shows failed pilots. Schedule info can be found here. (Warning: Link contains really obnoxious music.) I wanna check out next week's showing of Next!, Bob Odenkirk's sketch show.

The article discusses about why the shows don't get picked up. It only strengthens my argument that whether or not The Simpsons is as good as it used to be, it's not very probable that anything as good is going to replace it.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:17 PM

Using Amazon's free shipping, books I ordered on Labor day arrived this morning despite their warnings that the free shipping takes longer. It may be that the Nevada shipping place which got the package to me quickly may be where they ship it from across country. I dunno.

In addition to the book about the Six Days War eveyone's taking about, I bought both the trade paperback and the audiobook of The Kid Stays in the Picture. You know what that means...more Robert Evans impressions! Wooh!
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:11 PM

As we've been talking about both stand-up comedy and Jerry's telethon, I'm reminded of comedian Andy Kindler's goofing on Comic Relief thanking comics for doing the show for free

Yes, thank you for sacrificing your $200 show at KooKoo's Comedy Shack to appear on television in front of an audience of millions.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:02 PM

I discovered a nifty blog by Jay Zilber which I'll permalink to when I get around to it. (Anyone who has a bouncing picture of Bouncing Boy in his blog can't be all bad.)

Here, he talks some more about the Jackie Mason brouhaha. He quotes from some written material by the Palestinian guy, notes that the guy is actually American-born, and gives the scoop that the guy was scheduled to feature that weekend when Mason wasn't performing but went ahead and cancelled that (either in protest or to get more sympathy).

Zilber further asks

Now, I don't know the business from the inside -- so it's entirely possible that Zanies actually does have a clause in their contracts that forbids their acts from doing their own promotion of a specific Zanies appearance

I have to admit that this claim that opening acts are forbidden from promoting themselves sort of doesn't pass the smell test. Comedy clubs don't exactly get packed. It seems to me an opening act who brings people to a show through publicity would be a dream to a club as you get someone who fills seats at opener prices (with the exception of, say, opener appears on radio station A when club has a deal with radio station B). Granted this doesn't apply to Jackie Mason who very well may have stipulations that he is the star of the show and the opener shouldn't try to overshadow him.

Mark Evanier (who introduced me to this nifty site) pipes up to say that Jackie Mason has a history of playing the victim whenever he has a career setback and should know how the game is played.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:54 PM

Mark Evanier reports that the Triumph VMA segment will be broadcast tonight. It will also be rerun on Comedy Central tomorrow and on NBC around 3:30ish next week.

UPDATE:Conan O'Brien confirms on last night's show that they'll be running Triumph tonight.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:45 AM

An article by a wheelchaired gentleman explaining why much of the handicapped community objects to the Jerry Lewis telethon. He also wonders if a recent Larry King interview where his daughter said she felt sad about his condition perhaps taught Jerry what it feels like to be pitied.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:21 PM

So while looking for this transcript of Larry King's interview with Jerry Lewis, I learn that Larry King is doing his old USA Today column on the web, complete with ellipsis (the "..."'s). Click here and click on "King's Things". Potential highlights:

I know this is controversial in these politically-correct times but I like pudding...Here it is, a Larry King exclusive: the new Harry Potter movie will make a lot of money...How come the kids don't play Space Invaders anymore?...I just read Crime & Punishment by Dosteovosky. It's a must-read!...I think Peter Scolari has the potential to be the new William Powell...

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:12 PM

Has Jerry Lewis when talking about how long he's done the telethon always divided it into "52 years, 37 coast-to-coast" and I'm just now noticing it?

Speaking of telethons, my telethon shtick on Saturday went decentlyish. My concern is now whether Jerry will outlive my doing the one-man show concept.

I'm leaning towards a one-man show which incorporates all my dopey interesting-for-five-minutes one-man show concepts. Do it as an alleged career-retrospective or a vote-for-the-one-you like-best concept or even a keep-starting-over-because-I-realize-the-show's-no-good. Or something.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 5:57 PM

I meant to do this a while back but here's an article where stars of yesteryear complain that they can't get booked on late-night talk shows. Mark Evanier notes that most of the people quoted in the article weren't getting booked on Carson either (the last booking was '86 for Charles Nelson Reilly).

I will further add that Evanier gets Carson booking info from Johnny Carson's website which is referred to in the original article. Which shows either the writer's inability to use info easily available on the web or his willingness to ignore inconvenient information.

Basically this is the business we've chosen. Don Rickles can fill a room in Vegas and Yaakov Smirnoff can't. Consequently Rickles gets talk show bookings and Smirnoff doesn't. (I saw Yaakov Smirnoff do some stand-up on the Telethon. It took him less than 90 seconds to say "What a country." I wouldn't book him in a coffeehouse show, much less a talk show (except for novelty value).)

Here's a great quote from the article:

Tiny Tim, whose greatest triumph was his 1969 wedding on "Tonight," spent the last years of his life trying to get rebooked. He died in 1996, without returning.

I think he was having trouble getting booked in 1971. That ain't the fault of a youth-obsessed advertising culture.

Fans of my blog will recall an article I wrote about Jay and Dave getting heat for not doing enough for up-and-coming performers. They get it from both ends.

UPDATE: Mark Evanier agrees with me that Yaakov Smirnoff stinks. In that same article, "Billionaire Bill" Sherman gets a plug. Mazel tov.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:26 PM

The official Triumph the Insult Comic Dog web site! Not much there now but there's another statement re VMAs.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:43 PM

Speaking of the VMAs, here's more from Triumph the Insult Comic Dog about them. And an article from May by Kurt Loder about Triumph
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:38 PM

Jim Treacher reports that everything jerky Eminem did at the VMAs has been cut in the five thousand repeats of the VMAs MTV broadcasts.

I'm wondering why MTV doesn't go ahead and pre-record (and censor) like they do with the movie awards. Also why bother cutting that stuff out when it'll be part of the various crazy behind-the-scenes what-we-can't-show-you clip shows they'll run next year and every year after.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:23 PM

More on the Palestinian who would have opened for Jackie Mason: Here's some writing from his web-site where he blames terrorism on Israel. Stefan Sharkansky has more details on this clown here.
UPDATE: Instapundit wants to know why Big Media can't use Google and find out this stuff itself.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:45 AM

Don't forget. Big show tomorrow. (I have been remiss in mentioning a meager five dollar cover.)
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:44 AM

My brother sent the link to a 1999 article about Melrose Larry Green (one year after the Jackie Mason stint). Since it's from '99, it doens't mention his 2001 mayoral run (with 851 votes). I have the pamphlet from that.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:04 PM

MTV reports on Eminem attacking Moby and Triumph the Insult Comic Dog (with a response by Triumph) here. Their website is so crappy that they mention Moby's website and his writing about the event but don't link to it. Fortunately "Jolly Jim" Treacher comes through with a gajillion entries on the VMA awards (including wondering if Eminem has ever feuded with someone who might actually kick his ass).
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 2:51 PM

Michael Jackson did not get an "Artist of the Millenium" award or any other award from MTV. Details here.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:34 AM

This has been on other blogs but my father hasn't seen it so here we are: Sony announced that it will stop making Betamax video tape recorders. In other news, RCA is going to discontinue its videodisc department.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:22 AM

"Marvelous Max" Power, in response to Jackie Mason cancelling an opening act, wants me to tell about my "experience as a Jewish comic who got bumped from opening for Jackie Mason". I'm sure whatever story Max is thinking of is more interesting than what happened but here we go.

I was scheduled to open in Houston for Ron "Tater Salad" White (he's the one in the cowboy hat). The week before, I check the club's web site and find Jackie Mason is headlining. At the time, Jackie Mason was bringing his own opener, Melrose Larry Green (who was as awful as you'd suspect. Howard Stern once hypothesized that the reason Mason used Green was to show folks that comedy wasn't as easy as it looks). I call the club to ask if I was working that week. They apologized for not informing me and said that White and I were working the late Friday and Saturday shows. They at least paid me for the whole week which some clubs don't do with last minute cancellations. On Saturday, the manager talked about Green being unacceptable and making Jackie use me for an opener on Sunday but that didn't pan out. Jackie autographed my copy of his autobiography to "My Pal Daniel" and said "Look at that. I made you my pal."
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 2:36 PM

Sing along with Jerry this telethon.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:06 PM

Yesterday, we talked about whether running the hot new show against an established favorite ever worked. My brother reminded me that Survivor beat Friends in the 2000-2001 season. If our only example of the technique is two years ago, then perhaps James L Brooks's point that it had a history of never working is still relevant.

This site has summary Nielsen ratings for each year. It shows that Cosby was tied for #1 in 1989-90 with the Simpsons at #28. After the move, the Cos got pushed to #5 and the Simpsons were off the top 30.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:49 PM

Reminder to LA-area readers: Big show with me in it on August 31st. C'mon! Would it kill ya?
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:50 PM

Yesterday, I bought the Simpsons 2nd Season DVD set. During the second season, you'll recall that the Simpsons were put up against the Cosby Show. All recollect that the Cosby Show was the #1 show at the time which doesn't match my memories (although that same year, ABC was airing The Flash so I wasn't going to watch Cosby anyway). The Simpsons ratings suffered.

James L. Brooks noted that the move was a typical network move: Take a hot new show and move it to a timeslot against an established favorite. He said that trick nevers works, citing Miamai Vice vs Dallas and Mork & Mindy against All in the Family. I'm wondering if there exists a counter-example of a time that did work. I honestly can't think of one.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:07 AM

Group Captain Lionel Mandrake (I presume y'all are hip enough to know the reference) is checking out our site. I'd give him a Stan Lee-esque nickname but it just doesn't see, ya know, dignified.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 7:16 AM

Speaking of arguing with Max Power, you may recall he and I sparring over Andrew Sullivan complaining of the hypocrisy that the movie Tadpole is not raising an anti-pedophilia stink. (If you don't, see here and here.) One item of contention was whether Tadpole was more prominent than Max's counter-example of L.I.E., a movie with gay pedophilia. I would like to point out that Tadpole has made more money in five weeks than L.I.E. did in its entire 25-week release. Not to mention the fact that a July release usually shows more confidence in the prospects of a movie than a September release does.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:43 AM

I recently saw All Through the Night, a great example of the genre of guy finds Nazi saboteurs in America. This case it's Humphrey Bogart as a Brooklyn gangster who cares nothing about the war. He stumbles upon the fifth columnists while investigating a neighborhood baker's murder. He convinces a rival gang to help stop the Nazis' plot that day to blow up a battle ship. It ends with a great fight scene of Runyonesque characters against Nazis while a captured lady explains to the ringleader that it's the people he has such contempt for who are destroying his nest of vipers. All learn that the war's important and everyone needs to do their part.

I still want to know why the Universal monsters were such slackers.

UPDATE: This is what I'm talking about when I say I wanna see the Universal monsters fight Nazis. They could have fought the Primate Platoon.

UPDATE 2: The Creature Commandos are actually not, to my disappointment, the classic monsters fighting Nazis. They are people who were essentially turned into monsters that look like the classic monsters. Here's their history (scroll down).
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:34 AM

Speaking of my old grammar class, one of the things I used to do during the can-may lesson was come up with counter-examples where the other verb helper was true. For example "John [BLANK] have some ice cream?" had the correct answer of "may." I would suggest that perhaps John had been sick and unable to eat ice cream in which case "can" is the right answer.

A great counter-example to conventional wisdom (I believe cited by Isaac Asimov) is a guest asking "Can I have some milk?" The pedant would say "may" is correct. But the person is a guest; of course, he may have some milk. He's asking about the milk's availability so "can" is right.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:26 AM

Max Power chides my chiding of his who/whom mistake. Mea culpa. I can't argue with being called a pedant when pedantry was my exact intention.

Max cites an article by Steven Pinker which is itself an excerpt from a great book called The Language Instinct which I once recommended (and as you can see, intended to discuss this article at some point).

Basically, Pinker's thesis is that most of the perscriptive rules of English are nonesense:

Latin was considered the language of enlightenment and learning and it was offered as an ideal of precision and logic to which English should aspire. The period also saw unprecedented social mobility, and anyone who wanted to distinguish himself as cultivated had to master the best version of English. These trends created a demand for handbooks and style manuals, which were soon shaped by market forces: the manuals tried to outdo one another by including greater numbers of increasingly fastidious rules that no refined person could afford to ignore. Most of the hobgoblins of contemporary prescriptive grammar (don't split infinitives, don't end a sentence with a preposition) can be traced back to these 18th Century fads.
[...]But once introduced, a prescriptive rule is very hard to eradicate, no matter how ridiculous. Inside the educational and writing establishments, the rules survive by the same dynamic that perpetuates ritual genital mutilations and college fraternity hazing: I had to go through it and am none the worse, so why should you have it any easier? Anyone daring to overturn a rule by example must always worry that readers will think he or she is ignorant of the rule, rather than challenging it.

The old double negatives rule is a perfect example:

At this point, defenders of the standard are likely to pull out the notorious double negative, as in [I can't get no satisfaction.] Logically speaking, the two negatives cancel each other out, they teach; [...] But this reasoning is not satisfactory. Hundreds of languages require their speakers to use a negative element in the context of a negated verb. The so-called "double negative," far from being a corruption, was the norm in Chaucer's Middle English, and negation in standard French, as in [Je ne sais pas] where [ne] and [pas] are both negative, is a familiar contemporary example. Come to think of it, standard English is really no different. What do [any], [even], and [at all] mean in the following sentences? I didn't buy any lottery tickets. I didn't eat even a single french fry. I didn't eat fried food at all today. Clearly, not much: you can't use them alone, as the following strange sentences show: I bought any lottery tickets. I ate even a single french fry. I ate fried food at all today. What these words are doing is exactly what [no] is doing in nonstandard American English, such as in the equivalent [I didn't buy no lottery tickets] -- agreeing with the negated verb. The slim difference is that nonstandard English co-opted the word [no] as the agreement element, whereas Standard English co-opted the word [any].

This page valiantly fights for the singular their. One sub-rule is so counter-intuitive that the chapter about it required a week of study in my grammar class: the rule that says the their in the sentence "Everyone returned to their seats" should be a his. In the site's Pinker excerpt, he has the perfect counter-example:

Mary saw everyone before John noticed them.

I'll also just quickly note that before the Ebonics controversy, Pinker writes offhandedly in the article

Black English Vernacular is uncontroversially a language with its own systematic grammar.

# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:04 PM

One of the greatest pieces of meta-comedy was Andy Kaufman's performance at the Catch a Rising Star's 10th Anniversary show. Kaufman does his old act. A heckler (actually Bob Zmuda) starts reciting the act along with him. He attacks Andy for having nothing new, calls his controversial stuff broing and obviously a put-on, and says that Andy Kaufman will have no career once Taxi is cancelled.

He then says [and for some reason Zmuda left this out of his book], "You don't have anything new to do. As a matter of fact, that's why he hired me tonight to come here." The planted heckler is now making fun of Kaufman for planting a heckler. He points out the microphone he has. Andy starts screaming that Zmuda has f&*$ed up the act. Then a very obvious edit occurs and Kaufman does his Elvis impersonation.

One of the most brilliant pieces of comedy about comedy. (Tied with Lenny Bruce's "The Palladium" on this CD.)
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:49 PM

Mark Evanier reports that this Saturday at 3:00 AM's "classic" episode of SNL is the one where Andy Kaufman was voted off of Saturday Night Live.

If your only knowledge of Kaufman is that horrendous movie they made a few years back, you owe it to yourself to check out Lost in the Funhouse, Bill Zehme's great, well-researched biography of Andy Kaufman. Bob Zmuda (Andy's partner in crime) autobio is to a lesser-extent also good.

One of the dopier decisions made in that film was to move his Carnegie Hall concert from 1979 to around his death in 1984. First, this didn't make sense logically as the movie had established that Kaufman was hated near his death, yet he's able to fill Carnegie Hall.

Second, keeping the chronological order correct makes for a better story: A comedian whose act consists of conning the audience becomes very popular, so popular that he fulfills his dream of doing a show at Carnegie Hall. If you're so popular that everyone knows that what you're doing is a con, what do you do for an encore?
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:30 PM

Combustible Boy aka the Blazing Blogger is now part of the Sound and the Fury, "Marvelous Max" Power's blog. Archvillains beware!

In the announcement, Max, who's always goofing on my typos, uses "who" instead of the correct "whom." He should use the he/him method.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:22 PM

Speaking of Captain Marvel, here's the Captain Marvel from 1966. When he cried out "Split!", his body would divide into several parts and fly into different directions.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:20 PM

Reader Scott Helgeson has a solution to my Combustible Boy nickname problem:

Granted, a Stan Lee-esque nickname wouldn't work for him, but why not a superhero name addendum? You know, like "The Man of Steel", "The Dark Knight Detective", "The Wacky Wall-Walker". Ok, maybe not that last one, but something along those lines.

An interesting sidenote: DC superheros tend to have majestic nicknames like "The Man of Steel" whereas Marvel superheros tend to have more insulting ones like Webhead, Goldilocks, and Shellhead. Probably part of early Marvel's humanizing the heros. The intermediary is the original Captain Marvel who was both the World's Mightiest Mortal and the Big Red Cheese (although that was only used by Dr Sivana).

Anyhoo, I hereby dub Combustible Boy the Blazing Blogger.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 12:06 AM

A debunking of the Hearst "You furnish the pictures. I'll furnish the war" telegram.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 3:25 PM

Circumstantial evidence indicates that Instapundit (over 300 visitors yesterday and counting!) learned of me through Combustible Boy (The post linking to me is just above one linking to Combustible Boy). Which reminded that I've been a damn ingrate who owes him a plug and a permalink. Here he shows how Afghanistan is distancing itself from the Taliban in a popular Afghani game show.

I have no Stan Lee-esque nickname for Combustible Boy because his nom de plume is already too comic bookish to mess with.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 1:57 PM

Mark Evanier discusses the end of an era: the era of people falsely claiming to be members of "Our Gang". He lists reasons why some may genuinely think they were in Our Gang, including that they were members of knock-off troupes and that their parents fell for a con.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 6:18 PM

In all the excitement of being linked to by Instapundit, I forgot about a longtime policy here. So I dub Instapundit "Glamorous Glen" Reynolds!
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 2:55 PM

A columnist wonders why some TV stars make it to movie-stardom and others don't. This man is clearly unfamiliar with the Ted Danson factor.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:48 AM

He won't get as many TV specials or news segments as Elvis but today is the 25th anniversary of Groucho Marx's death. This Memphis article discusses Groucho. Mark Evanier complains that there were no network specials for Groucho's death when he died. He also discusses the horrendous show Groucho did at the Dorothy Chandler Pavillion. In part two of the story, Evanier tells of meeting Groucho a few times.
UPDATE: Another guy complaining about the lack of Groucho coverage.

UPDATE 2: Hello, Instapundit-readers (Hey, I know why my counter's suddenly spinning rapidly). If you're interested, here I complain about other Marx Brothers' history ignored. And, what the hell, as long as you're here, let me point you to a post that Max Powers liked a lot.

UPDATE 3: I am also tempted to plug a gig of mine tonight or a gig I have on August 31st, but that would just be crude exploitation.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 11:00 PM

I stumbled on a nifty find while shopping at a neighborhood used-book store shop: Little Wizard Stories of Oz, the one L. Frank Baum Oz book that my family didn't have when I was a child.

The Oz books were one of the first examples of the franchise concept. Baum wrote The Wonderful Wizard of Oz as an American fairy tale. The book became so popular that he wrote a dozen sequels. He even moved Uncle Henry and Auntie Em to Oz, probably so he didn't have to deal with the problem of "OK, how do we get Dorothy to Oz this time?" (This may or may not have been the same book which revealed that, yes, Toto could talk when he came to Oz; he just chose not to.) When Baum died, the publishing company brought in successors. The books were delightful or so I recollect them being when I was seven.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:52 PM

An interesting statistic in this New York Times magazine article: during the 1987-1993 Palestinian uprising, around 1000 Palestinians suspected as collaborators were murdered by Palestinians. This is nearly the same as the number of Palestinians that were killed by Israeli forces during the same time period. (Courtesy of Charles Johnson).
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 8:07 PM

An LA Times article about the Dodgers losing money. Some of the things that are causing losses have nothing to do with players' salaries. For example, the Dodgers built a bunch of luxury boxes which they can't sell because 1) with various mergers, there are less large corporations that want boxes and 2) they were finished the same time the Staples Center was completed.

A second point that's buried is this: TV rights for the Dodgers are so valuable that Fox bought the team rather than risk losing those TV rights to ESPN. A non-Fox owner could assumably start a bidding war between Fox and ESPN. Not to mention that since the Dodgers were the cornerstone of the founding of the Fox regional sports network, even if Fox lost the TV rights now, they owe part of the network's existence (and its accompanying revenues) to the Dodgers.

UPDATE: New feature of "Hooray for Captain Spaulding": You can log into any LA Times article with login/password cptspaulding/cptspaulding.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:37 AM

There exists a movie starring Steve McQueen and Bob Newhart and nobody had the decency to tell me?

UPDATE: Said movie is playing on AMC on August 28th at 10:15 PM EST.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:35 AM

I'm sure all of you folks are dying with anticipation about what costume I chose for the spy party. Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. using simply an eyepatch, a two-day beard, and a cigar (or ceegar). The only problem with my costume is that I have to wear glasses to see. Wearing an eyepatch with glasses over it just makes you look like John Ford.
# | |

Posted by Daniel Frank at 10:28 AM

I don't understand the greed of these baseball team owners. Whatver happened to the days when people owned teams for the joy of owning, for the love of the game?

All I know about the potential baseball strike is that my day job of computer programming has a longer history than baseball does of people doing it for the love of doing it rather than for money. And the minute my boss says I should not worry about my salary but program for the love of programming is the minute I quit.

If you don't believe me about players never playing for the love of the game, check out A Clever Base-Ballist, a book about an attempt to start a players' union in 1885. The blurb has a great quote from John Ward, the founder of this union and the Players League, that maybe needs to be remembered:

Baseball is not a Summer snap, but a business in which capital is invested. A player is not a sporting man. He is hired to do certain work, and do it as well as he possibly can.

UPDATE: I stumbled upon a book called Never Just a Game which deals with labor issues in baseball since 1920. Its companion volume Much More Than a Game deals with these issues after 1920.
# | |