One problem with the movie as is that many have pointed out is that there’s nothing in it that we don’t already know. Beyond that, there is a lot of stuff just made up. Not to spoil anything, but the ending is utterly absurd, did not happen, and never in a million years would happen. But we knew Lucy was accused of being a Communist, that CBS balked at Desi starring in the show, and further balked at doing a storyline of Lucy’s pregnancy. And we know that she was cleared of charges, Desi got the job, and the pregnancy storyline stayed in. We also know that Desi was a womanizer, and that would cause a rupture in their marriage. So in a sense there was no suspense other than would Lucy save the day by having the Mertz’s fall off the piano bench.
But like Jon said, Desi created the whole multi-camera form. Let’s see that. How did he come up with it? And why? Most sound stages couldn’t accommodate a large audience. How did Desi solve that? Let’s see bleachers being built. Let’s see how they overcame CBS’ objection to Desi. They performed a vaudeville act, parts of which found its way into the I LOVE LUCY pilot. Recreate that.
But of course this leads to one of my big problems. You can’t recreate Lucy comedy bits because Nicole Kidman can’t move her face and isn’t funny. If a movie could demonstrate how Lucy approached these scenes and what she did to perfect them, that’s a movie I’d want to watch. And that you can’t do with Nicole Kidman. She’s a great actress, but comedy (and now expressions) are not her gift. You need to find a young… well, Lucy. Or even a young Carol Burnett. Forget star power. Lucy is special. You have to find someone who’s special.
I’m also not sure Sorkin would be the one to direct that. There were moments in the movie that suggested he had no idea how a sitcom is filmed. The director (who is maybe the most inept director ever) blocks a scene around a table with the Mertz’s back to the cameras. It takes Lucy and it takes several days for her to figure out they should be facing the camera. Uh… everyone on the set, including the craft services guy, knows you don’t seat people with their backs to the camera on a multi-camera show. How are you going to shoot them? You can’t swing the camera around because then the background would be the audience. Now Sorkin could argue that the general public doesn’t know that, but it’s so egregious and so unnecessary that it looks embarrassing. It’s one thing if a director doesn’t know the procedure of a medical operation; he’s not a doctor. But blocking a sitcom scene? If you’re directing a movie about sitcoms, I’m sorry but that you gotta know.
(Believe me, if that happened in real life, the actors would IMMEDIATELY say that’s wrong. The camera’s only on our backs.) Factual note: I LOVE LUCY used very few outside directors. Marc Daniels and Bill Asher directed most of them. And they both knew what they were doing in spades.
Which brings me to my next point. Authenticity. There’s enough real fascinating stuff that you don’t have to fabricate the ending, or the mistreatment of her writers, or Lucy getting fired from RKO (didn’t happen that way) or that silly subplot where Lucy was trying to get Desi a producer credit because he was a proud Cuban who felt diminished in her shadow. He owned the fucking studio! He hired everyone on the crew. He didn’t need a credit. It was his show. He owned it. If he wanted a credit he could have just given himself one — any credit he chose. Executive God: Desi Arnaz.
And if Lucy wasn’t comfortable with the director he’d be fired. As a freelance director myself, do you think I could force George Segal or Nathan Lane or Joan Plowright to do something they didn’t want to do? That I’d be able to draw a line in the sand over a “hands-covering-eyes-guess-who-this-is” thirty second throwaway bit?
Bottom line: I LOVE LUCY pioneered situation comedy into an art form, and they had to literally invent it. The format, the lighting, the audience, the rehearsal schedule, camera blocking — they invented it. And seventy years later we’re still making shows the exact same way. Wouldn’t you like to see that? We all sort of know that Lucy was a tough broad. We know Desi drank and slept around. They got divorced. Jon is right. To better appreciate the genius and impact of I LOVE LUCY on popular culture and the evolution of television, show us how they did it. His business savvy, her artistic brilliance. This film should be made by someone who says I LOVE COMEDY.
NOTE: The next two days I will be reviewing KING RICHARD and LICORICE PIZZA. How’s that for an exciting teaser?
56 comments :
I haven't seen the movie but I find it sad that there are people out there who should know better but still will come away from this movie thinking they know the history of Lucy and Desi and their classic show. Also, is the plural of Mertz Mertzes? And should possessive of that be Mertzes's?
This post reminded of an episode of All In The Family (S1 EP 08 'Lionel Moves Into The Neighbourhood - on Youtube) where Arhcie sits in a chair beside the TV with his back to the camera and studio audience. Starts at 17:00 mark of the episode. I just went back to check it out because I always remembered that it seemed weird they would have him sit like that. Also didn't George's boss when he worked for the New York Yankees on Sienfeld always sit with his back to the camera when George came into his office?
As well, though I haven't checked this one out I'm pretty sure in the Dick Van Dyke Show episode about Rob's brother being asleep while performing they had Alan Brady sitting with his back to the camera and audience watching the performce in Rob's living room. I think at this point in the run, first or second season, they just wanted 'Alan' to be a voice only for some reason.
And, imho there was a young apprentice director on set named JAY SANDRICH. Truly one of the finest sitcom directors of all time (not merely a camera pusher).
Exactly.
Again, a great piece Ken. Right on the nose. Thank you
You have an interesting perspective, but I think the biopic formula works better by acting out what the audience already knows.
Maybe as an insider, you may like to see some of the technical aspects presented, but would that be as entertaining.?
Fyi Ken, this book is on the same topic and looks pretty good. https://www.harpercollins.com/products/when-women-invented-television-jennifer-keishin-armstrong?variant=32243113197602
In the dialog the term "showrunner" was used. This is an anachronism as that term will not be used for many years. It is also said that they will "tape" on Thursday. Videotape will not be shown until 1955. Years after the time of the action. As we can see from the beautiful remastering of the show, it was shot on 35mm film. And only film. Other shows would pioneer using tape instead of film but many years later and after the development of electronic editing techniques.
I dunno. Sounds of interest only to fellow technical geeks in the biz. What you propose would make an interesting episode/documentary for "Biography" channel or somewhere, but something I would pay money to see in a cinema (or stream)?
Nope.
A cultural impact second only to this building the sitcom as we know it is the hand Lucy had in making Star Trek appear on television. The "Five Year Mission" wouldn't have happened without her. Beyond pop entertainment in front of the tube, many a scientist and inventor is on record as saying watching Star Trek as kids inspired them to pursue the future.
I really hope you didn't like King Richard. I've not seen it, as I have zero interest in seeing a nauseating hagiography about the father of two arrogant, obnoxious Jehovah's Witness fanatics, one of whom victim blamed a college student who was raped.
I'm delighted the movie tanked at the box office. It was made as such obvious Oscar bait material. I wouldn't be surprised if Will Smith wins the Oscar, but it won't be deserved.
How 'bout this - How did Desi figure out how to light a set for three cameras shooting three different set ups (master shot, medium shot, close up) in real time for 35 mm film, and have it all match? Desi had to hire Karl Freund (legendary studio cinematographer) to figure it. Nobody had ever done this before, and a lot of people thought it couldn't be done.
A side note: March 3, 1966 was a date that William Asher presumably remembered poignantly: Both William Frawley and Alice Pearce (the original Gladys Kravitz on "Bewitched," which Asher produced) died on that day.
Uh… everyone on the set, including the craft services guy, knows you don’t seat people with their backs to the camera on a multi-camera show.
I was in a school play in 5th grade, and one thing the music teacher/director drilled in our heads was that you never turn your back to the audience. It's considered rude. I'm surprised someone didn't catch that detail.
In his Book, Desi Arnaz recounts his conversation with Karl Freund about filming I Love Lucy in front of an audience.
Desi knew Freund through Lucy, from her RKO days; they called him "Papa" (as many of his old friends did).
Freund listened to what Desi wanted to do, and proceeded to tell him the many reasons why it couldn't be done.
Desi's answer to Freund:
"Papa, I didn't hire you to tell me it can't be done, I hired you to figure out how to do it!"
Thus challenged, Papa Freund figured out how to do it - and Desi gave him full credit in A Book.
Would've made a helluva scene in the movie ...
As usual,even in 2022, you gotta love the comments pointing out the inaccuracies in your blog, Ken. I have lived my life with my back to the cameras.
The scene where Lucy re-sets the the dining room action, and has the Mertzes face the camera, at 2am couldn't have taken place. Sorkin had Lucy and Desi still living on their ranch in Chatsworth, a very long way from the studio and there was no freeway then from that part of the Valley. No way Lucy, or any one else, would drive all the way there at that hour of the morning.
THREE Friday questions for you; the first two about Larry Gelbart:
1) what were your thoughts on the short-lived "United States"? I've heard of it, but all that exists out there seems to be a short promo (which makes the show look pretty weak).
2) For the finales of Seinfeld, MTM, and Cheers, writers from early in those shows runs helped pen the last episode - even if they'd been out of the loop for many years. But once Larry Gelbart left MASH, he never returned. Any insight into why? Was he invited for the last episode? (I know there's an interview with Gelbart, in which he gives his synopsis for a potential last episode).
3) I was watching the original "Assault on Precinct 13" and one of the patrolmen looked so familiar -- turns out he's long-running Cheers extra Alan Koss, who passed in 2018. Any thoughts on him? He was such a familiar face in the bar for 11 years.
The original "Assault on Precinct 13" is a terrific film.
Here’s a Friday question that’s been on my mind for a while. I’ve taken a few screenwriting classes. It seems to me that most of the big movies that come out nowadays would get a grade of C on their screen plays. Would you agree with that assessment? And what does that say about what’s necessary to make a successful movie? Seems the script is the least important thing.
Ken has it exactly right. Planet Money did an episode about a year ago literally titled "How Desi Invented Television":
https://www.npr.org/2021/01/22/959609533/how-desi-invented-television
So give us that story on the screen!
I haven't seen it yet, but I would have liked to have seen Jenna Elfman cast as Lucy.
@ J.W. Booth
Alan Brady's face was not shown in early Dick Van Dyke Show episodes because it was a carryover from Carl Reiner's "Head Of The Family" pilot in which the TV star Don Sturdy was either seen from the back or hidden by props and set pieces.
Karl Freund was one of several golden-age Hollywood veterans whom Desi and Lucy both brought to television to maximize the look and sound of their show. In her movie days, Lucille famously paid attention to every aspect of filmmaking and the key personnel. Nothing was left to chance. She was fiercely loyal to these people and stayed on the air in part to keep them employed as long as possible (not just because of ego, as many accuse her--in fact, she knew she was competing with herself in reruns and critics usually attacked her with ageist putdowns).
Desi knew he was breaking new ground as a Hispanic on TV, especially since the suits didn't want him to begin with, saying that "the public would not believe he was married to Lucy." There is a great episode of I Love Lucy calls "Lucy Tells the Truth" in which she and Ricky bet they can go a day without lying. Charles Lane appears as a tax man (of course) and grills Ricky on his taxes. This was based on a radio episode of "My Favorite Husband" (almost word-for-word, as were several early episodes) but the difference is that Richard Denning's George character was caught cheating on his tax return. Desi asked for the script to be changed to make Ricky Ricardo honest because he knew he had a responsibility for how his people were going to be seen on TV.
Another person who helped behind the scenes was Jack Benny. When Lucille Ball was still playing Liz Cooper on "My Favorite Husband," she was not connecting as well to the material and she knew it. Jack advised her that she was not playing to the studio audience, not connecting directly to them. He knew that her comedy performance would work perfectly if she drew from their energy and responses (which is, as you often point out Ken, a major reason why three-camera live-audience sitcoms are so effective).
Benny's experienced advice as well as Jess Oppenheimer's changes to show (including making Ball's character more childlike), My Favorite Husband became the template for I Love Lucy, but with due respect to Richard Denning, Desi's comic timing and equivalent strength matched with Ball made all the difference in the world.
To quote Jiminy Cricket on The Mickey Mouse Club, "How do I know these things? I get them from books."
@ J.W. Booth
One of the reasons why Seinfeld had their George Steinbrenner with his back toward the camera was because Larry David voiced him.
@ Unknown
You are correct. Either shows were filmed or presented live. The problem is that kinescopes were used so that the west coast of the United States could see programs taped on the east coast.
I'm afraid the movie you want to see is for a select group of mostly in-the-business people. Your desire to learn about the history of camera blocking and how they got bleachers into the sound stage is way too much "inside baseball." You're in your 70s; you've been doing this for 45 years. To you it's new information about a world you love and know so much about. "Normal" people under 50 will be much more interested in the personal stories of people they only know from their TV screen. People in Salt Lake and Charleston working in sales and health care don't know much about the real Desi and Lucy.
I doubt I'm going to see the movie just based on the poster. The picture of Nicole Kidman looks like some sort of a death mask made of porcelain. She doesn't look anything like a living human being, let alone like Lucille Ball who may have been the most expressive actress ever. Who came up with this stupid casting and stupid script.
I will go see your version though....
There are two other Lucy/Desi biopics that I can think of: one had Frances Fisher as Lucy. I can't recall the other one without checking on IMDB. Give me a minute ...this is the other one https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361856/ . I haven't seen (nor do I want to see) Being the Ricardos, but I seem to recall that Frances Fisher did look like Lucy in the first one.
I just saw a YOUTUBE clip where Lucie Arnaz gave BTR a thumbs up and mentioned Ron Howard's company is doing a pic on the relationship between L & D.
https://deadline.com/2020/08/amy-poehler-directing-documentary-lucille-ball-desi-arnaz-marriage-imagine-documentaries-white-horse-pictures-1203021502/
Was he any relation to the famous Director of Astaire and Rogers films… Marc Sandrich?
Jon's got a great point. But to use a mixed metaphor, isn't that too much "inside radio?"
The process that took Lucy, Desi and Jess from radio's MY FAVORITE HUSBAND to the TV classic we still watch and study looks more like a course you could teach at USC. People in the industry or P1 fans might love it.
But how large would the streaming audience be that want to see it? This film was designed to go beyond a love letter to the founding family of sitcoms. I believe it worked.
The best 'Lucy' material I've seen is the show's own featurette taking people onto the set. A commenter here had posted this YouTube link to it: "Behind the Scenes on I LOVE LUCY" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7yPwWoj4D8
Thanks, kind person. I was really looking forward to BEING THE RICARDOS but did not care for it at all: Ken's post and that great video explain why.
P.S. Also just because I'm so annoyed with Sorkin's movie, there's already great stuff in the comments for today (Fortran and Mike Doran for instance) and I know there will be more and that's why I'm so disappointed with BEING THE RICARDOS.
You can't replace or duplicate original legends very well.
It's been done, but only with other legends.
Nicole Kidman does not look like or is as funny (or great) as Lucy.
George Vreeland Hill
Always felt that Desi's DOP Karl Freund had a lot to do with developing three cameras. One of the classic Hollywood cinematographers. But never any evidence backing that up.
“Hollywood Byline” January 14, 1950
Lucille Ball 50 minute unedited radio interview by Lloyd Sloane (Hollywood Citizen News), Bob Thomas (A.P.), Darr Smith (Los Angeles Daily News) and Frances Moor (Photoplay) — shortly after her TV debut with Desi on the Ed Wynn show
( Wynn show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJADyg8C6vg )
https://otrrlibrary.org/OTRRLib/Library%20Files/H%20Series/Hollywood%20Byline/Hollywood%20Byline%2050-01-14%20(04)%20Guest%20-%20Lucille%20Ball.mp3
*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*
• “Edward” posted the above audio link a few days ago in the comments thread of Mr Levine’s prior Lucy blog post.
The Hollywood Byline program is especially interesting when Lucy discusses her upcoming tour and TV plans
• Leonard Maltin — who got Buster Keaton’s autograph when Buster was filming Beckett’s FILM in NYC — just posted a tribute to Betty White that focused on Keaton’s three appearances on White TV shows in the 1950s.... Everyone is familiar with Harpo’s I LOVE LUCY mirror scene appearance with his former ROOM SERVICE co-star. Does anyone know if Buster — Lucy’s MGM friend in Keaton’s gagman days — was ever approached to do I LOVE LUCY? Buster and Ball only appeared together in a Stan Laurel tribute : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s5D6Rd2-RQ
while director Edward Sedgwick — Keaton’s MGM officemate in the late 1940s — wound up on the Desilu payroll and had his final credits there.
@ KLA 83
I certainly hope that the others did not also think I had the ridiculous notion that the process of transitioning My Favorite Husband from radio to TV should have also been part of Being the Ricardos, nor was it a criticism of the film for leaving it out (how much happen in a fictional week?)
It was intended to add to the discussion (especially about Jack Benny and three-camera sitcoms), help further the significance that Desi brought to entertainment and "inclusion" even today, and to exemplify the value of several excellent books.
To quote a Bob Hope movie title, "Boy, Did I Get a Wrong Number!"
When I went to Universal Studios Orlando several years ago, they had a special "I Love Lucy" exhibit, and I saw a miniaturized replica of Desilu's three-camera set. For the time period, that was ingenious design.
@ Ken...the possessive quote is interesting, especially during this psychotic period of "The New AP." They are rewriting grammar, because they want to, and everyone has decided to follow.
Listen to CNN. The reporters correctly say "Congress's vote." CNN Online, will print "Congress' vote." Crazy.
I'm too lazy right now to find the "rules." But you can refer to a place as "The Roosevelt Mansion" (proper noun?), but would correctly say, "The Roosevelt's mansion was grand" (possessive).
I agree totally with every point you made. As much as I think Nicole Kidmann is a great actress, she didn't have the physical look or expressions as Lucy was famous for. I was very disappointed in the movie. They could have shown so much more depth in my opinion. Leave well enough alone!
Mertzes/Mertzes'
The Roosevelts' mansion was grand
***
Jess Oppenheimer was the prime creator of My Favorite Husband and the premise for I Love Lucy. Madelyn Pugh says in her memoirs that he polished every script and often recast dialogue, so he seems to have maintained creative control and was key to the show's development.
I haven't seen BTR yet but based on notes and comments here it seems to be full of distortions about the show and its stars and creators to a degree that it seems contemptuous of the whole enterprise. I don't get why Sorkin would even be drawn to the project or so intent on falsely portraying the people involved.
But I don't look forward to another depiction of Lucy and Desi's marriage either. He drank and was a womanizer and they fought a lot, who wants to see that? But the evolution of Lucy and Viv's collaboration and friendship could be a great story. Or why not just focus on Lucy herself and the miracle of how she transformed from a capable and amusing actress into a comedy powerhouse?
Luci Arnaz has said in recent interviews that a 10-hour documentary on the history of Desilu is being done right now, and it'll have all the "real life & factual" information about "I Love Lucy" and all their other shows, told in chronological order. While she says she liked the "Being the Ricardos" show, she admits it's a compressed/compromised version of the complicated history of her parents.
Did you ever see the I Love Lucy TV movie "Lucy" from 2003? Rachel York played Lucille Ball. It's been a long time, but I remember it being pretty decent. As to the authenticity, though, I have no idea how accurate it was. There was also a Jackie Gleason TV biopic around that time with Brad Garrett. It was okay.
According to the sound groups I follow, JK Simmons notoriously refuses to be body mic’d, and if there are issues with getting clean audio with a boom or plant mics, tough shit. Friday question - any stories from your experience about actors whose “acting process” collides with the technical need to get the shot and the sound?
Ken and Jon are right - that would be interesting. As a Hollywood outsider, I would love to learn more about the process. I remember watching I Love Lucy as a kid and noticing that when they ate at a table in the living room, they were either facing the camera or sideways to the camera. I thought it was odd, because who sits around the table like that? I then realized they do that for TV. The show was groundbreaking, only the car scenes really dated it.
Ed Wynn, who gave Lucy and Desi their TV start :
“A comic says funny things; a comedian says things funny”
I’d argue that Lucy was more an actor who did and said funny things, and was not as capable doing or saying things funny.
Hmmmmm. "Roosevelt" is the name. The family name. It would be the "Roosevelt's mansion." It's possessive.
Curious about "Mertzes'." Have to research. "Mertz" would be the family name. Thus, it would be "The Mertz's home." It's not the plural, but the possessive. "The Mertzes own a home."
Curious...
Just read Richard Brody's early review of Becoming the Ricardos in the New Yorker (published on 12/9/21). He offers a lot of background on the project and analyzes Sorkin's "narrative framework." Best read while well caffeinated to get through Brody's at times exhausting and impenetrable prose. (Even though it's frustrating to read his long pieces he still covers a lot about film and tv history that can be interesting.) Anyway he concludes with this puzzling bit:
"It would take a writer with a freer sense of drama and a director with an expanded analytical repertory to raise 'Being the Ricardos' to the next level of historical consciousness and subjective turmoil. Yet Sorkin’s movie does enough. In peeling away the myths of pop culture and its lovable celebrities, Sorkin reveals the source of its mighty and lasting power."
I would be interested. But I grew up watching three network TV on a black and white Philco. Back then I Love Lucy aired every weekday. Would someone raised on MTV and Nickelodeon be interested? How about those who've known smartphones and I-Pads all their life? I don't think so.
As you say, in 1951 Lucy and Desi wanted to do a network sitcom out of L.A. they encountered one problem-the TV industry there did not exist. They built one up from scratch on their own dime- and succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. That's the story.
There’s an interview for Time Magazine with Lucy during the first season of the show where she says one of the biggest challenges of doing a weekly television situation comedy is having to memorize a new script every week. She said that during rehearsals she would sometimes say lines from the previous week’s episode.
As you point out, Ken, this was all new. In radio, no one had to memorize a script.
It's normally plural and possessive both, hence "the Mertzes' home"; if it's just one Mertz, then it would be "Mr. Mertz's home."
Hi Ken,
Here's a link to photos from 1957 of Desi, Lucy, writers Bob Schiller & Bob Weiskopf, Bob Carroll and Madelyn Pugh Davis, director Jerry Thorpe and AD Jay Sandrich at work in Desi's office.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RlAklCbs70-DqDzTskosfjanKOR7sEkk/view?usp=sharing
Typically excellent, insightful Levine analysis. It's always tragic when peopole hired to recreate something only wind up showcasing their ignorance -- and arrogance. I've read comments from writers, actors and directors granted the chance to recreate magic who've gone out of their way to avoid any in-depth study of their subjects as they fear that learning the truth about something might possibly color their own warped re-imaginings.
Great article, Ken. Glad that Amy Poehler is working with Imagine on a Desilu docu which, I'm sure, will set the record straight, including the creation of the 3-camera process. I enjoyed the movie enough, though yes, it was largely a missed opportunity.
I would like to see the film about how/why Desi invented the multi-camera format. But I think it would have to be funny and entertaining to get people to see it (you're capable of doing that part). Or make it a true documentary with recreations.
I may be the only liberal I know that really, really disliked The West Wing because it seemed really phony and facile to me. Some years after it began I read an interview with Sorkin where I believe the interviewer congratulated him on how authentic the show was and asked how much time he had spent in DC and how much background research he had done and he bragged he did no research, he just imagined what it was like (kind of insinuating he was such a visionary genius he could 'intuit' the truth).
This made me feel pretty good about my BS detector, but what I'm saying is this man has seemingly been validated over much of his career for the verisimilitude of his output so if much of this movie seems inauthentic by people familiar with the realities of the actual matters at hand I'm not surprised.
Speaking of movies we would like to see about Lucy - the thing that always interested me was the stark difference between I Love Lucy and Lucille Ball's later sitcoms (there were two, right? The Lucy Show and something else)? I means it was the same star, she did the same kind of comedy, I think there were some of the same writers and crew, but the later shows seemed so hollow and kind of depressing (and I'm not even talking about Life with Lucy which was a whole other level of bad). How much is it because Desi was running I Love Lucy and/or him breaking her heart took the wind out of her sails?
Not that I am expecting such a big budget movie to be made on said topic because The Lucy Show/s is still probably making money in syndication.
-bee: you are not the only liberal who...
I couldn't stand watching TWW at the time because it was such a fantasy and jarred so badly with the reality of the day.
wg
Amanda Bynes would have been great in this role.
re Desi inventing the 3-camera system, that is widely repeated but it's probably not true, as is the idea that the rerun didn't exist pre-Lucy (you can find the term in Variety in 1949).
A 16mm Multicam system was developed by NBC's Jerry Fairbanks and used to film “Public Prosecutor,” (1947-48) and “Silver Theater” (1949-50), and others.
The 1950 pilot for "Truth or Consequences" also employed such a system, but when Al Simon joined the production he improved the system by substituting 35mm film
The following year Simon worked on I Love Lucy, where he was responsible for the actual mechanics of filming, while Karl Freund devised the lighting.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NT9NZXeOIc4J:https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-07-29-ca-176-story.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Post a Comment