The downside of the SNL upside

As a follow-up to yesterday’s post on SNL: The changing world is a double-edged sword.  On the one hand, as I pointed out yesterday, the internet has been a boon for SNL.   However, it has not been so kind to cast members post-SNL.  What do I mean by that?

The trajectory was always get on SNL, become a stand-out, leave and become a movie star.  Or, at the very least, become a long-running sitcom or late night star.   Chevy Chase, John Belushi, Dan Ackroyd, Eddie Murphy, Will Ferrell, Mike Myers, Bill Murray, Tina Fey, Chris Farley, David Spade, Jimmy Fallon, Seth Myers, Billy Crystal, Kristin Wiig, Amy Poehler — just to name a bunch.  

But today there are very few comedy movies being made.  There are no major comedy movie stars — not like Eddie Murphy or Jim Carrey or (back when we wrote for him) Tom Hanks.  Especially now, post COVID, studios are making blockbuster comic book movies to lure people back into movie theaters.  Comedies and Romcoms are being made by streamers.  And they don’t have the same impact.  A studio is not going to make $100 million on the opening weekend of a Kate McKinnon movie.  So Kate McKinnon has not become a "star." Tina and Amy have tried that route.  Didn't happen.  Not since BRIDESMAIDS or THE HANGOVER can I think of a blockbuster break-out comedy.  In decades past there was always a GHOSTBUSTERS or SOMETHING ABOUT MARY that would be a box-office sensation.  

Studio “comedies” have become animated pictures.  Those are the new franchises.  And SNL alum may voice them, but it’s not the same.  

Similarly, good luck launching a mainstream big hit sitcom these days.  Everything is niche.  And even there, animation is king for the moment.  Maya Rudolph provides a voice.  

So leaving SNL for untold riches isn’t the endgame anymore.  Not to mention the increased competition among cast members.  The Not-Ready-For-Primetime-Players were seven or eight, not twenty-four.  Now cast members can’t even get on every week.   It’s harder to become Chevy Chase.  

The internet giveth and the internet taketh away.

The ninth or tenth resurgence of SNL

Well, first off, let’s acknowledge it’s phenomenal that any television entertainment series could be on the air for over 46 years.  But Saturday Night Live is not only chugging along, it’s growing in popularity and even  cracked through the zeitgeist — something that is usually reserved for the new and fresh.  

I contend there are a couple of reasons for this.  The first is, there are some very funny moments and talented people both in front and behind the camera.  The cast has grown so large that I couldn’t tell you all of them.  But certainly a stand-out for me is James Austin Johnson (pictured above).  His impersonations are spectacular.  He even looks like Biden. 

Side note:  Is it just me or is Kate McKinnon’s act getting tiresome?  I used to love Kate McKinnon and now I don’t.  

Another plus is that the show is topical at a time when politics is so front-and-center (mostly due to that fat orange fuck).  Being live really helps in that regard.  

But for me, the big reason SNL has had such a resurgence is the internet.  It’s the perfect click bait.  Opening monologues, opening bits, Weekend Update, selected sketches — they each fit nicely into four or five minute videos to be retrieved on demand.  And various websites like Deadline Hollywood post these videos on Saturday night as if they were actual news stories.   In its earlier heydays it never got such coverage.

I keep up with SNL but I can’t remember the last time I actually tuned in at 11:30 Saturday night and watched it “on television.”  I wonder how many SNL fans do the same — scour the internet to pick and choose the bits that might interest them.  NBC has a bigger hit now because people don’t have to watch NBC.  And so goes the future of SNL and network television. 

NIGHT COURT is in recess... for a year

Remember when NBC used to be the home of great comedy?  Comedy made them a lot of money and brought them a boatload of viewers — two things the network could really use today.

This fall not one comedy was on the NBC schedule. None  No room with nine LAW & ORDER series all getting slots. 

What they have been developing comedy-wise also seems derivative.  Their big jewel is a reboot of NIGHT COURT, a very funny series from the ‘80s. The new version stars John Larroquette (from the original) and Melissa Rauch. Why even attempt to bring original ideas to broadcast networks?  ABC reboots ROSEANNE and THE WONDER YEARS.  NBC took a shot with WILL & GRACE.  CBS brought back MURPHY BROWN and now has either spin offs of Chuck Lorre shows or reboots of UK comedies.  Fox doesn’t even pretend to be in the live comedy business. 

They’ll never find the next FRIENDS or CHEERS or SEINFELD that way. 

And even then, networks seem to have little faith in these recycled ideas they’re mounting.  NBC announced Friday that NIGHT COURT would be held for the 2022-2023 season.  And they weren’t even specific that it would premier in the fall.  They believe in it so much they’re saving it for at least a year, maybe more. 

Let’s look at the timeline, shall we?  This version of NIGHT COURT was developed last December, it got a pilot order in May (thus too late for the fall schedule), and was picked up to series in September.   In all likelihood, from idea to airing thirteen episodes (if indeed the order was for 13, it could have been 6), could be well over two years. 

Susan Rovner, Chairman, Entertainment Content, NBCUniversal Television and Streaming (nice title) said “We love NIGHT COURT and believe in it.” 

That may be true, but…

Here’s the reality in show business:  When they truly do believe in something they can’t get it on fast enough.  Movies would sometimes be held for peak periods like summer or Christmas, but television doesn’t sit on a show for a year if they really thought it had potential.   In fact, they do hour episodes, or super-sized episodes, or rush the series to air.  If one expression symbolizes network television it’s “serve it while it’s hot.” 

So NBC doesn’t really don’t believe in NIGHT COURT and will bury it later.  Or, their comedy development is woeful and they don’t have anything to go with it and might not for a year, or they just don’t really believe in comedy at all.    Considering there’s no comedy on their schedule now, which of the three would you suppose is the closest to the truth? 

Please put NIGHT COURT on the air while the people who saw the original are still alive. 
 

Weekend Post

 

I screened DR. STRANGELOVE when I taught a comedy class at USC.  It’s maybe the greatest black comedy ever. If you haven’t seen it, treat yourself. If you have seen it, treat yourself again.

The movie also serves as a great lesson in comedy.  

Things are funnier if you play them straight.

What do I mean by that?

Nobody in this film knew they were in a comedy. The subject matter was somewhat dramatic – the possible destruction of the entire planet, and yet you laughed at how absurd they acted. But they didn’t know they were acting absurd. They were dead serious in everything they said and did. When Peter Sellers as the president of the United States breaks up a tussle between a Russian ambassador and American general and says, “You can't fight in here.  This is the War Room!” there’s no trace of irony in his delivery. Were there, the joke wouldn’t have been funny.

Too often feature comedies and sitcoms these days are very self-conscious. Characters are trying to be funny or are aware they’re being funny. Lines are delivered with irony; with a wink to the audience that they know they’re spoofing pop culture or the form or themselves. “Yeah, I know I’m in a stupid sitcom and you know I’m in a stupid sitcom, but let’s just goof on it and share the laugh together.”

My personal preference is for comedy that’s underplayed rather than overplayed. I’m smart enough. You don’t have to put someone in a chicken suit for me to know I’m watching a comedy. Actors don’t have to be loud or frantic or mocking an entertainment genre for me to laugh.

Ground your comedy in reality. Create interesting characters. Give them strong attitudes. Not just make them glib or hip. Put them in real crisis situations and see how they react. The point is for you the audience to find their behavior funny, not them.

Friday Questions

Sick of Christmas music yet?  Here are this week’s FQ’s.

Ere I Saw Elba starts us off.

How did they set up the stage for HOLLYWOOD SQUARES? I know you weren't on that show, though I share your dream of being a panelist on it. More generally, are game show sets just different compared to sitcoms?

See the above photo, which gives you a view of the set from behind.  

Game shows are lit very differently from sitcoms.  They’re all extremely bright.  And they’re lit for tape, not film, although now everyone records in HD.  

It also seems like today’s game shows are all frenetic light shows with lasers and sound effects.  And some of the sets have become giant.  Gone are the days of witty intelligent panelist just sitting at a dais.  Now they’re STAR WARS video games.  

PolyWogg asks:

Here's a Friday question about retooling shows. When I watched B-Positive last season, one of the few comedies I can stand even though it's not great, I kept wondering what they would do for S02 if renewed? The whole premise of S01 is that an acquaintance from high school donates a kidney to him. End of S01, surgery's done, all is good. But what happens after that? She was living with him, sure, but that could get creepy quick as he inevitably falls for her now in S02. So what's the hook? They've retooled the show, she's running a retirement home with an opp for fantastic guest stars each season, and he's a therapist who comes into consult. It's Cheers in a nursing home! J/K. What retooling of shows for, say, S02 do you think have worked well and others that completely sank?

PARKS & REC springs to mind as one that worked.  Not that they changed the setting or premise, but their mid-course corrections turned it into one of the best sitcoms of its era.  Good going, Mike Schur.  

HAPPY DAYS and THE ODD COUPLE both switched from single-camera to multi-camera and that proved to be wildly beneficial for both.  Kudos, Garry Marshall.

Most shows don’t work when you retool.  If you have to change the premise it’s like making a U-turn in a battleship.  A number of shows tried and failed.  Two MTM spin-offs fall into that category.  Both RHODA and PHYLLIS groped around after their first seasons.

We made a bunch of cast changes on AfterMASH for the second year, along with new spiffy opening titles. We were re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

I think my favorite example is SANFORD ARMS.  Both stars left the show.  As some wag said, “NBC just renewed the set.”  

As for B-POSITIVE, you’re right, once he had his surgery and things were fine there goes your premise.  They had to re-develop it for season two.   There was a time networks wouldn’t pick up shows that only had a finite number of episodes.  But all bets are off today as networks scramble to find anything that will attract viewers right this minute.  They'll worry about season two if there's a season two.

I’ve talked about this before because it’s a very common problem on streamers and cable.  Great first seasons that have natural endings, and then what?  Usually, the “then what” is TV’s version of feeling around in a dark closet.

Houston Mitchell (one of my favorite writers) wonders:

I recently watched an episode of Matlock, where Andy Griffith and Don Knotts recreated a Judo scene from The Andy Griffith Show. There's a video on Youtube that shows them side-by-side and it's an exact recreation, which seems fine since they both involved Griffith and Knotts. I have seen other shows do an almost exact recreation of a scent from classic sitcoms of the past, and when asked about it the creators pass it off as a tribute, which may be true. My long-winded question: Does the original writer of the scene get any money for that if they are still alive?

I wish, but no.  I think if you look at a lot of so-called “classic” bits on sitcoms they were derived from something else.  The great candy conveyor belt scene in I LOVE LUCY — a direct lift from Charlie Chaplin’s MODERN TIMES.  

If anyone deserves the money it’s Chaplin, Stan Laurel, Harold Lloyd, and Buster Keaton.  

And finally, from Mike Bloodworth:

Do you think it's just the tiniest bit elitist that so many actors, directors and producers are now making shows for streaming services instead of the networks? Or am I just a dinosaur who doesn't realize that broadcast TV is dead?

I hate to say it but I think the latter.  Streaming is the future.  One just has to look at this year’s Emmycast to see that the exciting, innovative, original shows of today are on streaming platforms.  Networks are filling their schedules with franchises.  How many NCIS’s and LAW & ORDERS do we need?  

Like I said, the future is in streaming.

What’s your Friday Question? 

EP250: For Those Who Love Lucy

Ken does a deep dive into the history and making of the most successful sitcom in history, I LOVE LUCY. Bet you’ll learn things you didn’t know.

Note: I accidentally mis-identify two names.  See if you can spot them.  

More podcasts at WAVE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/artist/wave-podcast-network/1437831426

Listen to the Hollywood & Levine podcast!

No Time to Die -- my review

It’s hard to review this film without spoiling important elements and I don’t want to do that.  So very simply — there are some good sequences and the movie is too long.  The tone is consistent with the Daniel Craig Bond series.  And the action scenes come off like video games.  There. That’s my review.  Oh, and Daniel, it wouldn’t kill you to smile maybe once in almost three hours.  

Over the last few Bond films they’ve made a point to further his personal storyline along.  And that adds depth to the character.  As a writer, I’m normally all for that.

But…

Am I the only one who doesn’t want to see things change and him change?   One of the reasons my favorite Bond movies remain the Sean Connerys is that James Bond is just who he is.  He’s suave, he’s witty, he knows thirty languages, he can pilot planes, he’s an expert skiier/skindiver/driver.   And he takes on a super villain with secret lairs, a private army all in matching jumpsuits (how did he recruit them and how did no one see these secret lairs being built?), a Herculean henchman, and a plot to take over the world.   One guy against all that, and he still destroys the villain and his empire and has time to get laid at least twice a movie.  That's enough.  And it didn't take 2 hours and 43 minutes. 

Yeah, it’s a formula but I like the formula.  As Hitchcock says, “the best movies have the best villains.”  Just give 007 a worthy fun opponent and blast the James Bond theme.  Why delve into his personal life when a new Bond arrives every generation or so?  

Here’s what the producers need to understand: Anyone can create an action hero and start a franchise.  They can use the same CGI effects and generate eye popping (but fake) action sequences.  They can film around the world.  They can introduce their own super villain with his own world domination plot.  

But it’s not James Bond.  The one thing the Bond franchise has to do is protect James Bond.  Change him too much and it’s no longer James Bond.  It’s just an action hero.  And there’s nothing special about a new action hero.  You’ve squandered sixty years of nurturing a franchise.  

You might claim, “Well, the Sean Connery James Bond was from a different era.  We need to modernize him.”  

Why?

Is it anachronistic for someone to be suave, look good in a tux, be attractive to women (James Bond is hardly Pepe LePew — I doubt he’d be in trouble with #MeToo), be British, and have enough stored knowledge to beat Ken Jennings at JEOPARDY?  

Anyway, that’s my fear for the future of James Bond based on what I saw in NO TIME TO DIE.  So I walked out of it depressed.  That’s never happened before.  A few times I’ve walked out mad at how stupid certain installments were (I’m looking at you MOONRAKER) but never depressed.  Usually I’m exhilarated.  It was a fun ride and at the end I was reassured that "James Bond would be back"for another.  NO TIME TO DIE was many things — many good things — but it sure wasn’t a fun ride.  And did I mention it’s too friggin’ long?  

What did y'all think?  (Note: I won't post any comments that spoil plot points.)

Dr. Pimple Popper

Did that title get your attention? 

As proof that people will watch anything, there’s the DR. PIMPLE POPPER show on TLC.  Dr. Sandra Lee is a dermatologist and has this show where she graphically pops pimples, and other skin procedures that most people would find disgusting.  Not for the squeamish to be sure.  

Now you may wonder how a show like this gets on the air.  I do.  I can’t imagine her pitching it to TLC.  “And then we drain the puss and…” “STOP!  Say no more! SOLD!”  

My guess is she’s had videos on YouTube that went viral and TLC came after her.  I could be wrong, but that makes sense.

So how does the show do ratings-wise?  Very well.  Are we that starved for entertainment?  How would you like to be a competing show that loses to her in the ratings when she does her lancing blisters episode?  

I'm sorry, but I find this hilarious.  And as disgusting as some of the scenes are, I'd still rather watch Dr. Pimple Popper than Dr. Oz.  

Someone has the theory that whatever sick, weird fetish you may have there’s a porno site for it — or 100 porno sites for it.  Eyebrows?  Sure.  Left thumbs obsession? (way sexier than right thumbs) Gotcha covered.  Watching bunions removed?  Tune into TLC.  

I look at Paddy Chayefsky’s NETWORK, which at the time of its release in the late ‘70s was considered satiric and bordered on the absurd.  Now we’ve gone so far past that it feels somewhat quaint.  Dr. Pimple Popper has replaced Howard Beale.  Except I'm not mad as hell.  I'm amused. 

SouthWORST Airlines

WARNING:  ONE OF MY RANTS

At one time Southwest Airlines used to be good.  They used to be reliable.  Okay… sort of reliable. Reliable enough. I’ve flown Southwest quite a bit because I go up to San Jose to see my son and his family. I also fly out of Burbank rather than LAX.  Longer drive to get there but a much less crazy airport.   Burbank Airport (formerly Bob Hope Airport — how soon they forget) is reminiscent of the airport in WINGS.  No jetways. You still walk onto the tarmac and up ladders to get to the planes.  Think: the last scene in CASABLANCA.

I’d like to think it’s the pandemic, but whatever.  Southwest has become a fucking nightmare. Cutting corners and losing loyal customers.  And seemingly not giving a shit. 

A few weekends ago they cancelled 2,000 flights, blaming it on air traffic control and weather issues.  Uh… no other carrier had to cancel flights.  That four-day meltdown cost them $75 million.  And how many irate customers? 

They were also in the news recently for one of their pilots saying some anti-Biden remark to the passengers.   And just last night a Southwest flight attendant falsely accused a bi-racial mother of human trafficking when it was in fact her daughter.  Oops.  That'll be a fun lawsuit. 

Now that people are starting to fly again, wouldn’t the best policy be to make them feel welcome and make them feel glad they chose your airline?  

I see no evidence of this with Southwest.  None.  Nor do I see any effort made to be on time.  And here's the thing:  If you can't depend on an airline they're worthless to you.  We'll live if we don't get peanuts, but if we miss connections, if we can't get where we're going -- we fucking HATE YOU.  No, not annoyed by you -- HATE. 

Halloween weekend I flew up to San Jose on Southwest from Burbank.  A 45 minute flight leaving at 10 AM.  It was two hours late.  Coming home the next night it was an hour late taking off, and then when we got to Burbank we sat on the tarmac for close to an hour until there was a gate.   There was a gate available but since our plane was staying the night and another plane was arriving and taking off again, we had to wait.  This is the same route they fly every day.  They haven’t worked this out yet?  Plus, when we got to the gate I noticed four or five empty gates.  We couldn’t deplane via one of those?  Even if they then moved the plane to the eventual gate later?  Better to inconvenience 150 people after taking off an hour late for a 45 minute flight.   Like I said, they don't give a shit. 

And at least our flights weren’t cancelled.  They were up to old tricks and a number of flights were cancelled from Burbank that Saturday morning.  Stranded passengers had to leave the boarding area, try to get stand-by, then go through TSA security again.   We’re not talking Thanksgiving weekend.  This was a Saturday morning at sleepy Burbank Airport.  

I’m also looking at prices and seeing you can go round-trip from LA to Chicago on decent airlines cheaper than what I paid to fly to San Jose.  Spirit Airlines is the world’s worst but at least they’re cheap.  

A few years ago I had to fly from Indianapolis to Minneapolis (my all “apolis” trip).  Thank God I flew Delta.  We boarded the plane and they discovered there was some mechanical problem.  But instead of just cancelling the flight they pulled some strings and got another plane out of the hanger and we were on our way only an hour late.  Do you think Southwest would do that?  Not a chance.  

I bet there’s not a single person reading this post who doesn’t have at least three airline nightmare stories.  (Feel free to share)  I know there’s a practice where the airlines purposely try to make you uncomfortable so you’ll pay be better seats, blankets, etc.  But it just seems it’s getting worse.  Southwest says “We know you have a choice, thanks for flying with us.”  They’re right.  From now on I’m flying Alaska.  Waiting on the tarmac for an hour at 10:30 on Sunday night to get to a gate while other gates were wide open was the tipping point.  Not that they give a shit, I'm sure. 

Weekend Post

 

Do you always get sick just before a big exam? Or big performance? Or big game? Your problem might not be physical.  Take comfort.  You could just be a neurotic mess.  Your ailments could be psychosomatic.

It has happened to me.

Going back to my erstwhile radio career as a screaming top 40 disc jockey in the ‘70s, I would always get sick just as a new rating period was about to begin. Back then I was toiling in medium and small markets and ratings were only taken a few times a year. People would fill out diaries and send them in. Results arrived a few months later and since there were so few rating periods, each one packed a wallop. One bad ratings “book” and you were generally gone. Stations changed formats, people were fired, and it’s not like you were Whitney Cummings – there was no NBC to give you eighth and ninth chances.

So the pressure was on.

And I got a horrendous cold every time a ratings period started. Not that I sound great anyway, but with a cold I was Elmer Fudd. It’s hard to scream over Osmond records when you’re underwater. What came out of the radio was me at my worst.

This must’ve happened on four or five occasions.

And then one time when I was spinning the hits on KMEN, San Bernardino (and ALL of the magnificent Inland Empire), I got my usual cold and decided out of desperation to just have some fun with it. I copped to the fact that I was sick, sneezed, and blew my nose right on the air. I asked listeners to call in with cold remedies. It turned into a very funny show. One listener brought me chicken soup. Another arrived with blankets. And the best was I now had a way of dealing with my psychosomatic condition. I no longer worried about getting sick. In fact, I looked forward to it. I now had one of my better sure-fire bits. So bring it on!

I never caught another cold before a ratings period.

Better health can be yours… by fooling yourself.

(One final note: Notice I didn’t end this story by saying… “and I never got fired again!”?)

Friday Questions

Well, it’s November.  Christmas commercials and music have officially begun.  Here are some pre-holiday Friday Questions.

Guffman is up first.  He need not wait.

As a collector of memorabilia and autographs, I’m sure you’ve had opportunities to get a souvenir or two from shows along the way. Anything you’re particularly proud of latching onto for reasons that aren't necessarily monetary? Anything you've had an opportunity to pick up and sorry you didn’t? Anything you’ve had personally signed that means the most to you?

Like an idiot, I never took anything off the stages of either MASH or CHEERS.  I always thought having production scripts with my name on them was a unique souvenir.  I’ve got autographed scripts and an autographed CHEERS sweatshirt.  

A prized possession is a copy of one of Larry Gelbart’s hand-written first drafts from MASH, signed to me personally.   That’s way more important than a bedpan from post op.

When BIG WAVE DAVE’S ended (prematurely in my humble opinion) we had all these props from a surf shop.  I took home a bunch of surfboards and have the big “Big Wave Dave’s” sign up in our house.   No one else has that.  Of course no one else knows what that is.

ReticentRabbit queries:

Ken, you've held at least three of my dream jobs (screenwriter, DJ, baseball announcer). What jobs do you wish you'd worked but never did?

I would love to be a panelist on a game show.  The idea of sitting back and tossing out one-liners while getting paid for it and being on TV seems like the ideal job.  There’s no preparation, no pressure. Perfect for a lazy bum like me!  

I very much enjoyed hosting that TCM film festival a few years back.  I wouldn’t mind doing that again.

I’d also like to be a Benihana chef but only if I could do it without knives.  

Caleb Martin asks:

What's the largest creative similarity you've discovered between one of your shows and another sitcom, intentional or otherwise? Have you seen a scene or storyline you wrote more-or-less happen on another show, or vice versa?

Not a sitcom, but HOUSE pretty much stole our P.O.V. episode of MASH.  

I’ve seen a number of sitcoms use Sam & Diane storylines, but I can’t remember specifics.  

Many years ago I was in a UCLA library and bumped into a writer friend.  He wrote freelance episodes of dramas (back in the days when you could make a living as a freelancer).   He was there to go through old editions of TV GUIDE to come up with stories to pitch.  He’d take a story from say PETER GUNN and pitch it for a current private eye show.   He said it was a common practice, but it's sure nothing I would ever do.

Compare that to CHEERS where someone would pitch a story and if any one of us had seen something even remotely similar on another show we immediately tossed it.  

And finally, from Brian Phillips:

Have you done any or were you ever asked to do any work for the BBC or any other entertainment concern outside of the USA?

Yes.  There’s a production company in the UK called Hat Trick.  I assume they’re still going.  At the time, they had a lot of shows on the air.  This was quite a few years ago.  They invited David Isaacs and me to come to London for a year and create a series.  We were told we’d have enormous freedom.  

I must say the offer was very intriguing.  We ultimately didn’t do it because our kids were little and we didn’t want to completely disrupt their lives by moving to a different country, much less school.  Also we would be taking a very sizable pay cut at a time when American TV still paid writers well.  

But it would have been a fun adventure.  I’d do it now if it weren’t for COVID.  

What’s your Friday Question? 

EP249: Writer/Producer Clyde Phillips

The man has done it all — from game shows, to movies, dramas, and comedies. Discover the fascinating career of writer, Clyde Phillips along with some great advice on how to break into the business.

Get 20% off your first order at https://dadgrass.com/HOLLYWOOD

More podcasts at WAVE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/artist/wave-podcast-network/1437831426

Listen to the Hollywood & Levine podcast!

Absurd but TRUE

Sometimes there's no need to write comedy, no need to write satire because real life is way more absurd than anything you could dream up.  Now the below is going to sound like a sketch -- like a spoof on all the woke cancel culture stories you currently read about.  This might be a piece in THE ONION, right?  

No.  It's REAL. This is from BleacherReport.com and I am posting this verbatim.  The entire article is here.

At what point do we say STOP THIS BULLSHIT ALREADY!?  

Here's the piece.  Again, this is not a comic essay.  It's legit.

PETA is asking Major League Baseball to change the name of the bullpen, a term used since the 1800s to describe the area where pitchers warm up, to "arm barn."

The nonprofit organization argued in a news release Thursday the longtime baseball term isn't "animal-friendly," per TMZ Sports.

"Strike out the word 'bullpen,' which references the holding area where terrified bulls are kept before slaughter, in favor of a more modern, animal-friendly term," PETA wrote.

Tracy Reiman, the organization's executive vice president, added: "Words matter, and baseball 'bullpens' devalue talented players and mock the misery of sensitive animals."

While it's possible baseball's use of the term bullpen derived from actual bull pens, there are various theories about how the word became associated with pitchers, typically relievers.

Comments anybody???

Happy Birthday Matt Levine

A great son, husband, and father himself. 

I have many great Matt stories over the year, but this one pretty much tells you who he is.

He was in kindergarten I believe (maybe the 1st grade), and his school was having a fundraising auction.  Tickets were a dollar. 

I brought him down to the set of CHEERS to hawk his tickets.   Those people had money. 

He goes up to Kirstie Alley and says, “Hi, would you like to buy a raffle ticket for the Warner Ave School fair?  Tickets are a dollar and the prize is a brand new television set.” 

Kirstie says, “sure” and hands him a twenty.  He’s a little flustered.  He tells her he hasn’t sold enough to have $19 change.  She says, that’s okay.  Keep the twenty.  To which Matt says, “Yeah, but you might not win.” 

Is this a good kid or what?

Happy Birthday, Matt.  I love you and sorry about your Red Sox this year.   

Shorter is better

A baseball game should not take 4 hours unless it goes into the 16th inning.  But this playoff season has seen mostly 4 hour games.  That’s insane!   The NL Wild Card game between the Dodgers and Cardinals took almost 4 1/2 hours and the score was tied 1-1 until Chris Taylor hit a walk-off home run.  That’s beyond insane.

Game One of the World Series took well over 4 hours and the Braves were leading 5-0 by the third inning.  For the next THREE HOURS nothing really happened.  Last night's game took 4 hours.

You could blame the added commercials.  That’s a factor but not the major one.  It adds about 18 minutes to a game.  But then there are all the pitching changes, even with the new rules where pitchers must face three batters.  Managers still manage to throw ten pitchers out there a game.  In the case of the World Series, Dusty Baker can add 18 minutes himself just by walking out to the mound.  And batters now take five minutes between every pitch to adjust their batting gloves. 

Another problem is all the in-game challenges.  On the one hand, it’s good to get the calls right.  Too much is at stake.  But on the other, baseball has assigned some of the worst umpires to officiate these games.  Angel Hernandez, Laz Diaz, Tom Hallion —these guys should never be permitted to step on the field during a playoff game.  They blow calls that result in challenges where most of the time their calls are overturned (because they’re terrible).  Behind the plate they're a disaster. 

Major League Baseball has a big problem.  When the audience is bored by your crown jewel, when you turn off fans who only watch the playoffs, when people on the east coast can’t see the end of the game if they can’t stay up till 1 am, when kids and the future generation of fans can’t stay up past the second inning  - you’re shooting yourself in the foot.  

I’m a huge baseball fan.  I used to hang on every pitch during the playoffs.  I would cancel appointments to be in front of the TV.   Now I’m surfing the net, writing blog posts, and turning it off because JEOPARDY is on.  So if MLB can’t even keep ME… 

The new warning for Cialis should be "If you have an erection that lasts the length of a baseball game, go to the emergency room." 

Weekend Post

It’s always hard to write Halloween episodes. Especially in sitcoms. How many costume party mishaps and botched attempts at scaring people can we write? Dramas at least can do spooky episodes if they fit within the genre. I’m sure you will want to keep the lights on the night the CRIMINAL MINDS Halloween episode airs.

But there’s always the danger that the Halloween show will get just a little too weird and go off the rails. Such was the case with my favorite idiotic Halloween episode (although I don’t know if it were designed specifically for Halloween) – THE MAN FROM UNCLE – “The Deadly Games Affair.” It aired in late October, 1964 so I’m guessing that’s why it was slotted there.

First some background for the (overwhelming majority) of readers unfamiliar with THE MAN FROM UNCLE. In the early ‘60s James Bond movies were first introduced and were a huge sensation. So naturally television wanted their version. Thus, THE MAN FROM UNCLE starring Robert Vaughn as Napoleon Solo on NBC. In fairness, the first year was pretty good. It was still in black-and-white and attempted to be gritty and suspenseful (for the most part). In later years it went to color and became more camp and was less James Bond and more Austin Powers.

However, “The Deadly Games Affair” was a first season episode. It was an early episode so I give them the benefit of the doubt that they were still trying to nail down the tone of the series.

But…

This was the plot. Some Nazis in suburban New York had Hitler’s body in suspended animation. To reanimate him they needed someone with the same blood type. Namely Napoleon Solo.

Now this Nazi mad scientist, like I said, lived in a New York suburb and somehow has a secret laboratory underneath his house. Imagine Rob Petrie kept Adolph Hitler in his basement.

This Frankenstein plot is so absurd on every level that it’s my favorite Halloween show and no other has come close.  And no, I won't tell you how it ended up.   It would keep you up nights for weeks!

Happy Halloween and as you trick-or-treat (I'm going to trick-or-treat with my granddaughter) be careful of houses that have secret underground labs.

 

Vote for THE UPSHAWS

THE UPSHAWS, a very funny show on Netflix starring Wanda Sykes and Mike Epps is nominated for a People's Choice Award.  Oh, my daughter Annie & her partner Jon are two of the producers. But that's just coincidental.  Anyway, as a favor to me and a way to say thanks for this blog, would you please vote for it?  You can vote 25 times. 

Here's the link. 

Thanks.  And if you haven't seen THE UPSHAWS, check it out.  You'll say, "Hey, I actually voted for a really good show."

Friday Questions

Happy Halloween Weekend.  Here are some scary FQ’s to get you in the mood.

cd1515 leads off.

Friday question: as a writer, if you have a well-established character with a well-known trait—-ie, Charlie Harper drinks a lot, his brother is cheap, Monica on Friends is neat, Norm likes beer, etc—-where is the line between giving the viewers what they want and beating the horse to death?
After a show is on for a long time, they always seem to go back to jokes regarding the same things over and over again.  Did you battle that as well?

It’s something we battle all the time, especially on a long-running show.  The best way to deal with it is to find more dimension for the character.

Sometimes that means backing off whatever that trait was.  For example: early on in FRASIER, Daphne had psychic abilities.  But soon enough the producers realized that was not a bottomless pit of material and gently moved away from it.

For the most part, it’s a tricky dance.  Again, in FRASIER — we got a lot of mileage out of his Niles’ crush on Daphne.  But at some point we had to take the storyline to another level.   

In their case, I thought the timing was right.  But in a lot of others producers milk familiar laughs way past their sell-by date.  The Fonz and J.J. from GOOD TIMES are just two examples.  

Darwin's Ghost wonders:

As well as you and David, other Hollywood comedy screenwriting partnerships have been duos like Lowell Ganz & Babaloo Mandel and Scott Alexander & Larry Karaszewski. Is there a sense of comradeship among comedy writing duos and do you guys all know each other?

There is indeed.  In the examples you cited, we don’t really know Lowell & Babaloo that well, but back in the mid ‘80s David and I were rewriting a movie for 20th and had an office next to a young team writing the screenplay for PROBLEM CHILD.  It was Scott & Larry, and we’ve been friends ever since.  They’re both great guys and terrific writers and even though it's not true, we take credit for discovering them. 

Among the teams we were friends with (some are no longer teams but they were then) are Patchett & Tarses, Marshall & Belson, Rosenstock & Teicher, the Charles Brothers, Pollock & Davis, Mumford & Wilcox, O’Shannon & Anderson, Staley & Long, Pollack & Rich, the Steinkellners, Saltzman & Diamond, Bugliari & McLaughlin, Vaupen & Baker, Casey & Lee, Kimmell & Gibbs, Donzig & Peterman, Flett-Giardano & Ramberg, Balmagia & Koenig, Byron & Kapstrom, Richman & Gittlin, and I’m sure I’m leaving a few people out (with my apologies).    Oh yeah… Levine & Emerson.  

Bob Paris queries:

Your daughter Annie is a comedy writer, as is Gary David Goldberg's daughter Shana. While writing structure can be taught, funny can't. When Annie was growing up did you have any inkling that she inherited your sense of humor or ability to write comedy?

Absolutely.  From day one.  My son, Matt is also very funny but chose to go into technology and now is at that Apple company that hopefully will stick around for a couple more years.  

But Annie was always funny.  She was selected for the “Writing for the Media” program at Northwestern and really established her comic voice.   It was very easy for me to be encouraging since I saw she had the chops.  But lest you think it was easy, she and her partner Jonathan Emerson wrote a bunch of spec scripts and needed several years before they could finally break in.  

And finally from Unknown (please leave a name):

Late to the party this week; MLB.com is running a clip of Wilson Alvarez's second start in the majors, White Sox v Orioles. You're very mellifluous talent is part of the calls -- altho there's a lot of horrible Hawk too -- and I was wondering do you remember that game? Where does calling a no-hitter, for your team or the other team, fit among all your play-by-play highlights?

August 11, 1991.  What I remember most is that once we got into the late innings and there was the distinct possibility of a no-hitter, the Baltimore crowd (the game was in Baltimore) was rooting for Cal Ripken Jr. to make an out.  That might have been the only time that ever happened.  

No-hitters rank very high among my broadcasting highlights.  But my greatest highlight was calling a spring training game in 2009.   That’s because it was a Dodger game and the two announcers that day were Vin Scully and ME.  As a Dodger fan growing up you can imagine what an unbelievable thrill that was.  

What’s your Friday Question? 

EP248: The Return of Dexter

Ken talks with Clyde Phillips, the guiding force of DEXTER for its first four seasons (the good seasons) and the new DEXTER series premiering in November on Showtime. If you’re a fan of DEXTER “carve” out some time for this episode.

More podcasts at WAVE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/artist/wave-podcast-network/1437831426

Listen to the Hollywood & Levine podcast!

The Beatles vs. the The Stones

Here’s a Friday Question that became an entire post.  Warning:  It’s a “Boomer” post.  

scottmc asks:

Paul McCartney recently referred to The Rolling Stones as a ‘Blues cover band’. Which side of The Beatles/Stones debate do you come down on?

It is the great debate of our time.  I like them both but for different reasons.  They have two very different approaches.  

A woman I know once described the contrast as this:  The Beatles are the boyfriends you want; the Stones are the guys you want to fuck.

Like every Boomer in America in February 1964 I was blown away by the Beatles when I first saw them on THE ED SULLIVAN SHOW.   76,000,000 people watched that night.  (Today, I can’t imagine CBS getting 76,000,000 people to tune in all year.)   It was all-Beatles all the time.  

The fact that we couldn’t get enough Beatles led to the British Invasion.  Billy J. Kramer & the Dakotas, Gerry & the Pacemakers, the Searchers, Freddie & the Dreamers (heaven help us!), and the Dave Clark Five were the first wave.

Also sneaking into that category were the Rolling Stones.  They did have, as Paul suggested, a somewhat bluesy sound.  I liked it.   All white boys from the San Fernando Valley identify with the blues.  But they were just one in the pack.

Then I saw a movie called THE TAMI SHOW.  This was a filmed super concert at the Santa Monica Auditorium.  It featured the Beach Boys, James Brown, Jan & Dean, Lesley Gore, Marvin Gaye, the Miracles, the Barbarians (who???), Billy J. Kramer, the Supremes, Chuck Berry, and the Rolling Stones.   Now within that lineup you had some pretty exciting performers.  Chuck Berry and James Brown have enough electricity between them to light Cleveland.  

But when the Stones performed and I saw Mick Jagger command the stage, I thought “we have a new king of rock n’ roll.”   So I became a Stones fan — but never at the expense of loving the Beatles.

A couple of years later the Beatles would go on to make groundbreaking music like SGT. PEPPER and MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR.  The Stones would put aside cover versions, do more original content and some longer cuts.  A local radio station in the valley, KBLA, started a Sunday night show just featuring the Stones.  Hosted by Humble Harv, it was the show for all his “Stone Agers,” of which I was one.  

Then came the ‘70s and the Beatles broke up.  But the Stones kept going.   So I treasure Beatles music as timeless, but I look forward to new cuts by the Rolling Stones.   And that’s where I am today.

I never saw the Beatles in concert.  I did see the Stones.  Mick Jagger was way more impressive in Dodger Stadium than the Dodgers were last week.  

I have many albums from both and listen about equally.  But I will say this in closing.  I can’t stand “Hey Jude” and I am sick to death of “Satisfaction.”  Which do I hate more?  The debate continues.  

The surprise of Broadway

A surprise to everyone but me.

The current show at Circle in the Square is CHICKEN & BISCUITS.  And it’s a big success.  Here’s what so surprising about it to the Broadway community:

It’s a comedy.

God forbid!

And not just a comedy — a conventional comedy.  

Kind of a familiar plot — relatives fighting after a funeral.  But apparently it’s funny.  

Blasphemy!

While every other play on the Great White Way is heavy, experimental, and “important,” audiences are turning to a show where they can laugh.  

As disturbing as this concept might be, people occasionally want to go to the theatre to enjoy themselves.

They don’t always want to be challenged, to be lectured, to be made to feel guilty.  

What really surprises me is how this is always a surprise to Broadway.  For every THE PLAY THAT GOES WRONG there are five award-winning OSLO’S that close.  They named a theatre for Neil Simon yet don’t seem to remember what his contribution was.  

The big issue in theatre this year of course is diversity.  And that’s fine.  But that shouldn’t dictate subject matter and genre.   Douglas Lyons, the playwright of CHICKEN & BISCUITS is Black.  So what?  People are going because they want to be entertained.  And Lyons delivers the goods.

I congratulate everyone involved in the production of CHICKEN & BISCUITS for taking the daring courageous step of staging an actual show that people want to see. 

When game shows were naturally funny

 Since we seem to be on a nostalgia kick following this weekend's post...

The remake of classic game shows is a current network trend.  And they try desperately to be funny.  As a result they are so forced and for my money, mostly unwatchable.  When ABC has to rely on Anthony Anderson's mother for laughs you know we've reached rock bottom. 

Some of the original game shows elicited laughs, but usually they came out of the double meanings of certain questions and answers.  They weren't desperate quips by celebrity guest stars.  And unlike today, these shows were done live.  Bloopers and unexpected moments were part of the fun.  I'm sure the current prime-time game shows are edited to death in order to eke out a semblance of actual entertainment.  

Here is an example of a classic game from the 1950's.  It's called WHAT'S MY LINE?  Four panelists have to guess the occupation of the guest.  So the occupations tend to be somewhat unusual to better stump the panel.  Part of the charm (and bonus humor) of the show is John Daly, the moderator.  His attempts to clarify points are so long-winded and precise that he forever confuses everybody.  

Enjoy a segment from WHAT'S MY LINE?   Remember, this was 1958.  I don't want any "This is inappropriate and offensive" comments.  No one was offended then.

Weekend Post

I was at lunch recently with a writer friend and we got onto the topic of role models. We each had writers, parents, other individuals we admired, and then another name occurred to me – one he found surprising. And I imagine you will too.

Those of you who have even heard of this person.

Okay. Ready? One of my role models was Shari Lewis.

So who’s Shari Lewis? Younger readers will have no idea I’m sure.

Shari Lewis was a kids’ show host in the ‘50s-‘70s. She was also a ventriloquist. Remember the puppets Lamb Chop and Charlie Horse? Those were Shari Lewis’. They weren’t particularly hilarious but they were endearing.

And some other things about Shari Lewis: she won twelve Emmys, was a magician, juggler, singer, dancer, and was considered one of the finest ventriloquists in the world. Oh, and she co-wrote an episode of STAR TREK.

So why is she a role model?

In 1974 I was a disc jockey in San Diego.  A friend was visiting and we went to Belmont Park, which is an old-time amusement park, complete with rickety roller coaster, a boardwalk, etc. It’s still open. Neither Sea World nor Legoland could kill it. 

Well this was an afternoon in the middle of the week during August. Crowded it wasn’t. How it’s still open today I don’t know.

Oh wait.  Wrong lamb chop

We walked by an auditorium and saw that Shari Lewis was performing. Next show in ten minutes. What the hell? A little nostalgia. And it’s not like there were a thousand other great things to see or do at Belmont Park. So we went in. The auditorium seated probably 200. There was one person sitting there. We figured, well when it gets closer to showtime people are going to stream in. So we took a seat right up front. I had heard she was a great ventriloquist so I wanted to be close enough to see her lips. (How many people go to a show because they want to see the star’s lips?).

You see where this is going, don't you?

When it was time for the show to begin there were literally three people in the audience. Now remember, Shari Lewis at the time was a big name. She had done network shows for over a decade. She gave not one but two command performances for the Queen. And here she was, on a hot August afternoon in an amusement park performing for three idiots. Oh, and it was free admission.  How much could she have been paid?  I picture some supervisor handing her a big bag of quarters from the Whack-a-mole game. 

I would not have blamed her if she had come out and said, “Sorry guys. I never do shows for audiences smaller than the number of puppets I have.”

Redd Fox essentially did just that once.  He was a long-time nightclub comic who became the star of SANFORD & SON.  As the story goes, he was playing in some Vegas showroom.  It's the midnight show.  There are four people in the house.  The band plays the SANFORD & SON theme, he walks out on stage, surveys the audience, says something to the effect of "Four fucking people?  I ain't plain' for four fucking people."  He then walks off.  The band again plays the SANFORD & SON theme, lights up in the auditorium.  End of show, goodnight.  

But that’s not what Shari Lewis did.

She came out and started her show.

At first, I have to admit, I was really uncomfortable. I felt so self-conscious. She was essentially doing her act just for me. And it’s not like I could leave.

But as her show continued my discomfort slowly gave way to admiration. Even though there were just three audience members, she was performing her heart out. It would have been so easy to just go at half-speed, drop a bunch of bits. But Shari went through her material with energy and class. (She probably did drop some of the jokes geared for kids but that's all the more reason to thank her.)  There could have been 10,000 in the venue. I was in awe.

And the show itself was great. She was a phenomenal ventriloquist. I remember a bit she did with an auctioneer, puppets talking a mile a minute, she chiming in -- it was amazing. Another time she had her puppets sing and even yodel. How do you yodel without moving your lips?

When the show was over – and it was about 45 minutes. We stood up and gave her a standing ovation. And since it was just the three of us, my friend and I approached the stage, shook her hand, and told her how knocked out we were by her performance. I also joked that she should consider changing agents. She laughed.

But if ever there was the definition of a trouper; that was it. Over the years I’ve been on the radio in the middle of the night knowing no one was listening (a 15 inning Syracuse Chiefs game from Denver on a station that covered less territory than your Wifi router), been in an improv group that would occasionally play to audiences of seven, and wrote everyday for a blog that when I started out was being read by maybe ten people a week. But I always thought back to Shari Lewis. I learned from her that day what it means to be a consummate pro and I have emulated her ever since.  Sadly, she left us way too soon.  She was only 65 when she passed.   But I'm proud to say she's one of my role models. 

Do you have a surprising role model?  If so, who and why?  And can she yodel?

 

Friday Questions

It’s getting dark earlier.  I don’t know anyone who likes that.  Here are some Friday Questions to enjoy by candlelight.

JS  starts us off.

What is your Favorite show that lasted awhile but got lost in Time? Mine is "Early Edition" -that show was so good and different and launched Kyle Chandler into a great career. William Devane was really good in his guest appearances.

Since it’s lost in time you probably won’t know it, but there was a show called THE PRACTICE in the mid-70’s that starred Danny Thomas as a crusty but lovable neighborhood doctor that was a treat.  The creator and primary writer was Steve Gordon, who later went on to write and direct the movie ARTHUR.  

Sadly, Steve passed away very young.  But he wrote crackling dialogue that was effortlessly funny.   He's one of my comedy writing idols.  The show lasted a year.  It too was gone before its time.  

Neil wonders:

What's your opinion of the proposed Additional Literary Material credit for all participating writers who do not otherwise receive writing credits on motion pictures.

I don’t think it’s a bad thing.  Why should everyone who works on a movie including craft-services assistants get credit except for the writers?  That's the way the system is set up now. 

From Tom Asher:

LOVE Christine Baranski... you ever work together, Ken?

I love her too.   I never really worked with her.  She was a finalist for a part in one of my pilots and I got to spend the afternoon with her.   Ultimately, she wasn’t totally right for the part, but I really wanted to work with her.  

By the time we had our next series she was already on CYBILL, but I’d still love to do something with her.   

She’s also a very classy and lovely lady.

And finally, kcross has a question about the HISTORY OF SITCOM debacle that CNN ran.

How would you have approached the assignment? If someone came to you with a lot of money and a really good staff, what would your sitcom history look like?

Very simple.  I would treat it like a history course.  I would start in the late 40’s and work my way up through the decades.  I would immerse the audience in the various decades, sprinkle in some news and societal norms for context, and maybe God forbid mention a writer or two.   

I would show trends, I would praise the shows that were genuinely funny or innovative.  

Along the way I would show sitcoms evolved and how they reflected society as a whole.

What I wouldn’t do is spend half the series pointing out all of sitcoms failings because they didn’t adhere to 2021 sensibilities in 1955.  

What’s your FQ? 

EP247: The Art of Showrunning

Ken continues his chat with comedy writer, Dave Hackel. This week they delve into what a showrunner really does. It’s a unique and rigorous responsibility. And Dave is one of the best. They also discuss BECKER, a show Dave created and ran for five years. Lots of great info here.

More podcasts at WAVE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/artist/wave-podcast-network/1437831426

Listen to the Hollywood & Levine podcast!

The Many Saints of Newark: My review

 

If you’re a mega fan of THE SOPRANOS it’s a fun ride.  If you’re not, it’s just another gangster movie — one you’ve seen countless times.    It’s now playing in select theaters and on HBO Max.  If you have a decent sized screen at home that should be sufficient.  There’s not enough scope that it’s worth going to the theater, paying for it, and leaving yourself open for possible COVID.  

THE SOPRANOS was a TV show.  So is this.

It’s also very familiar.

People get shot, they eat a lot of Italian food, they get loud and swear, and there’s the obligatory turf war.  Young Tony Soprano witnesses these events, which we’re supposed to believe is ultimately what led him into the family “business.”  And that’s fine except you could do all that in one brief montage or have a narrator quickly walk you through it.

Alan Taylor did a nice job of directing the script by David Chase and Lawrence Konner (who my partner and I rewrote on JEWEL OF THE NILE).  

There’s one story turn (I won’t spoil it) that is so ridiculous  it takes you out of the movie. Suffice to say a character does something they never would because the writers needed the story to go in a specific direction.  Hint: The scene takes place on a beach. 

The acting was good.  The real stars are Alessandro Nivola and Leslie Odom, Jr.   James Gandolfini’s actual son plays his dad as a teenager.  Michael Gandolfini acquitted himself very well.  For my money though, Ray Liotta stole the movie.  

But here’s the thing, and I know it’s intangible — It just didn’t feel like a SOPRANOS episode.   You meet a lot of future characters, and Chase’s writing is always first-class, but the rhythm, the situations, and even the dialogue just didn’t live up to the series.   The original was very fresh.  They had great characters, a real suspense,  memorable scenes and  moments.  This new version feels like  GOOD FELLAS meets THE MUPPET BABIES.   But again, if you’re a diehard SOPRANOS fan you may get a lot more out of it. Wait.  I am a diehard SOPRANOS fan.  So why didn’t I love it?  I was sure hoping to.  Maybe it's because the whole point of the movie (how the environment turned Tony into Tony) is something I and every SOPRANOS fan already knows.

See for yourself.  It’s on HBO Max. 

10 years ago today

Here's a feature I like to do about once a month or so -- repost Friday Questions from the distant past.  Very few read the archives and there are some worthy FQ's buried in there.  Here's a post from October 2011.  My responses still hold up.

Becky is up first.

I was wondering what Harry Morgan was like in real life?

Becky, you’ll be happy to learn he’s a wonderful guy. Harry has a wicked sense of humor. Very droll. And is a great storyteller. During breaks he would regale us with stories of doing movies with Spencer Tracy and Elvis. And there were a lot of tales about DRAGNET and how, uh… “frugal” Jack Webb was. You’ll notice he and Jack were always in the same suits, every week. That’s because they filmed exterior shots of them entering and exiting buildings, their car, etc. and were able to use the same shots every week.

Harry is the ultimate pro. Could scan a page of dialogue once and have it perfectly memorized. Would lock in on a performance and do it perfectly the same way every time, every take. He was courteous to every member of the staff and crew and knew everyone’s name.

I saw him last at a tribute to MASH producer, Gene Reynolds a couple of years ago. Harry hadn’t seen me in ages. But he was still as sharp as ever. Remembered my name, that I was now involved with baseball. And he must’ve been only 93.

What few people don't know is that Harry is also an excellent director. Once a season he would direct an episode of MASH. During our tenure we made sure Harry got to direct one of ours. If he wasn’t such a terrific actor he would have had a great career behind the camera.

Harry has one of those faces and voices that even when he was 20 he was able to play 60. So it’s no surprise he’s a young 96. He’s been a young senior citizen for 70 years.

From Chris:

Here's a Friday question: why do some shows give the same writer a consulting producer and a written by credit in the same episode?

Those are two different assignments. Consulting producer is a staff position. A written by credit means he wrote the script for that week’s episode.


DyHrdMET asks:

Have you ever worked a playoff game?

Yes, with the Padres in ’96.  We lost. 

From Mark:

This is a question for Friday and you may not want to answer it but I bet that tons of your readers are wondering the same thing, so what the heck, I'll be the guy who asks:

You come across as a very modest, self-effacing, middle-class (okay, upper middle class) kind of guy, and yet you've been involved at a very high level with several extremely successful TV shows. Are you collecting fat (or thin) royalties from those programs, or is that money ancient history?

I am still collecting royalties but not enough to allow me to finally become a dick. Seriously, though, since the 1977 WGA Basic Agreements residuals are into perpetuity (God bless you, Writers Guild). The amounts have dwindled down through the years but royalties are still dribbling in. Even more exciting at this point is that shows I wrote 30 years ago are still being shown and enjoyed today.

And finally, from John based on a post about Charles Winchester of MASH:

There was an episode early in Season 6 written by Laurence Marks entitled "Change Day" in which Charles' scheme to scam people out of their script comes across more like something Frank Burns would do. Was the writing staff still trying to get a handle on who Maj. Winchester was at the time, or was this an idea thought up earlier, when Frank Burns was still the show's main foil, and then reworked to try and fit David Ogden Stiers' new character?

You were right the first time, John. We were still trying to nail down Charles. This was one of the first stories broken with that character. It came from an actual incident we discovered in the research. Unfortunately, it’s confusing as hell. If I’m being honest, it was one of our worst episodes that year, and it was not Laurence Mark’s fault. It was ours.

Dave Chappelle and the current state of comedy

A lot of readers have asked what I thought of the new controversial Dave Chappelle Netflix Special.  This, of course, is a trick question that can only get a person in trouble.  Like “How often do you beat your wife?”  God forbid anyone says something positive about Chappelle’s material they’re instantly branded as a racist, homophobe, or worse.  (Remember the days when some people thought something was funny while others didn’t and it was just chalked up to differing senses of humor?)  

So I’m not going to speak at all about the trans material in his special or any of the subject matter.  All I will say is this:  I’m glad there is a Dave Chappelle.  I’m glad there’s one comic out there who is truly fearless.   In the tradition of Lenny Bruce, we need someone willing to be provocative, willing to ruffle some feathers in the cause of getting society to think.  

There’s a terrific article I want to point you towards.  It’s by David Zucker, one of the writers of AIRPLANE and NAKED GUN.  He’s a very funny guy.  I worked with him on a project once a thousand years ago. In his piece, bemoaning the current sad state of comedy, he brings out a great point.  Through social media a tiny minority now has a huge amplified voice and can dictate policies and norms for the majority — even though the majority doesn’t agree with them.  

The night ALL IN THE FAMILY premiered on CBS, they installed extra phone banks and operators to field the inevitable throng of complaints.  They got 12 calls.  12.  Now today those 12 could cause such a stink that they might be able to pressure ALL IN THE FAMILY off the air.  How horrifying is that?

So when you sit home, by yourself, and watch AIRPLANE, or the DAVE CHAPPELLE SPECIAL, or BLAZING SADDLES, are you really offended?  And if you are, does it really rock you to your very core and affect how you see the world?   Or, do you simply say, “Fuck you, Dave Chappelle or David Zucker,” turn off their show, and go on about your life?   It’s a comedy special not a snuff film.

I’m personally not a fan of mean-spirited comedy.  And if it’s designed to demean anyone, regardless of color, gender, age — then it’s not for me.  And it’s not the type of thing I write.  But I don’t think there should censorship when it comes to comedy.   I don’t think writers or comics should be blasted for things they wrote or said that may not be acceptable now but were when they wrote or said them.  

Anyway, here’s the article.  I encourage you to read it.

Thanks.

Weekend Post

This is my worst movie meeting.

Anyone who’s been in the business for more than eleven minutes has twelve stories of disastrous meetings. My partner, David and I have had more than our share. But our worst is worthy of an I LOVE LUCY episode.

This was a number of years ago. VOLUNTEERS and MANNEQUIN had been made. JEWEL OF THE NILE (which we rewrote – uncredited) was going into production. So for the moment we had a viable feature career.

Our agent arranged a general meeting with an executive from 20th Century Fox, Dylan Sellers. These are generally just meet and greet affairs. You want to be on their radar. It’s fairly hard to screw up these meetings. They just want to be sure you’re not too weird. So if you show up on time, are dressed nicely, and can carry on a breezy conversation for a half hour without revealing that you collect tonsils or God talks to you through hidden messages delivered by Mr. Rogers you’re pretty much in.   Often they have a project in mind and if you don't scare them they offer you the assignment. 

Our meeting was set for the end of the day, around 5:30. At the time, we had an office on the Paramount lot in Hollywood and drove across town to 20th. Traffic was bad (duh) and we just arrived on time. Punctuality is important with these meetings. It gives the studio executive an idea of how responsible you are. If you can’t show up on time for a meeting, how can they count on you to turn in the first draft when you promise?

David was driving. I opened the passenger’s door, climbed out of the car, and the seat of my pants ripped right up the butt crack. We’ll dispense with the fat jokes for now because I had a much bigger problem. How was I going to take a meeting with my underwear hanging out?

There was no time to postpone the meeting. I lived way too far to race home and change. We decided to just take our chances. I know. This is like right out of THREE’S COMPANY.

We walked into Mr. Sellers’ outer office with David right behind me. We tried to look nonchalant but I’m sure in some states we were close enough for sodomy charges. The assistant told us Mr. Sellers would only be a couple of minutes and take a seat. We sat on the couch. I tried to grab a copy of Variety that was on the coffee table and as I leaned in I heard the rip get a little longer. I froze immediately.

A few minutes later Mr. Sellers was ready to see us. Instead of just cutting across the room to the door to his office I sort of hugged the walls. The assistant looked at me funny. We entered his office and again I walked laterally along the wall, trying to appear natural.

Dylan Sellers came around from behind his desk, shook our hands, and invited us to take a seat on the couch. Which we did. It was an overstuffed couch, the kind you really disappear into.

He sat in a chair across from us and the meeting began. I sat there with a big smile plastered to my face. Fortunately, David did most of the talking. I just nodded like a bobblehead. I don’t think I heard a thing Mr. Sellers was saying. All I could think was, “How the fuck am I going to get out of this giant couch?”

At one point, the conversation turned to cars. Mr. Sellers was very proud of the new one he had just purchased. It was parked right outside and he invited us to come to the window to have a look.

Shit!

I struggled to my feet, felt a little more rip. Pretty soon the pants were going to just fall off. That would make a great impression. I casually hugged the walls, moving towards the window. David hopped in right behind me so that when Mr. Sellers was behind him he (hopefully) couldn’t see my now-officially fat ass.

It was back to the couch. Was he starting to sense something was weird? Most people turn and walk to a couch. They don’t backpedal.

More charming chit-chat for about fifteen minutes and that was it. Again, I had to hoist myself out of couchzilla. The ripping sound could have been mistaken for a fart but that’s hardly better. We shook hands, said goodbye, I hugged the wall all the way out the room then bolted.

Our agent followed up with him the next day. He said the meeting went well. He liked us but thought we were a little reserved. Worried that our sensibilities were a little too sophisticated for the project he had in mind. It was a very broad comedy. Lots of slapstick. Humiliating situations. That just didn’t seem like us.

Talk about taking one in the shorts.