"Birdman" is a surrealistic view of show business, and it's successes and failures.
It's imagination is endless.
The intensity of it's performances can be overwhelming at times.
So much so, that when it isn't, the film tends to drag a little.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Mostly. But there are chatty respites between characters that are relatively less than interesting.
B+.
Compelling even?
Often.
A+.
Is it controversial?
Only to people directly involved in show business.
B.
Is it a story worth telling?
I think it is.
B+.
Is it good storytelling?
For the most part, but there is this major, MAJOR story hole that happens near the very end of the film that nearly brings it down entirely.
In fantasy based TV shows, in order for there to be some semblance of working, you have to stay within the framework of whatever fantasy has been set up.
You have to buy into the fact that Samantha Stevens has witch-like powers. But everything else had to adhere to that reality.
In "My Mother, The Car", you had to make the buy that Jerry Van Dyke's mother was in fact, a car.
And what makes that show the worst thing to ever hit the airwaves is that they consistently violated their own reality.
Now, "Birdman" is certainly a far cry better than "My Mother, The Car", but it makes the same transgression.
I won't turn it into a spoiler alert but anyone who wants to e-mail me about it at macchus999@aol.com can hear me sound off about it in relative privacy.
C.
Is it well written?
The dialogue is thoroughly superb.
A+.
Is it well cast? Well played?
Michael Keaton is kinetic and awesome. A fabulous choice.
Edward Norton is more impressive every time I see him.
A+.
Well shot?
Very.
A+.
Is it too long? Too short?
The lulls in the action makes it feel a little long, but not very.
And soon enough, we're back to the intensity.
B+
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
Within it's frame work, it is, and I do, until, like I said, almost the very end.
B.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
Constantly unpredictable, and utterly surprising, though not always in a good way.
B.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
As I have experienced some of the things depicted, it truly resonates.
A+.
Is it funny?
Often.
A.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
It didn't need any more than my 60 inch plasma screen.
F.
Is it impressive ?
I was taken with the ambitiousness of it all.
A+.
Overall grade: B+.
If you can get past the quizzical ending, it's certainly worth your time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Thursday, December 25, 2014
Report Card----"Unbroken"
Yet another reason why I can't stand Chris Mathews anymore: He spoke about this movie on his last show, saying something like "I don't know what all the shouting is about. I just couldn't get into it. I mean, I LOVED the book. Maybe it's because the movie had a feminine sensibility (You know, because it was directed by Angelina Jolie.)."
"A feminine sensibility".
Right.
It was just chauvinistic for this shmuck to say that.
The reason he couldn't get into the movie was probably BECAUSE he loved the book, and thus was totally familiar with the story.
There is probably a correlation to be made with how familiar you are with the story going in, and how blown away you'll be by the movie.
Fortunately, I had not read the book, and was totally unfamiliar with this story of a survivor of torture in a Japanese POW camp during World War II, Louis Zamporini.
And I was blown away.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Overwhelmingly.
A+.
Compelling even?
Constantly.
A+.
Is it controversial?
What with torture being in the news every day, absolutely.
A+.
Is it a story worth telling?
Over and over.
A+.
Is it good storytelling?
Excellent, although I understand that Zamporini was actually much more of a juvenile delinquent than he was portrayed.
A-.
Is it well written?
Yes. Very.
A.
Is it well cast? Well played?
The Japanese actor playing "The Bird" was totally compelling.
We did fall into the trap of two key actors looking a little too much like each other, causing you to say, on more than one occasion, "Is that him, or the other one?"
This is so easily remedied.
A.
Well shot?
Very.
A.
Is it too long? Too short?
Probably too short. I saw an interview between Tom Brokaw and Jolie, where she discussed the post-war dramatic stress disorder that Zamporini underwent that almost destroyed him as much as the prison camp did.
I would have liked to see that depicted more.
B.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
It was true. It behooves you to care about the characters.
A+.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
I was one of the fortunate ones to never see what was coming.
A+.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
It makes us realize what we can be if we have to be.
A+.
Is it funny?
It's not really about that.
No Grade.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
The immensity of it is that much greater in a filled movie theatre.
It's the best way to see it.
A+.
Is it impressive ?
Constantly.
A+.
Overall grade: A+.
Somebody please tell Chris Matthews to shut up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
"A feminine sensibility".
Right.
It was just chauvinistic for this shmuck to say that.
The reason he couldn't get into the movie was probably BECAUSE he loved the book, and thus was totally familiar with the story.
There is probably a correlation to be made with how familiar you are with the story going in, and how blown away you'll be by the movie.
Fortunately, I had not read the book, and was totally unfamiliar with this story of a survivor of torture in a Japanese POW camp during World War II, Louis Zamporini.
And I was blown away.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Overwhelmingly.
A+.
Compelling even?
Constantly.
A+.
Is it controversial?
What with torture being in the news every day, absolutely.
A+.
Is it a story worth telling?
Over and over.
A+.
Is it good storytelling?
Excellent, although I understand that Zamporini was actually much more of a juvenile delinquent than he was portrayed.
A-.
Is it well written?
Yes. Very.
A.
Is it well cast? Well played?
The Japanese actor playing "The Bird" was totally compelling.
We did fall into the trap of two key actors looking a little too much like each other, causing you to say, on more than one occasion, "Is that him, or the other one?"
This is so easily remedied.
A.
Well shot?
Very.
A.
Is it too long? Too short?
Probably too short. I saw an interview between Tom Brokaw and Jolie, where she discussed the post-war dramatic stress disorder that Zamporini underwent that almost destroyed him as much as the prison camp did.
I would have liked to see that depicted more.
B.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
It was true. It behooves you to care about the characters.
A+.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
I was one of the fortunate ones to never see what was coming.
A+.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
It makes us realize what we can be if we have to be.
A+.
Is it funny?
It's not really about that.
No Grade.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
The immensity of it is that much greater in a filled movie theatre.
It's the best way to see it.
A+.
Is it impressive ?
Constantly.
A+.
Overall grade: A+.
Somebody please tell Chris Matthews to shut up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Why I Still Love Letterman.
Yes.
The ending of the last episode of "The Colbert Report", where he found every celebrity in town, and probably some who made a special trip in, got them on stage, and led them in a sing-along to the tune of "We'll Meet Again", was most-likely the greatest thing on TV in at least the last few months.
It was spectacularly done.
And there was an overlay of true sadness.
But something that was on the next night, very similar in nature, was a very close second in terms of greatness.
I have found a lot of reasons lately to not particularly care whether or not I would watch Letterman.
He repeats the same jokes over and over.
He does the first five minutes purely for the studio audience, at the expense of the home audience.
You can always tell when he is bored with a guest, which is way too often.
A lot of times, he seems to be phoning it in, and is off his game.
But Letterman revives several "traditions" around Christmastime that are usually spread over several shows.
For the first time that I can recall, he did all four on the same show, which only enhanced the impact of each.
He began by having Paul Shaffer do his hilarious impression of Cher singing "Oh Holy Night" as she had done it on the old "Sonny and Cher Variety Hour", preceded by his introduction to it, which is at least as funny as the impression itself.
It would not be Christmas for me without it.
Then, Dave brought out actor-deejay Jay Thomas, as he has annually for 22 years, to tell what Dave always announces as the greatest talk-show story ever.
It involves Jay's personal encounter with Clayton Moore, who was working a car dealership opening as his signature character, The Lone Ranger.
Jay was also working the gig as the local deejay on radio.
It is, indeed, the greatest talk-show story ever.
Then they segued into the annual "Quarterback Challenge", where Jay and Dave took turns attempting to knock a meatball off of the top of the very tall Christmas tree on the set.
As usual, Jay was the winner.
As Dave led him offstage with a sincere goodbye, Jay said to him "This is it. I'm never going to see you ever again, am I."
And Dave said "Nope. You never will."
And once again, there was this overlay of sadness.
He won't ever see him again.
We have all witnessed this for the last time.
Oh, it's all on YouTube.
Many years of it.
But it will never be new again.
This is sad.
Then, Dave brought out Josh Brolin, who seemed hopelessly out of place in the proceedings.
He dispensed of him shortly, and then brought out the last tradition, Darlene Love, to sing her classic "Christmas", recreating the Phil Spector "Wall of Sound" with a slew of musicians and backup singers.
And it, too, was glorious.
And it, too can be found on earlier incarnations on YouTube.
It was a great, great show, and, unfortunately, the last of it's kind, as Letterman won't be around next Christmas.
Let's all be glad we had him around as long as we did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
The ending of the last episode of "The Colbert Report", where he found every celebrity in town, and probably some who made a special trip in, got them on stage, and led them in a sing-along to the tune of "We'll Meet Again", was most-likely the greatest thing on TV in at least the last few months.
It was spectacularly done.
And there was an overlay of true sadness.
But something that was on the next night, very similar in nature, was a very close second in terms of greatness.
I have found a lot of reasons lately to not particularly care whether or not I would watch Letterman.
He repeats the same jokes over and over.
He does the first five minutes purely for the studio audience, at the expense of the home audience.
You can always tell when he is bored with a guest, which is way too often.
A lot of times, he seems to be phoning it in, and is off his game.
But Letterman revives several "traditions" around Christmastime that are usually spread over several shows.
For the first time that I can recall, he did all four on the same show, which only enhanced the impact of each.
He began by having Paul Shaffer do his hilarious impression of Cher singing "Oh Holy Night" as she had done it on the old "Sonny and Cher Variety Hour", preceded by his introduction to it, which is at least as funny as the impression itself.
It would not be Christmas for me without it.
Then, Dave brought out actor-deejay Jay Thomas, as he has annually for 22 years, to tell what Dave always announces as the greatest talk-show story ever.
It involves Jay's personal encounter with Clayton Moore, who was working a car dealership opening as his signature character, The Lone Ranger.
Jay was also working the gig as the local deejay on radio.
It is, indeed, the greatest talk-show story ever.
Then they segued into the annual "Quarterback Challenge", where Jay and Dave took turns attempting to knock a meatball off of the top of the very tall Christmas tree on the set.
As usual, Jay was the winner.
As Dave led him offstage with a sincere goodbye, Jay said to him "This is it. I'm never going to see you ever again, am I."
And Dave said "Nope. You never will."
And once again, there was this overlay of sadness.
He won't ever see him again.
We have all witnessed this for the last time.
Oh, it's all on YouTube.
Many years of it.
But it will never be new again.
This is sad.
Then, Dave brought out Josh Brolin, who seemed hopelessly out of place in the proceedings.
He dispensed of him shortly, and then brought out the last tradition, Darlene Love, to sing her classic "Christmas", recreating the Phil Spector "Wall of Sound" with a slew of musicians and backup singers.
And it, too, was glorious.
And it, too can be found on earlier incarnations on YouTube.
It was a great, great show, and, unfortunately, the last of it's kind, as Letterman won't be around next Christmas.
Let's all be glad we had him around as long as we did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Friday, December 19, 2014
Report Card----"The Judge"
Robert Downey Jr. is an unscrupulous Chicago hotshot lawyer.
Robert Duvall is his estranged highly-scrupulous small-town judge father.
Logical circumstances force the two of them together, where their estrangement is tested.
This sets the movie in motion.
And it does it very well.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Very.
A.
Compelling even?
Here and there.
B.
Is it controversial?
There are moral questions that are interestingly dealt with.
A.
Is it a story worth telling?
It is a ripping yarn.
A.
Is it good storytelling?
Basically, yes.
B+.
Is it well written?
Yes. Very.
A.
Is it well cast? Well played?
You've got Downey, and you've got Duvall.
You can't hardly do better than that.
And Vincent D'Inofrio, a "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" fave, a little older looking, and a little chubbier, does a nice turn as Downey's brother.
A+.
Well shot?
Very.
A.
Is it too long? Too short?
A little long.
B.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
Yes.
A.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
At first, there seemed to be about four endings, which made it seem long first, and predictable.
Then, they hit me with the fifth ending, which totally blindsided me, and wrapped up the movie really well.
A.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
It's self contained, and not really provocative.
But not all of them have to be.
No Grade.
Is it funny?
Here and there.
B.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
I could have waited for HBO.
B-.
Is it impressive ?
On several levels.
A.
Overall grade: A-.
This one has a lot going for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Robert Duvall is his estranged highly-scrupulous small-town judge father.
Logical circumstances force the two of them together, where their estrangement is tested.
This sets the movie in motion.
And it does it very well.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Very.
A.
Compelling even?
Here and there.
B.
Is it controversial?
There are moral questions that are interestingly dealt with.
A.
Is it a story worth telling?
It is a ripping yarn.
A.
Is it good storytelling?
Basically, yes.
B+.
Is it well written?
Yes. Very.
A.
Is it well cast? Well played?
You've got Downey, and you've got Duvall.
You can't hardly do better than that.
And Vincent D'Inofrio, a "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" fave, a little older looking, and a little chubbier, does a nice turn as Downey's brother.
A+.
Well shot?
Very.
A.
Is it too long? Too short?
A little long.
B.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
Yes.
A.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
At first, there seemed to be about four endings, which made it seem long first, and predictable.
Then, they hit me with the fifth ending, which totally blindsided me, and wrapped up the movie really well.
A.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
It's self contained, and not really provocative.
But not all of them have to be.
No Grade.
Is it funny?
Here and there.
B.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
I could have waited for HBO.
B-.
Is it impressive ?
On several levels.
A.
Overall grade: A-.
This one has a lot going for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Tuesday, December 16, 2014
Report Card----"The Theory Of Everything."
This is the one about Dr. Stephen Hawking, whom I admit I didn't know that much about.
It was mostly about the relationship between him and his wife.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Not nearly enough.
C.
Compelling even?
Never.
D.
Is it controversial?
Not in the slightest.
D.
Is it a story worth telling?
Maybe there was a story in him, but this wasn't it.
C-.
Is it good storytelling?
It concentrated on the rather soap-opera-ish "Do they love each other enough to stay together?" tale, rather than on his work, which I wanted to hear more about.
I guess I wanted it to be more like "A Beautiful Mind"---a much better movie.
D.
Is it well written?
Nothing stands out.
B-.
Is it well cast? Well played?
The guy playing Hawking looked like him, and I guess sounded like him.
He certainly didn't make himself easy to watch.
Other than that, I got nuthin'.
C.
Well shot?
I'll give them that.
A.
Is it too long? Too short?
Way too long.
D.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
Yes, and no.
C.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
Not predictable,and it surprises me, but I blame my ignorance for that.
B+.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
No.
C-.
Is it funny?
Almost never.
D.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
It wouldn't, and it isn't.
F.
Is it impressive ?
Not to me.
C-.
Overall grade: C.
Another one of those "Let's see if we can rack up awards for nobility."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
It was mostly about the relationship between him and his wife.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Not nearly enough.
C.
Compelling even?
Never.
D.
Is it controversial?
Not in the slightest.
D.
Is it a story worth telling?
Maybe there was a story in him, but this wasn't it.
C-.
Is it good storytelling?
It concentrated on the rather soap-opera-ish "Do they love each other enough to stay together?" tale, rather than on his work, which I wanted to hear more about.
I guess I wanted it to be more like "A Beautiful Mind"---a much better movie.
D.
Is it well written?
Nothing stands out.
B-.
Is it well cast? Well played?
The guy playing Hawking looked like him, and I guess sounded like him.
He certainly didn't make himself easy to watch.
Other than that, I got nuthin'.
C.
Well shot?
I'll give them that.
A.
Is it too long? Too short?
Way too long.
D.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
Yes, and no.
C.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
Not predictable,and it surprises me, but I blame my ignorance for that.
B+.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
No.
C-.
Is it funny?
Almost never.
D.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies?
It wouldn't, and it isn't.
F.
Is it impressive ?
Not to me.
C-.
Overall grade: C.
Another one of those "Let's see if we can rack up awards for nobility."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Friday, December 12, 2014
Once Again, The Return Of "Report Cards".
It's that time of year again.
I have over a dozen DVDs sent from the West Coast studios, waiting for me to view and review them.
With many more anticipated.
I will review them with my usual "Report Card" process, designed to tell the readers no more than they need to know in order for them to determine whether or not they should want to see the movie in question.
Because I don't want to know the plot of a movie before I see it, I assume you don't either.
I said that I had more to say about the recent production of "Peter Pan"".
I've decided to take it on in Report Card fashion.
Jackie Gleason once described a TV critic as "One who describes an accident to an eyewitness."
As there have been an awful lot of eyewitnesses to this production already, I will, in this case, loosen my restrictions about discussing the plot.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Only rarely. Only intermittently.
C-.
Compelling even?
On rare occasions.
C.
Is it controversial?
Often, due to "political correctness", futzing around with the score, adding and removing things...
B-.
Is it a story worth telling?
With all the significant things that they did wrong, they still got me to cry during the last ten minutes.
That makes it a story worth telling.
A+.
Is it good storytelling?
It's been told better.
C.
Is it well written?
Yes. No damage done here.
A.
Is it well cast? Well played?
Now, we're getting down to the nits and grits.
You've got to start with Allison Williams.
I've never seen her in anything else, but here, she only displayed one arrow in her acting quiver: serious sincerity.
This eliminates a lot of other arrows that one needs to play Peter Pan: impishness, compassion, naivete, humor, joy.
All missing.
As a result, she was way too stiff.
You didn't care about her (him).
This made for a mostly tedious evening.
I kept thinking about all the possibilities for better Peter Pans that existed rather than Allison Williams.
One of them was right there on the stage: Kelli O'Hara, who played Mrs. Darling.
She's had a history of sliding into Mary Martin roles.
She is nine years younger than Mary was when she did "Peter Pan", and looks at least fifteen years younger.
And is adorable.
Hell, BRIAN Williams would have made a better Peter Pan.
He has the charm, the youthful looks, and the boyishness.
After all, he was once an actual boy.
Christopher Walken, though, WAS the compelling element.
Any time he appeared on the screen, I was hooked. And not just by his hook.
He was delightful.
You consistently can't wait to get back to Walken, who isn't on-screen nearly often enough.
The same is true of Kelli O'Hara.
Walken also accomplished something I had never seen before.
He made you care about Captain Hook.
So when you care about Captain Hook, and don't care about Peter Pan, something is out of whack.
B-.
Well directed?
If that was the best Rob Ashford could get out of Allison Williams, then no.
And Christopher Walken appeared to be uncontrollable, so no again.
D.
Well shot?
It looked gorgeous.
Much was made about the difficulties of attempting and pulling off such a complicate project.
But to me, it didn't look any more difficult than any of the last ten Super Bowl Halftime Shows.
All just as live, most involving people flying around on wires. That you didn't see.
B+.
Is it too long? Too short?
Way, way, way too long. Without Tivo, it would have been interminable.
F.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
It's fantasy, but with all it's flaws, I cared about the characters.
B+.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
Too much previous awareness makes it very predictable.
But the shift in concern between Hook and Peter Pan was certainly surprising.
B-.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
It was an event. It requires you to think about it.
B+.
Is it funny?
Only Walken was funny. Very funny. For the rest of it, a lot of funny was missing. They managed to take all the humor out of Tiger Lily.
C+.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies, or for a DVD?
It was dreary from beginning to end. It's hard to put a price tag on that. Actually it isn't.
F.
Is it impressive ?
Only visually.
A-.
Overall grade: C-.
I think I've pretty much covered it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
I have over a dozen DVDs sent from the West Coast studios, waiting for me to view and review them.
With many more anticipated.
I will review them with my usual "Report Card" process, designed to tell the readers no more than they need to know in order for them to determine whether or not they should want to see the movie in question.
Because I don't want to know the plot of a movie before I see it, I assume you don't either.
I said that I had more to say about the recent production of "Peter Pan"".
I've decided to take it on in Report Card fashion.
Jackie Gleason once described a TV critic as "One who describes an accident to an eyewitness."
As there have been an awful lot of eyewitnesses to this production already, I will, in this case, loosen my restrictions about discussing the plot.
On to the scoring:
Is it interesting?
Only rarely. Only intermittently.
C-.
Compelling even?
On rare occasions.
C.
Is it controversial?
Often, due to "political correctness", futzing around with the score, adding and removing things...
B-.
Is it a story worth telling?
With all the significant things that they did wrong, they still got me to cry during the last ten minutes.
That makes it a story worth telling.
A+.
Is it good storytelling?
It's been told better.
C.
Is it well written?
Yes. No damage done here.
A.
Is it well cast? Well played?
Now, we're getting down to the nits and grits.
You've got to start with Allison Williams.
I've never seen her in anything else, but here, she only displayed one arrow in her acting quiver: serious sincerity.
This eliminates a lot of other arrows that one needs to play Peter Pan: impishness, compassion, naivete, humor, joy.
All missing.
As a result, she was way too stiff.
You didn't care about her (him).
This made for a mostly tedious evening.
I kept thinking about all the possibilities for better Peter Pans that existed rather than Allison Williams.
One of them was right there on the stage: Kelli O'Hara, who played Mrs. Darling.
She's had a history of sliding into Mary Martin roles.
She is nine years younger than Mary was when she did "Peter Pan", and looks at least fifteen years younger.
And is adorable.
Hell, BRIAN Williams would have made a better Peter Pan.
He has the charm, the youthful looks, and the boyishness.
After all, he was once an actual boy.
Christopher Walken, though, WAS the compelling element.
Any time he appeared on the screen, I was hooked. And not just by his hook.
He was delightful.
You consistently can't wait to get back to Walken, who isn't on-screen nearly often enough.
The same is true of Kelli O'Hara.
Walken also accomplished something I had never seen before.
He made you care about Captain Hook.
So when you care about Captain Hook, and don't care about Peter Pan, something is out of whack.
B-.
Well directed?
If that was the best Rob Ashford could get out of Allison Williams, then no.
And Christopher Walken appeared to be uncontrollable, so no again.
D.
Well shot?
It looked gorgeous.
Much was made about the difficulties of attempting and pulling off such a complicate project.
But to me, it didn't look any more difficult than any of the last ten Super Bowl Halftime Shows.
All just as live, most involving people flying around on wires. That you didn't see.
B+.
Is it too long? Too short?
Way, way, way too long. Without Tivo, it would have been interminable.
F.
Is it believable? Do you care about the characters?
It's fantasy, but with all it's flaws, I cared about the characters.
B+.
Is it predictable? Does it surprise you?
Too much previous awareness makes it very predictable.
But the shift in concern between Hook and Peter Pan was certainly surprising.
B-.
Do you think about it after you've seen it?
It was an event. It requires you to think about it.
B+.
Is it funny?
Only Walken was funny. Very funny. For the rest of it, a lot of funny was missing. They managed to take all the humor out of Tiger Lily.
C+.
Would it have been worth the thirteen bucks it would have cost to see it in the movies, or for a DVD?
It was dreary from beginning to end. It's hard to put a price tag on that. Actually it isn't.
F.
Is it impressive ?
Only visually.
A-.
Overall grade: C-.
I think I've pretty much covered it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not
e-books. But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one. If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube.
*****
Monday, December 8, 2014
Once Again, The Return Of Doctor Rothman, Tune Detective.
Okay.
So I caught up with the new production of "Peter Pan" on Saturday Night, due to my trusty Tivo.
I'll give you my general impressions of it later in the week, but today, I'd like to concentrate on one specific element.
An element that I haven't seen anyone in the blogosphere comment upon.
So in that regard, I'd like to be the first kid on my block.
There has always been a checkered history about the Music and Lyrics credits for "Peter Pan".
First, the very talented team of Moose Charlap and Carolyn Leigh churned out eight of the surviving songs.
Then, the powers that be felt that more help was needed, and Jule Styne and Betty Comden & Adolph Green were brought in to mop up, and provided four of their own songs.
I think that the quality in both cases was comparable.
Here is the breakdown:
"Tender Shepherd" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"I've Gotta Crow" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Never Never Land" Jule Styne Betty Comden and Adolph Green
"I'm Flying" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Pirate Song" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Hook's Tango" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Indians" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Wendy" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Hook's Tarantella" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"I Won't Grow Up" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Oh, My Mysterious Lady" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Ugg-a-Wugg" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Distant Melody" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Captain Hook's Waltz" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"We Will Grow Up " Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
It's roughly eight to four, in favor of Charlap and Leigh.
I didn't realize that it was so heavily weighted that way.
So I'm watching the production, and they get to Captain Hook's tap dance number, a song called "Vengeance"
And my jaw drops about three feet.
It was a song written about fifty years ago, for a Broadway Musical called "Do-Re-Mi", which starred Phil Silvers.
It was called "Ambition".
Also by Comden, Green, and Styne.
It was a list song, during which Phil tried to convince Nancy Dussault, our heroine, that she could have everything she ever dreamed of by utilizing her wonderful singing voice by cutting a record for him.
And it was turned into "Vengeance".
All new lyrics.
Another list song, where Captain Hook mused about all the pleasures he'd derive by destroying Peter Pan.
"Vengeance" was very entertaining, and certainly gave Walken an opportunity to strut his stuff.
But, I kept asking myself, why did they have to rip off the melody to "Ambition" to accomplish this?
My first thought was that it was a song originally written for "Peter Pan", and got cut along the way, so they tossed it into "Do-Re-Mi" five years later.
As it turned out, this theory didn't hold that much water.
I had also Tivoed "The Making of Peter Pan Live", which I didn't watch until I finished watching "Peter Pan" itself.
Sure enough, there was a discussion about this song.
It involved Amanda Green, Adolph's daughter, and a somewhat prominent composer and lyricist in her own right.
Her mother is the actress Phyllis Newman.
A graphic appeared by her name---"Lyricist for Peter Pan".
With the rather large menu for the composers and lyricists for "Peter Pan" in it's opening credits, it was rather easy to overlook a credit which read "Incorporating Additional Lyrics by Amanda Green".
But it was there.
I went back and checked.
Amanda Green has gigantic teeth, considering the size of her face.
It's not a deformity, and this is not an insult. Her parents both had gigantic teeth, so it sort of makes sense.
It must have made for some interesting kissing in the Green household.
There's nothing inherently wrong with having gigantic teeth.
Dinah Shore was quite attractive with hers.
Amanda Green is rather attractive with hers.
So why am I bringing this up?
Because when asked about "Vengeance", she said it was a "New song".
Oh, the lyrics were new, I suppose, and perhaps written by her.
But who knows when they were written?
They showed the sheet music for "Vengeance"
It read "Music and Lyrics by Styne, Comden & Green, and Green.
Styne, Comden, and Green (the elder) are all long since dead.
So my question is: Just what was Betty Comden and Adolph Green's contribution to "Vengeance"?
They were only the original lyricists.
They didn't seem to have the time to write any of the lyrics to "Vengeance", being dead and all.
So why are they on the sheet music?
Maybe they did write it for the original "Peter Pan", and Amanda was just trying to keep it in the family.
Why wasn't anything lifted from the Charlap-Leigh catalogue?
Moose's son Bill is a major musical artist.
Why wasn't he asked to collaborate with Amanda?
Wouldn't that have been more fair?
Did he not get jobbed out of this?
In any case, the melody for "Vengeance" was written at least fifty-four years ago.
Some lying is going on.
A lot of children watched that interview.
So she was lying to children.
What's worse than that?
The song is not exactly new.
I think we were entitled to know that.
So she was, in effect, lying through her gigantic teeth.
Makes you wonder why she pursued and got this gig.
Maybe she was at a position to hold them at gunpoint.
But "Vengeance" wasn't enough for Amanda.
She also added two other melodies from earlier Styne, Comden, and Green shows, and set new lyrics to them:
One more from "Do-Re-Mi", which was originally "I Know About Love", changed to "Is It Only Pretend?".
The only hit song from "Do Re Mi" was "Make Someone Happy".
It was re-popularized many years later by Jimmy Durante on the soundtrack of "Sleepless In Seattle".
And bizarrely enough, Jimmy's rendition of "Make Someone Happy" showed up in one of the commercials in "Peter Pan"
Maybe if it didn't, Amanda would have ransacked that too:
"Make pirates happy,
Make just one pirate happy...."
I'm just sayin'
There was another song from another Comden, Green, Styne show, "Say Darling", "Something's Always Happening On The River", and it was turned into something weaker.
Maybe they were ALL written for and cut from "Peter Pan".
She was definitely ravaging the Styne, Comden, and Green Songbook.
I mean, she is supposed to be a composer in her own right.
Why couldn't she come up with original melodies for these songs?
Is she nothing more than a hack? A nuchshlepper?
(Boy, I haven't used THAT word in a while.)
Or maybe that was part of the deal to get permission to do any of this.
There has always been a history of dropping songs from some shows and having them turn up in others.
Rodgers and Hammerstein wrote a song for "South Pacific" for Lt. Cable to sing called "Suddenly Lucky".
The director, Joshua Logan, heard them play and sing it, and immediately pronounced it "The worst song he ever heard".
Undaunted, for their next show, "The King and I" they re-wrote the lyrics, and it became "Getting To Know You".
Nobody's idea of the worst anything.
When Lerner and Loewe wrote "My Fair Lady", they had this song written for it called "Say a Prayer For Me Tonight".
A lovely song.
There was no room for it, so they dropped it.
It showed up intact in their film "Gigi".
Nothing wrong with any of this.
But Styne and Comden & Green egregiously stepped over the line.
On at least one occasion.
They took a song from a show they did for Carol Burnett called "Fade Out, Fade In", a song that had seen the light of day, changed the lyrics, and re-inserted it into a show called "Hallelujah, Baby!", which starred Leslie Uggams.
It won the Tony that year for Best Musical.
Admittedly, there was very little competition that year.
Okay. They stole from themselves.
But it's still thievery.
So as far as Amanda is concerned, it's likely a case of apples and trees.
Maybe with Peter Pan, she tried to balance the books between Styne, Comden, and Green, and Charlap and Leigh.
After dropping "Mysterious Lady", a less than sexually appropriate or stellar effort of Comden and Green's, and adding the three that Amanda added, that pretty much evened the score.
And maybe it's even more crass and mercenary than that.
The CD for this show is probably going to sell in the gazillions.
It's a real stocking stuffer.
Amanda, who was given billing at the beginning of the show as "Incorporating Additional Lyrics by Amanda Green" would surely be entitled to a sizeable chunk of royalties.
And we've already established that she has the teeth to handle it.
So in a show about pirates, apparently lots of piracy is going on.
********
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not e-books.
But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one.
If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube, and my 4-hour interview at the Television Academy's Emmy TV Legends Website.
Here's the link:
http://www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/people/mark-rothman
*****
So I caught up with the new production of "Peter Pan" on Saturday Night, due to my trusty Tivo.
I'll give you my general impressions of it later in the week, but today, I'd like to concentrate on one specific element.
An element that I haven't seen anyone in the blogosphere comment upon.
So in that regard, I'd like to be the first kid on my block.
There has always been a checkered history about the Music and Lyrics credits for "Peter Pan".
First, the very talented team of Moose Charlap and Carolyn Leigh churned out eight of the surviving songs.
Then, the powers that be felt that more help was needed, and Jule Styne and Betty Comden & Adolph Green were brought in to mop up, and provided four of their own songs.
I think that the quality in both cases was comparable.
Here is the breakdown:
"Tender Shepherd" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"I've Gotta Crow" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Never Never Land" Jule Styne Betty Comden and Adolph Green
"I'm Flying" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Pirate Song" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Hook's Tango" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Indians" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Wendy" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Hook's Tarantella" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"I Won't Grow Up" Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
"Oh, My Mysterious Lady" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Ugg-a-Wugg" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Distant Melody" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"Captain Hook's Waltz" Jule Styne Comden and Green
"We Will Grow Up " Moose Charlap Carolyn Leigh
It's roughly eight to four, in favor of Charlap and Leigh.
I didn't realize that it was so heavily weighted that way.
So I'm watching the production, and they get to Captain Hook's tap dance number, a song called "Vengeance"
And my jaw drops about three feet.
It was a song written about fifty years ago, for a Broadway Musical called "Do-Re-Mi", which starred Phil Silvers.
It was called "Ambition".
Also by Comden, Green, and Styne.
It was a list song, during which Phil tried to convince Nancy Dussault, our heroine, that she could have everything she ever dreamed of by utilizing her wonderful singing voice by cutting a record for him.
And it was turned into "Vengeance".
All new lyrics.
Another list song, where Captain Hook mused about all the pleasures he'd derive by destroying Peter Pan.
"Vengeance" was very entertaining, and certainly gave Walken an opportunity to strut his stuff.
But, I kept asking myself, why did they have to rip off the melody to "Ambition" to accomplish this?
My first thought was that it was a song originally written for "Peter Pan", and got cut along the way, so they tossed it into "Do-Re-Mi" five years later.
As it turned out, this theory didn't hold that much water.
I had also Tivoed "The Making of Peter Pan Live", which I didn't watch until I finished watching "Peter Pan" itself.
Sure enough, there was a discussion about this song.
It involved Amanda Green, Adolph's daughter, and a somewhat prominent composer and lyricist in her own right.
Her mother is the actress Phyllis Newman.
A graphic appeared by her name---"Lyricist for Peter Pan".
With the rather large menu for the composers and lyricists for "Peter Pan" in it's opening credits, it was rather easy to overlook a credit which read "Incorporating Additional Lyrics by Amanda Green".
But it was there.
I went back and checked.
Amanda Green has gigantic teeth, considering the size of her face.
It's not a deformity, and this is not an insult. Her parents both had gigantic teeth, so it sort of makes sense.
It must have made for some interesting kissing in the Green household.
There's nothing inherently wrong with having gigantic teeth.
Dinah Shore was quite attractive with hers.
Amanda Green is rather attractive with hers.
So why am I bringing this up?
Because when asked about "Vengeance", she said it was a "New song".
Oh, the lyrics were new, I suppose, and perhaps written by her.
But who knows when they were written?
They showed the sheet music for "Vengeance"
It read "Music and Lyrics by Styne, Comden & Green, and Green.
Styne, Comden, and Green (the elder) are all long since dead.
So my question is: Just what was Betty Comden and Adolph Green's contribution to "Vengeance"?
They were only the original lyricists.
They didn't seem to have the time to write any of the lyrics to "Vengeance", being dead and all.
So why are they on the sheet music?
Maybe they did write it for the original "Peter Pan", and Amanda was just trying to keep it in the family.
Why wasn't anything lifted from the Charlap-Leigh catalogue?
Moose's son Bill is a major musical artist.
Why wasn't he asked to collaborate with Amanda?
Wouldn't that have been more fair?
Did he not get jobbed out of this?
In any case, the melody for "Vengeance" was written at least fifty-four years ago.
Some lying is going on.
A lot of children watched that interview.
So she was lying to children.
What's worse than that?
The song is not exactly new.
I think we were entitled to know that.
So she was, in effect, lying through her gigantic teeth.
Makes you wonder why she pursued and got this gig.
Maybe she was at a position to hold them at gunpoint.
But "Vengeance" wasn't enough for Amanda.
She also added two other melodies from earlier Styne, Comden, and Green shows, and set new lyrics to them:
One more from "Do-Re-Mi", which was originally "I Know About Love", changed to "Is It Only Pretend?".
The only hit song from "Do Re Mi" was "Make Someone Happy".
It was re-popularized many years later by Jimmy Durante on the soundtrack of "Sleepless In Seattle".
And bizarrely enough, Jimmy's rendition of "Make Someone Happy" showed up in one of the commercials in "Peter Pan"
Maybe if it didn't, Amanda would have ransacked that too:
"Make pirates happy,
Make just one pirate happy...."
I'm just sayin'
There was another song from another Comden, Green, Styne show, "Say Darling", "Something's Always Happening On The River", and it was turned into something weaker.
Maybe they were ALL written for and cut from "Peter Pan".
She was definitely ravaging the Styne, Comden, and Green Songbook.
I mean, she is supposed to be a composer in her own right.
Why couldn't she come up with original melodies for these songs?
Is she nothing more than a hack? A nuchshlepper?
(Boy, I haven't used THAT word in a while.)
Or maybe that was part of the deal to get permission to do any of this.
There has always been a history of dropping songs from some shows and having them turn up in others.
Rodgers and Hammerstein wrote a song for "South Pacific" for Lt. Cable to sing called "Suddenly Lucky".
The director, Joshua Logan, heard them play and sing it, and immediately pronounced it "The worst song he ever heard".
Undaunted, for their next show, "The King and I" they re-wrote the lyrics, and it became "Getting To Know You".
Nobody's idea of the worst anything.
When Lerner and Loewe wrote "My Fair Lady", they had this song written for it called "Say a Prayer For Me Tonight".
A lovely song.
There was no room for it, so they dropped it.
It showed up intact in their film "Gigi".
Nothing wrong with any of this.
But Styne and Comden & Green egregiously stepped over the line.
On at least one occasion.
They took a song from a show they did for Carol Burnett called "Fade Out, Fade In", a song that had seen the light of day, changed the lyrics, and re-inserted it into a show called "Hallelujah, Baby!", which starred Leslie Uggams.
It won the Tony that year for Best Musical.
Admittedly, there was very little competition that year.
Okay. They stole from themselves.
But it's still thievery.
So as far as Amanda is concerned, it's likely a case of apples and trees.
Maybe with Peter Pan, she tried to balance the books between Styne, Comden, and Green, and Charlap and Leigh.
After dropping "Mysterious Lady", a less than sexually appropriate or stellar effort of Comden and Green's, and adding the three that Amanda added, that pretty much evened the score.
And maybe it's even more crass and mercenary than that.
The CD for this show is probably going to sell in the gazillions.
It's a real stocking stuffer.
Amanda, who was given billing at the beginning of the show as "Incorporating Additional Lyrics by Amanda Green" would surely be entitled to a sizeable chunk of royalties.
And we've already established that she has the teeth to handle it.
So in a show about pirates, apparently lots of piracy is going on.
********
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not e-books.
But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one.
If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube, and my 4-hour interview at the Television Academy's Emmy TV Legends Website.
Here's the link:
http://www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/people/mark-rothman
*****
Friday, December 5, 2014
My Poohpie Boy.
It's fascinating to me how it's never too late too learn something new about yourself and your life as you think you know it.
This happened to me a couple of weeks ago.
I've mentioned a website called Spotify.
It contains almost every record album one can imagine.
I've downloaded many that interest me.
Usually stuff that would be regarded by most of you as "old".
I recently did a search there for "Spike Jones".
No, not the movie director.
The old bandleader.
His band was known as the City Slickers.
His approach to music was a humorous one, supplying raucous sound effects to such dignified melodies as "Cocktails For Two".
The closest comp to Spike Jones was Victor Borge.
The approach to music was the same, but Borge's was a lot more subtle.
He never had his trombonists play the slide with their feet and with their pants rolled up.
Jones did.
So I was scouring Spotify for Spike Jones albums, and started playing one.
And one cut completely stopped me in my tracks.
It was called "My Pretty Girl", and was sung by a male chorus.
The lyrics went something like:
"My Pretty Girl
My Pretty Girl
My Girl is Very Pretty"....and went on from there.
There was nothing particularly funny about "My Pretty Girl"
At least not "funny ha-ha".
But it sure was "funny peculiar".
It happens to be the same tune as a song my mother used to sing to me when I was four.
Only my mother's version was called "My Poohpie Boy".
And when I was four, I clamored for it.
I couldn't get enough of it.
Her version went:
"My Poohpie Boy
My Poohpie Boy
My Poohpie is a shmoohpie"
There was a middle part, or release, to it, and it too was the same as "My Pretty Girl".
Yes, I remember that, as well.
That's how weird I am.
I think that one of the reasons I always clamored for it is that I thought that my mother had composed it.
She never indicated otherwise.
And now, over sixty years later, I find out that she was merely ripping off Spike Jones.
What a rude awakening.
********
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not e-books.
But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one.
If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube, and my 4-hour interview at the Television Academy's Emmy TV Legends Website.
Here's the link:
http://www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/people/mark-rothman
*****
This happened to me a couple of weeks ago.
I've mentioned a website called Spotify.
It contains almost every record album one can imagine.
I've downloaded many that interest me.
Usually stuff that would be regarded by most of you as "old".
I recently did a search there for "Spike Jones".
No, not the movie director.
The old bandleader.
His band was known as the City Slickers.
His approach to music was a humorous one, supplying raucous sound effects to such dignified melodies as "Cocktails For Two".
The closest comp to Spike Jones was Victor Borge.
The approach to music was the same, but Borge's was a lot more subtle.
He never had his trombonists play the slide with their feet and with their pants rolled up.
Jones did.
So I was scouring Spotify for Spike Jones albums, and started playing one.
And one cut completely stopped me in my tracks.
It was called "My Pretty Girl", and was sung by a male chorus.
The lyrics went something like:
"My Pretty Girl
My Pretty Girl
My Girl is Very Pretty"....and went on from there.
There was nothing particularly funny about "My Pretty Girl"
At least not "funny ha-ha".
But it sure was "funny peculiar".
It happens to be the same tune as a song my mother used to sing to me when I was four.
Only my mother's version was called "My Poohpie Boy".
And when I was four, I clamored for it.
I couldn't get enough of it.
Her version went:
"My Poohpie Boy
My Poohpie Boy
My Poohpie is a shmoohpie"
There was a middle part, or release, to it, and it too was the same as "My Pretty Girl".
Yes, I remember that, as well.
That's how weird I am.
I think that one of the reasons I always clamored for it is that I thought that my mother had composed it.
She never indicated otherwise.
And now, over sixty years later, I find out that she was merely ripping off Spike Jones.
What a rude awakening.
********
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not e-books.
But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one.
If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube, and my 4-hour interview at the Television Academy's Emmy TV Legends Website.
Here's the link:
http://www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/people/mark-rothman
*****
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
LAURIE METCALF!!!!!
You all know who Laurie Metcalf is, don't you?
She's that wonderful actress who is on TV all the time.
She has a flair for playing comedy in a unique way, differently as she goes from role to role.
And right now, she is going from role to role weekly, as she stars in two, count 'em, two different TV series currently on the air.
CBS's "The McCarthys", and HBO's "Getting On".
Both brilliant shows.
Both made even more brilliant by her glowing presence.
Laurie Metcalfe is to comedy and television what Meryl Streep has been to drama and movies.
Except I've also seen Laurie Metcalfe be stunning playing drama.
And I've never really seen Streep, great as she is, be stunning doing comedy.
I think that Laurie Metcalfe is rapidly assuming, or has already taken over the mantle of The Best We Have.
The word ""nuanced" could have been coined to describe her approach to acting.
I can't think of anyone whose work is as nuanced.
There certainly is no one's work that is more nuanced.
So why do I have her name in capital letters at the top of this page?
Followed by five exclamation points?
Is it because of my already expressed enthusiasm for her?
Well...to some extent.
But there's a much more important reason:
I simply cannot remember her name.
Let me amend that.
I cannot easily remember her name.
When I try to summon it up, I usually have to start with "that actress who was on 'Roseanne'", which is odd, because I never watched "Roseanne".
I suppose you'd think it has something to do with someone my age typically beginning to forget people's names.
And I do.
But not usually actors.
Or ballplayers.
Particularly those who I am a fan of.
So continually having to fish for Laurie Metcalf's name in my head is a particularly peculiar aberration.
One I'm not at all proud of.
She deserves better than that from me.
I mean, after all, she has two, count 'em two great shows on the air.
So I have put her name in capital letters, followed by five exclamation points, in the hope that it will force me to remember her name without ever having to fish for it ever again.
And I may have to constantly re-refer to this article.
I hope not.
This was a problem I never had with Meryl Streep.
I'll give her credit for that.
That name's pretty unforgettable.
********
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not e-books.
But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one.
If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube, and my 4-hour interview at the Television Academy's Emmy TV Legends Website.
Here's the link:
http://www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/people/mark-rothman
*****
She's that wonderful actress who is on TV all the time.
She has a flair for playing comedy in a unique way, differently as she goes from role to role.
And right now, she is going from role to role weekly, as she stars in two, count 'em, two different TV series currently on the air.
CBS's "The McCarthys", and HBO's "Getting On".
Both brilliant shows.
Both made even more brilliant by her glowing presence.
Laurie Metcalfe is to comedy and television what Meryl Streep has been to drama and movies.
Except I've also seen Laurie Metcalfe be stunning playing drama.
And I've never really seen Streep, great as she is, be stunning doing comedy.
I think that Laurie Metcalfe is rapidly assuming, or has already taken over the mantle of The Best We Have.
The word ""nuanced" could have been coined to describe her approach to acting.
I can't think of anyone whose work is as nuanced.
There certainly is no one's work that is more nuanced.
So why do I have her name in capital letters at the top of this page?
Followed by five exclamation points?
Is it because of my already expressed enthusiasm for her?
Well...to some extent.
But there's a much more important reason:
I simply cannot remember her name.
Let me amend that.
I cannot easily remember her name.
When I try to summon it up, I usually have to start with "that actress who was on 'Roseanne'", which is odd, because I never watched "Roseanne".
I suppose you'd think it has something to do with someone my age typically beginning to forget people's names.
And I do.
But not usually actors.
Or ballplayers.
Particularly those who I am a fan of.
So continually having to fish for Laurie Metcalf's name in my head is a particularly peculiar aberration.
One I'm not at all proud of.
She deserves better than that from me.
I mean, after all, she has two, count 'em two great shows on the air.
So I have put her name in capital letters, followed by five exclamation points, in the hope that it will force me to remember her name without ever having to fish for it ever again.
And I may have to constantly re-refer to this article.
I hope not.
This was a problem I never had with Meryl Streep.
I'll give her credit for that.
That name's pretty unforgettable.
********
My books ,"Show Runner" and it's sequel, "Show Runner Two", can be found at the Amazon Kindle Store.
Along with the newer ones, "The Man Is Dead", and "Report Cards".
You can search by typing in my name, Cindy Williams, Laverne and Shirley, The Odd Couple, or Happy Days.
Check them out.
You don't need a Kindle machine to download them.
Just get the free app from Kindle, and they can be downloaded to an IPhone, IPad, or Blackberry.
The paperbacks, "Mark Rothman's Essays" and my new novel, "I'm Not Garbo" are not e-books.
But they are available for people without Kindle.
I have many readings and signings lined up for those, and the thing about Kindle is you can't sign one.
If you'd like one of the paperbacks, personally autographed, contact me at macchus999@aol.com.
And now, we've got my reading of my "Laverne and Shirley Movie" screenplay on YouTube, and my 4-hour interview at the Television Academy's Emmy TV Legends Website.
Here's the link:
http://www.emmytvlegends.org/interviews/people/mark-rothman
*****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments