The Bob Crane I knew and loved

Here’s a Friday Question that became an entire post. It’s about Bob Crane, who starred in HOGAN’S HEROES and was later murdered in a porn-related incident.  But that's not the focus of today's question.

It comes from Mark:

How was Bob Crane on radio. You hear a lot of superlatives now, but the early work of famous people is often overpraised. What did you think of him at the time?

Before Crane established himself as a fine comic actor, he was a truly great radio personality and here’s why: He really knew how to communicate one-to-one with his listeners. He was warm and funny and talked directly to YOU. Very few announcers understand that concept. But the great ones, like Arthur Godfrey, Paul Harvey, Dan Ingram, and Vin Scully do.

For years Crane did mornings on the CBS flagship station in Los Angeles, KNX.

His big schtick was that he used a lot of wild tracks in his show – quick sound bytes inserted into programming, even commercials. He’d play a Winston cigarette commercial and stop it right in the middle for five seconds of a guy coughing.   Remember these were the late '50s and that technique was very groundbreaking.   Now almost every zany radio personality does this as part of their act.  But Crane was one of the originators. 

Interestingly, he was hired from a small station in Bridgeport, Connecticut. The station used to reach parts of New York and he was eating into the ratings of powerhouse WCBS. Primarily to get him out of town, CBS offered him the morning show on their LA outlet.

Great, except there was a problem. KNX was a union shop. Crane was used to playing all of his wild tracks himself – which was quite a feat considering everything was on discs and had to be cued up to just the right spot. He was also a drummer and had expert timing.

The union engineers were nowhere near as proficient at it and the show really stumbled out of the gate. Crane threatened to quit unless he could run his own control board. Lots of meetings between the station and the union resulted until an agreement was reached allowing him to do that.

Crane was also an excellent interviewer. A regular feature on his show was celebrity interviews, and he’d get the biggest stars in Hollywood to come on his local show. Sinatra, Marilyn Monroe, Jimmy Stewart, etc. One day he interviewed Carl Reiner, who at the time was running THE DICK VAN DYKE SHOW. He convinced Reiner to give him a small part in an episode. The producers of THE DONNA REED SHOW saw him and were impressed enough to give him a recurring role on their series. For two years he did that show but kept his radio gig.

And all the while he remained the same humble charming friendly guy on the air. You just felt comfortable listening to him. And the quality never slipped. You never got the sense he was now just phoning it in because he had a TV series.

Once he got HOGAN’S HEROES and was starring in a show, that’s when he finally gave up the radio job.

But even then, a few years later, he filled in a few times for Dick Whittinghill at crosstown rival KMPC. I was an intern at KMPC back then and spent some time with him.   He was as nice and genuine off the air as on. 

I also knew him a little bit from the neighborhood. His son was roughly my age and I’d see Bob Crane at Little League games or school concerts. He was the typical suburban dad.

Who knew he would abandon all that for a life of sex and pornography and enter a very unsavory and ultimately deadly world?

Crane is remembered way more for his TV work, but I’m here to tell you, as good as he was, his radio work was even better.

I'm a guilty pleasure

Everybody is a critic goes hand in hand these days with Everybody has a podcast (or a blog). You can find critical analysis on just about everything, including, I’ve discovered, my own work.

There’s a website called THE NEXT REEL where two guys Siskel&Ebert their way through popular cinema. They are Pete Wright and Andy Nelson.

They’re currently doing a series called “Guilty Pleasures” where they select films not categorized as classics but they still really enjoy. Andy is up this week and selected VOLUNTEERS. Thanks, Andy… I think.

Because after he talks about how funny and enjoyable it was, he and his partner systematically tear the film apart. Makes me wonder what they do to movies they DIDN’T like.

My first reaction in listening was of course, “Who the fuck are these guys and what have they ever done?” But then I looked at the big picture. How very cool that something I co-wrote thirty years ago is still being discussed! There are plenty of movies from earlier this year that are forgotten and will never be heard from again. Thirty years is a long time. It’s half the shelf life of a Twinkie.

At that point I found the analysis entertaining. Some things I agree with and others I don’t. Being on the inside I had the advantage of knowing why certain creative decisions were made. I also have pet peeves with the film they didn’t seem bothered by. (Come on, guys. If you’re going to rip me, rip me for the right things.)

But overall, the discussion just made me more proud of the film, warts and all. Like I said, the fact that they even remembered it was a plus. And if comic material can still stand up and be funny after thirty years, that’s pretty satisfying. How many people are still laughing at FRATERNITY VACATION or REMO WILLIAMS: THE ADVENTURE BEGINS?

And our aim was more ambitious than most current studio raunch-fests. We had an actual story, social commentary, political overtones, and character development. We may not have succeeded in bringing it all together but I give us points for trying.

The hosts point to a Rotten Tomatoes survey to suggest that audiences didn’t care for the film. But in truth, VOLUNTEERS kicks ass whenever it’s shown on TV, and always has. You’ll generally find local stations airing it during sweeps because it consistently garners high ratings. HBO ran it again just recently. How many movies from 1985 does HBO show? So with all its faults, I’m happy to be associated with VOLUNTEERS. Oh, and I still get residuals.

I’m really looking forward to another podcast. TALK SALAD AND SCRAMBLED EGGS. Kevin Smith and his partner, Matt Mira, plan to discuss every FRASIER episode, two a week. Pretty soon they’ll get to our first Lilith episode.  And surprise surprise in this week's episode they talk about me and this blog.   They mispronounce my name but who gives a shit?  I made the Kevin Smith podcast. It starts 8 minutes in.  They don't mention VOLUNTEERS.  Too bad.  It would have been fun to compare critiques. 

Size does matter

The perfect follow-up to my ANT-MAN review.

As I’ve mentioned before (ad nauseam) David Isaacs and I wrote the 1985 Tom Hanks-John Candy movie, VOLUNTEERS. Happily, it still airs some thirty years later. Recently it was on HBO. (Ka-ching!)

The director, Nicholas Meyer graciously allowed David and me to participate in editing. Basically, we just watched. We’re not stupid.

Back in those days the editors worked on movieolas, splicing strips of film, physically attaching them, and then previewing on a machine with a monitor the size of an ipad mini.

In VOLUNTEERS, Tom Hanks, John Candy, and Rita Wilson play characters who join the Peace Corps and wind up in Thailand in 1962. Tim Thomerson plays the Peace Corps leader who is sweet on Rita Wilson. He’s also a fucking nutcase. We wanted to hint at that by having him give Rita a little present – a small statue of a Siamese Prince. These were common items. But the key feature on this particular one was a large protruding penis.

Nick cut the scene together and we noticed he cut to a close up of the statue. David and I said, “You can’t do that. On the big screen that's going to be horrifying. You can’t tell here on a 5” monitor but on a giant silver screen all hell will break loose.” Nick worried that if we stayed in the master that the statue wouldn’t have enough impact, and the penis might not even register.

He was the director so we bowed to him.

Once the film was all assembled we put together a screening for a test audience. It was held in the main theater on the 20th Century Fox lot that seats – I dunno – five or six hundred. Maybe a thousand?  Who knows?  David and I sat in the last row taking notes.

The infamous moment arrived when the statue was revealed and this giant penis filled the entire screen.  Every woman in the theater screamed in bloody horror. David and I had to slip out into the lobby where we were proceeded to laugh hysterically through the rest of the picture.

Needless to say, the close up came out. I’m only sorry the preview wasn’t on an IMAX screen in 3D. I think I’d still be rolling on the ground.

The moral here is that size does matter – but sometimes the smaller the better.

ANT-MAN -- my review

DISCLAIMER:  No picnics were harmed in the making of this movie.

What’s wrong with the Marvel Universe? Don’t they understand that superheroes have to be tortured individuals? That all bright colors need to be washed out and grayed? That every story needs to be dark and dreary? That it has to rain through half the movie? That the superhero has to be British? If only Ingmar Bergman were still alive to direct BATMAN v. SUPERMAN.  But even he would lighten it up a little. 

Everything I hate about the DC Universe is what I love about Marvel. It’s a fucking comic book, people! And although a lot of Marvel’s movies get convoluted and the CGI action sequences become tiresome and tedious after awhile, when they hit it right they really produce a fun thrill ride with genuine laughs and (God forbid) a touching moment now and then. ANT-MAN is one that got it right. Even without Joss Whedon.  Who knew?

First off, the movie doesn’t take itself too seriously. It’s a fucking comic book! Paul Rudd stars in it. You go to Paul Rudd for funny. You go to Paul Rudd for quirky romantic lead. You don’t go to Paul Rudd for “Yippee Ki-yay, motherfucker!” And by putting Rudd in an ant costume where his face is completely covered, he himself didn’t have to do any of the stunts. Just get a stuntman who looks good in a Power Ranger suit, throw him against greenscreen, have him run and kick and punch the air and you’ve got Paul Rudd: action hero. Look, when you think about it, a big part of the fun for guys watching superheroes is wishing they could be them. More of those guys look like Paul Rudd than Henry Cavill. (Although, in this case, not many guys fantasize about being any smaller.)

For his part, Rudd totally delivered. He has that rare quality of being able to play funny and likable but real. And clearly, he was enjoying himself.  In fact, the single thing that struck me about this movie was that all of the actors seemed to be having the time of their lives. It showed and was infectious. Michael Douglas proved he could eat up the scenery while still playing straight. Evangeline Lily can kick ass even in a bob haircut (Jack, Hugo, Sayid, and the Smoke Monster would all be proud), and Corey Stoll is what Lex Luther can only dream of being. And who can possibly forget Leilani Amour Arenza as SF Tenderloin Resident?

Like I said, there are a few tender moments, but the movie goes out of its way to puncture them as soon as possible. If you see a tear, a joke will not be far behind.

Along the way there were some inventive gags and stunts. Because everything is all computer generated, nothing is really spectacular. The most impressive thing you can say about this film technically is that the CGI has really improved since HONEY, I SHRUNK THE KIDS.

And they really had to rely on CGI for the opening sequence.  They had to make Michael Douglas look thirty years younger while in the same scene make Hayley Atwell (Agent Carter) look forty years older.  

But none of that matters. ANT-MAN is mindless good fun... or super scary if you’re afraid of ants.

Oh, and just to avoid any confusion, ANT-MAN is not a reboot of AUNTIE MAME.  It's a fucking comic book! 

No one dresses better than comedy writers

I once related the story of my partner and I attending an awards ceremony looking like idiots in matching brown tuxedos and peach ruffled shirts. But that is not to suggest that I don't normally dress extremely well. In fact, I was in GQ.

No. Really.

Honest.

I’m serious.

Somehow GQ magazine got wind of my going off to Syracuse in 1988 to announce minor league baseball. They decided to do an article about me. My wife is still laughing. “You in GQ?”

I did the phone interview with Ron Powers who wrote the piece. Then I got a call from their photographer. They wanted to take pictures of me that Friday at a local baseball stadium. I said fine. The photographer then wanted to know what I’d be wearing. I said I didn’t know. This was only Monday and my mom usually doesn’t pick out my clothes until the night before. He asked my measurements and said he would bring something. Now I was a little pissed off. Just because I was a writer did he automatically assume I was a schlump? I can't believe he saw me on DON KIRSCHNER'S ROCK AWARDS. I told him I would bring my own wardrobe. Obviously his concern was not assuaged. He asked if I’d bring a selection.

I’m the same height and size as Ted Danson. The next day I went to the CHEERS wardrobe guy and asked if I could borrow some Sam Malone shirts and slacks.

Friday afternoon I hooked up with the photographer. I think I was wearing a torn t-shirt. There was already a lump in his throat. I opened my trunk and let him examine my selection. The accompanying picture is a well...an approximation. His eyes almost popped out. “Jesus, this is great stuff!” he said, astonished. “Any one of these would be perfect.” “Well YEAH,” I said as if it couldn't be more obvious. “It might surprise you to learn that most television writers are total fashion hounds. Much of the time in writers rooms is spent discussing men’s haberdashery.”

I accepted his apology and hoped that he had a new respect for how writers really felt about wardrobe.

He went off to set up his camera while I put one of the shirts on, glad that he didn’t see the “Property of Paramount Pictures” tag that was still on the sleeve.

The article came out August 1988. I see my shirt all the time in reruns.

This is a repost from over four years ago.  

Why sign up for THE SITCOM ROOM?

I will be holding another SITCOM ROOM weekend seminar this October 17 & 18 in Los Angeles. Registration will be later this week. But it will open one hour earlier for anyone on the Alert List. Here’s where you go to sign up for that. (The list is private and will never be shared.  And you can unsubscribe at any time.)

So why should you sign up for the SITCOM ROOM?

It’s the only truly hands-on writing seminar there is.

I only hold it once every couple of years.

You get to see professional actors perform your work.

It’s something to do.

This might help you break into the business.

You learn things about yourself that you never knew. (Good things even)

You’ll learn your strengths and weaknesses.

You build lifelong friendships.

You might even find a writing partner.

You get to hear some of my old war stories.

You’ll laugh for two straight days.

No experience is necessary.

You’ll develop a taste for Red Vines.

You’ll learn different “types” of comedy and which are bested suited for sitcoms.

You’ll learn how to write spec scripts that sell.

There’s no keynote speech by Tommy Lasorda.

Even if you don’t want to do this professionally, it’s “fantasy camp” for comedy writers.

You get to live out a dream.

You get to meet some of my friends. 

You’ll forever see sitcoms in a whole new light.

I only lecture once.

You learn how to make things funnier.

Chicks love comedy writers.

You learn how to be creative on demand.

You learn whether this is the career path for you.

It’s a lot cheaper than a year at NYU.

You’ll be introduced to the business side of sitcom writing – agents, managers, job opportunities, salaries, and marketplaces,

It’s something to look forward to in October besides the World Series (unless it’s held in November this year) and Halloween.

You develop new ways of thinking.

There’s never more than twenty attendees so that everyone gets personal attention.

You’re held to professional standards.

There’s a Burger King across the street.

Former attendees have gone on to have nice careers in writing. One was on staff of NURSE JACKEE.

You get to ask me lots of questions.

You come away not just with a notebook of notes but with a scene you’ve co-written (and rewritten) and a great sense of accomplishment.

Here’s what past attendees have said (and a few more always chime in with an unsolicited comment or two), and again – here’s the Alert List. Hope to see you at this year’s SITCOM ROOM.