As Robert Musel looks on, Lucy is preparing for a mod dance sequence to be staged at Osterley House, one of the stately homes you always see in tours of England. Looking at some of the "far-out costumes that end 6 inches above the knees", she wonders out loud to Musel if they're supposed to be short skirts or long belts, then proceeds to show off her own "notably elegant legs" in various outfits that form a pictorial during the scene. It can be painful sometimes watching these shows where your favorite stars try to act younger than their years, but if anyone can pull it off, I suspect it's Lucille Ball. Anyway, you've got a link to the video up there; you can check it out for yourself.
In case you were wondering, and it should come as no surprise, the Brits love Lucy as mucg as we do; throughout her time there, "Truck drivers gaped and slowed down to give her the traditional thumbs up of approval, and there was a good deal of cheerful backchat with passers-by." In fact, while cast and crew were filming at Mme. Tussard's, she received quite a fright when she was approached for an autograph by a cleaning woman. The poor lady just wanted a good look at Lucy, so she had stood quietly, staring at the star and hoping not to attract any attention, totally unaware that from an angle she appeared to be part of one of the wax displays. And, of course, when one of those figures appears to come to life and start walking toward you—well, what else can you do but scream? Lucy happily, if somewhat shakily, signed the autograph.
One scene in particular demonstrates Lucy's dedication to her work. It takes place at the poluted river Thames, which Musel describes as "'not much better than a sewer in some stretches." Lucy's character expresses a desire to go punting on the Thames, but Newly's hapless travel agent can only come up with an inflatable raft. Ball was warned that if she sank with the raft, as was called for in the script, she'd need typhoid and other shots, and if she swallowed any of the "sludge," she'd probably have to have her stomach pumped. Why don't we just go to a nice, clean—and safe—reservoir and film it there? Lucy, however, disagreed, and since she also happened to be Executive Producer of the special, her word was final. To prove it, she "went into the Thames up to her lips right then and there." No stunt doubles for this star.
l l l
During the 60s, the Ed Sullivan Show and The Hollywood Palace were the premiere variety shows on television. Whenever they appear in TV Guide together, we'll match them up and see who has the best lineup..Sullivan: Ed's scheduled guests: Jim "Gomer Pyle" Nabors, who sings "The Impossible Dream" and "Swanee"; singer Peggy Lee; jazz pianist-bandleader Duke Ellington; Mirella Freni and Gianni Raimondi, of the Metropolitan Opera; comics Joan Rivers and Norm Crosby; the Kovac and Rabovsky Gypsy Ballet; Upstairs at the Downstairs, comedy troupe; Tanya the Elephant; and the Muppets puppets.
Palace: Comedienne Phyllis Diller, making her debut as a Palace hostess, presents singer Tony Martin; comedian Bob Newhart, who offers a monolog about a policeman and a would-be suicide; Herman’s Hermits, rock ‘n’ roll group; dancer Lada Edmund Jr.; magician Kirk Kirkham; Del Morals’ acrobatic act; and the Palace Duo, trapeze artists.
You might remember that last week I promised I'd compare TV Guide's scheduled listing of Sullivan guests with the actual show lineup; this week's description was pretty accurate. There was only one significant addition, but I think it's worth mentioning; the four-person comedy troupe Upstairs at the Downstairs, one of those members being one Madeline Kahn. Otherwise it's a tough call, with Bob Newhart and Herman's Hermits making a strong statement for Palace. On the whole, though, I think Peggy Lee and Duke Ellington make the difference, and on that basis Sullivan carries the week.
l l l
From 1963 to 1976, TV Guide's weekly reviews were written by the witty and acerbic Cleveland Amory. Whenever they appear, we'll look at Cleve's latest take on the shows of the era. It's always nice to be able to analyze one of Cleveland Amory's reviews from the perspective of having actually seen the series he's reviewing, and this week we have such a case, with CBS's WWII action-adventure series Jericho. I never saw it during its original sincle season, but I had the chance to view the entire series this year, so when Cleve calls Jericho "the season’s best new adventure-filled, action-packed series involving undercover work in a fun war," I'm in a position to agree with him. Mind you, I didn't like the show quite as much as he did, or perhaps his ardor dimmed somewhat as the season progressed, but as Amory points out, it has a good many things going for it.
Start with the three principals, Don Francks, John Leyton, and Marino Masé, playing the three members of a special unit, code-named Jericho, sent to pull off impossibly impossible missions with the help of local partisans. They're all good actors, playng characters that are "intrinsically interesting," and though the show can be heavy-handed at times, well, what isn't? Amory singles out one episode which he considers "one of the finest individual episodes of any show we've ever seen," which is high praise indeed, particularly coming from Our Critic. It involved choirboys being smuggled into a secret German submarine base carrying loaves of bread containing bombs, and if that doesn't whet your appetite enough to go to Roku and check it out for yourself, there's not a whole lot more I can do for you. (It's called "A Jug of Wine, a Loaf of Bread—and POW!" but don't let that stop you; remember that reporters don't compose their own headlines, either.)
Having watched Jericho just after finishing Garrison's Gorillas and just before starting Combat!, I can tell you that the show, good as it might be, doesn't measure up to either one of those. It's certainly not as gritty as the latter (but then, what series is?), and the entertainment value of the former was just that much bit higher that it allowed one to overlook the implausibility in which both Garrison and Jericho traffic. However, as a devoted fan of Hogan's Heroes, I'm in no position to lecture anyone on plausiblity. Amory himself points out that the the trio might be well-served by going about their jobs displaying a little more grimness and a little less relish. As he concludes, "Fun's fun, boys—but still . . .
l l l
The first "definitive" poll of the season is in, that being the Nielsens for October 10, and while the week's top show was a returning favorite—Green Acres—first among the newcomers is ABC's WWII series The Rat Patrol. As for the biggest disappointment, at least in terms of potential, that belongs to the network's Stage 67, which was highly touted at the start of the season but "was so scorned by critic and viewer alike" that it's likely going to be replaced by a Wednesday night movie. The jury's still out on where Stage 67 winds up, and whether it survives as a weekly series or an occasional special. But since a Wednesday night movie requires more than just an hour, that's going to necessitate moving the week's second airing of Peyton Place. Where to? At this point, probably in place of The Man Who Never Was, although Shane and Hawk, two hour-long dramas, are in big trouble already. As for the year's biggest bomb, The Tammy Grimes Show, well, that's already a scratch.
The axe swung quickly at CBS as well, with Jean Arthur's new comedy to leave the air on December 5 after 12 episodes, to be replaced by a prime-time version of To Tell The Truth. And while the network hasn't announced any other casualties yet, "the Smothers Brothers, signed for a new variety hour, had been alerted to stand by for a January debut." Sure enough, when the new year comes around, the Brothers will be sitting in place of the revival of Garry Moore's show. Perhaps the best news for the Tiffany Network applies not to this season, but next Carol Burnett will be returning next fall in a comedy-variety hour, the first woman to helm such a show since Dinah Shore; it's probable she'll be replacing Danny Kaye, who's "experiencing ratings fatigue."
Meanwhile, all is quiet at NBC; there are no reports of "second season talk," although The Roger Miller Show and The Hero are said to be on tenuous ground. A possible replacement: a long-promised live-action version of Dick Tracy. It's only been 58 years, but we're still waiting.
l l l
As for the rest of the week, on Sunday, KXTV tours the magnificent collection of Oriental art donated to the city of San Francisco by Avery Brundage; Brundage may be best known to most of you as the head of the International Olympic Committee from 1952 to 1972, a man for whom amateurism in the Olympics was a hill to die on, and one of the most controversial figures in sports in the 20th Century. Tuesday, Truman Capote is one of the guests on David Susskind's program (9:00 p.m., KQED), discussing his life and works, including "Breakfast at Tiffany's" and In Cold Blood. On Wednesday, Tony Bennett stars in his first hour-long special (10:00 p.m., ABC), with trumpeter Bobby Hackett, drummer Buddy Rich, vibraphonist Milt Jackson, Candido on bongos and conga drums, and flutist Paul Horn and his quintet. Bennett also performs with the Ralph Burns orchestra. Thursday sees the conclusion of a two-part Batman adventure (7:30 p.m., ABC) starring Liberace in the dual role of Chandell, the famouns pianist, and his evil twin brother Harry; as I recall, this story pulled in the highest ratings of Batman's run. And on Friday, Swingshif Theatre (1:00 a.m., KNTV in San Jose) presents "Who Killed Julie Greer?," an episode of The Dick Powell Show that served as the pilot for Burke's Law, with Powell himself in the role of our favorite millionaire police detective, Amos Burke.
l l l
I think it's safe to say the Great Pumpkin is the second-most popular of all the Peanuts cartoons after A Charlie Brown Christmas, and it's probably also the second-most successful as far as merchandise marketing is concerned. I mean, have any of you gone been in a grocery store in the last month? If so, you've almost certainly seen boxes of pumpkins for sale, and just about every one of those boxes has Charlie Brown, Linus, and Snoopy on the side, sitting in a sincere pumpkin patch, waiting for the Great Pumpkin. And this is 58 years after the cartoon first aired! I've mentioned in the past how Hallmark really cashed in on it at the time, putting out The Peanuts Book of Pumpkin Carols, including the classics "Great Pumpkin is Comin' to Town" and "Pumpkin Bells." (Maybe they still publish it; it's been a while since I've been in a Hallmark store.) Then, of course, there's the legend of Snoopy vs the Red Baron; the storyline had been introduced in the comic strip the previous year and was instantly popular (just ask the Royal Guardsmen); it plays a crucial role in the plot of The Great Pumpkin. We don't do much for Halloween in the Hadley household besides greating trick-or-treaters at the door, but we always make it a point to watch The Great Pumpkin on Halloween night.
l l l
Arthur Schlesinger Jr., John F. Kennedy's house historian and a past contributor to TV Guide, writes this week about the changes television hath wrought in politics. "More and more Americans, it appears, are forming their impressions of the world on the basis of the things they see on the tiny screen," he begins, adding that in 1964 Broadcasting magazine declared that "television had become the 'Nation’s primary news medium.'" (Substitute "social media" for television, and we're probably at the same point.) Some argue that reliance on the medium produces "a more alret and better-informed electorate" while others counter that it is "reducing our politics to a mixture of high-pressure salesmanship and beauty contests." Schlesinger attempts, in this article, to sort through the various claims and evidence and come up with an understanding of where the truth lies.
On the other hand, television has also played a role in what Schlesinger refers to as "pseudo-news"; that is, "the creation of news on the initiative of the medium." That news may be legitimate, even important, but too often it winds up being "mischievous and irresponsible," as in the case where a TV news crew attempted, in the course of an interview, to spur Schlesinger into criticizing President Johnson. Although their efforts failed (and, to the crew's credit, they still aired the interview even without any provocative comments), this kind of interview technique, "designed to lure or trap people into sensational statements they would not otherwise make[,] can be dispensed with."
Schlesinger is less sure about the effect or usefulness of editorialization by news personalities. Frankly, he wonders, it's quite possible that television has a tendency to constrain such commentary. His preference is for panel discussion shows, most frequently seen on public broadcasting or local television. Schlesinger believes these shows "have improved the level of political discussion in part because they permit the suggestion of subtleties and complexities in public problems." Shows of this kind nowadays tend to become either echo chambers or shoutfests—one can only imagine what he'd think of them.
Finally, there's the question of paid political programming. Schlesinger's greatest fear is reserved for what he refers to as the "spot announcement," what we'd call a commercial. The length of political speeches has steadily decreased in the era of mass communication; whereas 60 years ago an audience would travel miles to hear a candidate discourse for a couple of hours on important issues, the coming of radio reduced such speeches to 45 minutes, then a half hour. By 1956, Adlai Stevenson's television advisers said that 15 minutes "represented the outer limit of the attention span of an American audience." Today, even that is too long. The result has "degrad[ed] the level and character of our political discourse" (preach it, Art!), resulting in "the vulgarization of issues, the exaltation of the immediately ingratiating personality and, in general, an orgy of electronic demagoguery." Perhaps the majority of the television audience doesn't want an intelligent discussion of the issues (it doesn't), but doesn't the media have an obligation to provide it for the minority who do? Schlesinger suggests that government subsidies enabling networks to give more time to candidates without losing ad revenue might be a possible solution.
Television has also resulted in an emphasis on style over substance, preferring "the poised, photogenic, otherdirected, manipulable candidate." Presidents such as Adams, Jackson, and Lincoln wouldn't have stood a chance in such an environment. Of course, Schlesinger's former boss, JFK, was among the first politicians to recognize the power and potential of television, and the words "poised" and "photogenic" describe him to a T. Schlesinger doesn't acknowledge that, but he does allow as to how the national grief following Kennedy's assassination was in part "a result of the way television had made him a cherished figure in remote lands." If television would "app[ly] as much as much thought and talent to this as it does to selling detergents," it could play a great role in making "our democracy more rational and responsible."
l l l
The myth that the BATMAN episodes with Liberace were the highest rated of the series originated with Joel Eisner's OFFICIAL BATMAN BATBOOK back in the mid-1980s, but it is definitely a myth. The Wednesday episode on 10/26/66 scored a 17.9 rating and 30.7 share, which didn't even win the time period. It did edge LOST IN SPACE which had a 17.7 for the half hour (but improved to 22.4 in its second half hour for a total 20.0 rating, 33.1 share) but was well behind THE VIRGINIAN, which was at 19.9/34.1 share for its first of three half hours. Hell, the following week's Wednesday episode outscored it, with a 18.2 rating on 11/2/66. And of course the Wednesday installment averaged a 24.7 during 1965-66.
ReplyDeleteOn Thursday, 10/27/66, BATMAN was at 18.5/32.6, second in the half hour again, beating JERICHO which a 13.1 rating but behind DANIEL BOONE's 19.1 rating. And once again, the following Thursday's BATMAN scored better, with a 21.3 rating, 34.6 share. The Liberace appearance is well remembered, but was well down on the list for the 1966-67 season, let alone the Nielsens for the previous year.
My figures are from the actual Nielsen pocketbooks for 1966-67, which to be fair likely were not available to Eisner when he wrote the Batbook circa 1985-86.
What did score big, big ratings on 10/27/66 was, as you mention, IT'S THE GREAT PUMPKIN, CHARLIE BROWN which bludgeoned NBC and ABC with a 31.6 rating, 49.0 share. It beat the ratings for its competition, STAR TREK (14.5) and THE DATING GAME (13.8) put together-handily.
ReplyDelete