Friday, January 27, 2012

Racing Cars ~ Winning (1969)


I had set out to watch three classic race car movies and write about each. First was Grand Prix (1966) which was a delight to watch and even though it was long and the plot was rather weak, the three hours seemed to fly by for me. Le Mans (1971) was a horrible, plotless mess. It was fun to watch because of Steve McQueen and because I could easily pick out all the things I disliked and the documentary on the DVD proved to be what saved the whole film for me. Watching Winning (1969) was both a bore and a chore to watch. But this makes absolutely no sense to me. I love the 1960s, I love Paul Newman, and it's an added bonus that his wife Joanne Woodward co-stars as his love interest and I can legitimately hate Robert Wagner because he's the bad guy in the film. Plus there was racing! Winning should have been #winning in my book. But alas, it was not.

So what went wrong? Well, out of the three racing movies, this one had the most plot. Or at least it tried very hard to have a dramatic plot. Paul Newman stars racer Frank Capua who is racing the Indy 500. He falls for divorcee and single mother Elora (Joanne Woodward). They marry and Frank adopts Elora's teen son Charley (Richard Thomas). Elora and Charley, both head over heels in love and admiration for Frank, follow him from race to race. Elora proves to be trouble when she has an affair with rival racer Lou Erding (Robert Wagner). The plot is very choppy, Charley is annoying, to our dismay Newman drinks champagne out of a used popcorn box (ew), and there are numerous slow dramatic shots of pensive Newman alongside cheesy 1960s music. And I seriously wanted to smack Elora upside the head. I mean serious, you chose to cheat on Paul Newman with Robert Wagner? C'mon! The only thing I enjoyed was looking at Paul Newman throughout the movie. Good grief was that man good looking. Those eyes. THOSE EYES! And those chiseled features. He looked like a Roman god.



I wish I had something thoughtful to say about this film. My advice is that if you are looking for a good racing movie from the 1960s/70s era, then skip Le Mans (1971), skip Winning (1969) and watch Grand Prix (1966) instead. 

If you are interested in the early days of race car driving, I highly recommend two silent films. The First Auto (1927), which I've reviewed before, is an excellent film about the early history of cars. The story follows the clash between a father, set in his ways and who doesn't want to give up his horses, and his son who loves the excitement of the new technology. The son, played by Charles Emmett Mack, becomes a race car driving and is involved in a serious accident. Ironically, the actor died in a car accident before filming ended. Legendary race car driver Barney Oldfield makes an appearance in the film. The other film is Speedway (1929) starring William Haines  and Anita Page (I also did a post on this on but not quite a review). I don't remember too many details about the film however it's a fun picture with William Haines as a flamboyant racer who is more interested in chasing Anita Page than he is in taking racing seriously. The racing in both films is real and Speedway was shot on the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, as was Winning (1969) (and I've been there! woot!).

Have you watched Winning (1969)? If so, what did you think of it? What's your favorite racing movie?

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Racing Cars ~ Le Mans (1971)


UPDATE: Stop! Before you leave a comment, read the entire post first. I have some opinions about the film not everyone will agree with but I was as fair as possible. Don't jump to conclusions. Thank you.

Le Mans (1971) is simply a terrible movie. It's more a quasi-documentary Steve McQueen/race car fest than it is an actual film. There is virtually no plot and if you are not a race car enthusiast or perhaps you do not know what Le Mans is you would be confused and bored by the seemingly endless race that lasts the entire film. For those of you who are not familiar with Le Mans, it's a 24 hour endurance race (relay with teams) which takes place every year in the Le Mans region of France. The whole movie centers around Michael Delaney (Steve McQueen) the champion racer who is participating in Le Mans in the shadow of the recent death of another racer Belgetti. Belgetti's widow Lisa (Elga Andersen) hangs around the race for some reason, looking forlorn and lusting after Delaney. It's hard to tell if this is really what is going on. Her husband just died and here she is, holding on to the lifestyle and social circle she's grown accustom to which she no longer has a connection. So is Delaney the replacement that will keep her in the race care lifestyle? Who knows. It's Steve McQueen driving a race car. Cool.

This film has very little dialogue. So little that the first 37 minutes of the film contain no dialogue spoken by any of the characters. All you hear is the occasional announcer. The remaining 69 minutes has some dialogue but not much.  So why watch this film? For the setting, the fancy shots of real race care driving and for Steve McQueen. McQueen loved sports and he loved racing. After his famous chase scenes in Bullitt (1968) and The Great Escape (1963), it seems inevitable that McQueen would do a movie completely devoted to race car driving.

The 1970s was the most varied and the most sparse decade in Steve McQueen's film career. Le Mans was produced by Solar Productions, McQueen's production company run by himself and business partner/friend Robert Relyea. By 1970, McQueen had become one of the world's most recognizable talents and a hot commodity for film studios. He also become one of the most difficult actors to work with. Le Mans really should have been Day of Champion (1966), produced by Warner Bros., starring Steve McQueen but it wasn't meant to be. Instead Grand Prix (1966)  starring James Garner was made and Day of the Champion was put on the back burner. Relyea eventually made a deal with CBS's Cinema Center Films to do 3 pictures with Solar Productions. It was a deal I'm sure CBS came to regret.

According to Steve McQueen biographer Marc Eliot, a $5 million dollar insurance policy was taken out on McQueen's behalf were something to happen to him during the filming of Le Mans. Although Solar Production and McQueen were virtually broke, McQueen, banking on his fame, managed to get a good deal out of making Le Mans. Initially that is. However, there were many problems. The director John Sturges, was sick of McQueen's antics on set and the constantly changing script (whatever there was of one) that he abandoned the picture. Le Mans was hemorrhaging money. Pretty much all of Sturges' scenes had to be tossed, CBS' Cinema Center pulled out, McQueen's salary was cut, people were fired and the filming just plain stopped. CBS's Cinema Center took it back on after a few weeks with a new director on board. Lee H. Katzin took over but was restricted heavily by McQueen's demands. Katzin stuck with the production to the bitter end, bless him. By the end of filming, the editors had a mess of a movie to piece together, McQueen ended his business and personal relationship with Relyea forever and McQueen's marriage with Neile was on life support. The film was a critical disaster, didn't make enough to cover it's costs and it quickly disappeared from theaters.




I do hope this movie is released on BluRay, because although it's a terrible film I really do think it should be restored. It's aesthetically and historically important given the footage of real racing and Steve McQueen's iconic status in the history of film. The quality of the DVD is as bad as the plot of the movie. If you are a courageous soul and do brave watching this film on DVD, you will be rewarding by a very nice Speed Channel documentary about Le Mans (1971) hosted by McQueen's son Chad McQueen. I'd say it's better than the actual film. (Update: Le Mans is available on Blu-Ray).

Monday, January 23, 2012

Racing Cars ~ Grand Prix (1966)

There is no film quite like Grand Prix (1966). It is the quintessential racing movie and while it's not the best film out there we are very lucky to have it. Grand Prix was made during a golden era of race car driving, when Formula 1 was glamorous, safety in driving wasn't all that important, race car drivers were rock stars and racing teams were owned by individuals or car companies not corporations looking for another advertising opportunity.

Grand Prix (1966) was directed by John Frankenheimer and stars James Garner as Pete Aron. The cast also includes Eva Marie Saint, Antonio Sabato, Yves Montand, Brian Bedford, Toshiro Mifune and Jessica Walter. Originally, the studio wanted Steve McQueen for the principal role of Pete Aron and Frankenheimer wanted an unknown. McQueen had signed up for the role, however, he did not see eye-to-eye with producer Ed Lewis and during their meeting together McQueen decided to bail out on the movie. James Garner, who expressed a lot of interest in the role, got to play Pete Aron in the end, not knowing that his rival (McQueen saw him more as a rival than vice versa) had wanted to play the part. McQueen would have been amazing in this film, considering he was the quintessential sporting bad boy of the 1960s. Alas, it wasn't meant to be. James Garner proved he could drive the race cars well and I believe he did a decent job as Pete Aron.



Grand Prix was a way to showcase the different Grand Prix races of Europe and to celebrate Formula 1. But with any movie, there has to be a plot. The story, which anchors the movie and makes it more than just a lot of glamorous shots of races, follows 4 race car drivers. There is the American Pete Aron who is in trouble with his sponsor Ferrari when he crashes into his fellow team racer British Scott Stodard (Brian Bedford), whose life seems to be already in shambles even more so now with a serious injury. Aron finds a new sponsor in Japanese business man Izo Yamura (Toshiro Mifune) and also has sort of a fling with Stodard's estranged wife Pat (Jessica Walter). That affair made absolutely no sense to me, I think they could have just cut it right out. The third driver is the French Jean-Pierre Sarti (Yves Montand) who is at the end of his career and although married, falls in love with magazine journalist Louise Frederickson (Eva Marie Saint). The last driver is fun-loving Italian Nino Barlini (Antonio Sabato) who thinks he his immortal, fears nothing and has a lazy fling with a race car groupie. The love affair between Sarti/Montand and Frederickson/Saint was the only one that made sense and had some heart to it. The others seemed forced and a lazy way to add sex into a sports film. However, when you compare this film with Le Mans (1971) which has no plot and Winning (1969) which has a boring plot, Grand Prix's plot looks amazing!



All of the principle drivers, except for Brian Bedford, did their own racing. They were trained at a legendary racing school in England and James Garner proved to be the most talented in the bunch. To provide as much realism as possible, Frankenheimer shot everything on location, used real drivers and had actors do the driving. Stunt doubles and dummies were used for the dangerous crash scenes. The film follows each of the major Grand Prix races in Monte Carlo, France, Belgium, England, Netherlands and Italy. Frankenheimer basically takes us on a trip through Europe! Cameras were mounted on cars for POV and over-the-shoulder shots. There are some shots that are so realistic looking you almost feel like you are in the driver's seat. Race sequences were choreographed by the legendary designer Saul Bass who also did the title sequence and the different montages (splits of the screen with multiple images or the multiplication of a single image across the screen). The title sequence takes place in Monte Carlo and includes shots of the different race cars and drivers getting reading for the first Grand Prix race. Attention to detail is key in this film. Frankenheimer and his crew knew that in order to get cooperation from Formula 1 drivers and companies like Ferrari (their headquarters is featured in the film, it was no small feat to get access to it), they needed to respect the sport, to show it as truthfully as possible and to place close attention to details. In the first race in Monte Carlo at the beginning of the film, every single sound you hear is as accurate as possible. They even did a special recording of two drivers, who were familiar with the Monte Carlo track, in which they did all the gear changes for the race to match what it would sound like. All the races in the film are on the real Grand Prix tracks.

In James Garner's memoir, he devotes a chapter to racing and how preparing for and film Grand Prix developed his love for racing cars. Because he did all his own driving in the film, he was at risk for injury and he had an accident on set.
"Toward the end of the shoot, I did a fire stunt with butane bottles that I ignited with a switch in the cockpit on the final turn. When I crossed the finish line going about 120, I slammed on the brakes and threw another switch to put out the flames. But something went wrong and the car erupted in a giant fireball. I scrambled out of the cockpit as the crew blasted me in the face with fire extinguishers and smothered me in an asbestos blanket. I wasn't hurt, but it shook me up. The producer wasn't happy that I'd done the stunt and neither was Lloyd's of London. They canceled my policy, and for the rest of the picture I drove without insurance."



When I say there is no film quite like Grand Prix, it's because it was lucky we got Grand Prix in the first place considering all the obstacles Frankenheimer had to face in making this 3 hour racing epic! If you enjoy sports films as I do, watch Grand Prix! It's all about the ambience. The glamour, the racing, the sights and sounds. Saul Bass' design, Maurice Jarre's score and Frankenheimer's direction make the film a beauty to behold. Just don't pay attention to the plot and you'll enjoy it!

Monday, January 16, 2012

These Amazing Shadows Giveaway Winners


Congratulations to Bob F., Janie, Bob G and Sam for winning my These Amazing Shadows (2011) BluRay giveaway. I asked contestants to write about a film they think should be in the National Film Registry and why or to share some information about the registry. Here are the winners' entries:

Bob F. of Allure:

Mystery of the Leaping Fish, The (1916) gets my vote. It shows just how different the cultural attitude toward certain controlled substances was at the time.  And it Doug Fairbanks and Bessie Love, what's not to make it a perfect candidate for inclusion.  

Janie:

It's wonderful that the National Film Registry does this so all generations can look and  learn about/from movies/culture, the history of film, different cultures, the older style of special effects is on of my favorites, the things they could do way back when..   we've come a long way
Bob G.:

"I feel the National Film Registry should include a Gene Autry film.  I would consider Melody Ranch from 1940 or Back in the Saddle from 1941. I fully realize that none of the ninety-three Gene Autry pictures ever rose to the budgetary or artistic levels of a John Ford Western, yet he was more popular than John Wayne for nearly a decade. Voted the top Western star for six years straight, and was the fourth most popular of all box-office stars in America by exhibitors in 1940. I fell that the cultural impact of his films merit his consideration for inclusion
Part of his impact on American culture  was demonstrated in 1994. Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings, and Kris Kristofferson spent four days together in a Los Angeles studio making what would be their third and final album as the Highwaymen. Among their recording selections was an old favorite: Gene Autry's Back in the Saddle Again. These legends of country music were born during the Great Depression and had grown up with Gene Autry as their hero. Gene was a great influence on these superstars trough his films.
Over the course of his career he was a star on Radio though Chicago's WLS National Barn Dance and later had his own radio show Melody Ranch. Autry's movies reinvigorated the Western with the addition of his country songcraft to action-packed morality plays. In his films, good versus evil was easily delineated. Gene Autry was in inspiration to next generation of artists, encouraging and supporting Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, and others who followed. Some of his most celebrated acolytes range from Ringo Starr to Solomon Burke, Aaron Neville to James Taylor. Taylor told audiences during his 2006 tour that the inspiration behind his first hit, ""Sweet Baby James,"" was to write a cowboy lullaby like the ones he'd heard Gene Autry sing in movies when he was a boy."


"I wrote them a letter a couple of weeks ago to find someone to take an interestingly large personal collection of 16mm films that I own. I mentioned that I have an original copy of THE HEART OF TEXAS RYAN (1917) with both the Spanish and French subtitles included. The response I got from them was to contact one of 2 other organizations because my copy may be in better condition than theirs. It was a breath of fresh air to receive such nice treatment when they could have just let me slip through the cracks.
THE HEART OF TEXAS RYAN was shot on Tom Mix's ranch in Newhall CA by the Selig Polyscope Company and released Feb. 12, 1917."

Thank you to everyone who entered!

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Interview with Robert S. Bader, Editor of Groucho Marx and Other Short Stories and Tall Tales

I have had the pleasure of interviewing Robert S. Bader, the editor of the book Groucho Marx and Other Short Stories and Tall Tales (read my review of the book here). He shared a lot of wonderful insights on Groucho Marx's writing career. Enjoy!

1) How did you become interested in Groucho Marx?

The Marx Brothers were going through a bit of a revival when I was growing up, so in the late 1960s and early 1970s I discovered them on television. I was an inquisitive kid and after seeing a couple of the films I checked out everything I could find on them in the local library and was surprised to learn that Groucho had written several books. So I became interested in him as a writer and a performer almost simultaneously. And his writing was as enjoyable to me as everything else he did from the beginning.



2) What would you like people to know about Groucho's writing career?

Groucho was mostly self-educated and sought acceptance from writers more than film critics. Writing was very important to him. He wasn't just a movie star who wrote some books and articles. He was a formidable enough writer to have succeeded at it without his other more successful endeavors.


3) Do you think Groucho's fame as a theater and film star interfered with him being taken seriously as a writer?

The most frequent criticism Groucho received as a writer had little to do with his writing ability. It was often said that he was funnier on stage or screen than he was in print. It would be hard to argue against that, but it seems unfair in assessing his written work, which is frequently hilarious. So I would agree that his status as a successful entertainer kept him from his rightful place in the world of literature. And in part because of the constraints on his time. He had a pretty successful and prolific writing career for a guy who was busy being a star for 60 years. He found time for writing because it meant a lot to him.



4) This new edition has 19 additional writings. Tell us a little about how you found these pieces and why you added them to this new expanded Edition?

Several of the additional items in the new edition were considered for the original but left out for one reason or another. I tried to keep everything in context – placing the pieces in the five sections of the book, which each deal with a certain aspect of Groucho's life and career. Many very funny and beautifully written pieces just didn't fit into any of the sections. So for the new edition I created an extra section for these difficult to categorize essays as well as a few of the items I've discovered in the years since the original publication. In the new edition I've also included a few speeches Groucho delivered. Since he wrote these without any intention of publishing them, I didn't consider them for the original edition. But over the years I've enjoyed reading them so much, I decided they belonged in the collection. Groucho's writing style is so conversational that the speeches seem like they were written for publication. My methods of finding some of this material are purely unscientific. In some cases I simply went through every page of a publication until I found Groucho's contribution. I spent many hours in libraries reading magazines from the 1930s like Judge and College Humor, which have never been indexed. As you would expect, I found a few other interesting items too. I consider it time very well spent. And the process rescued a few small treasures by Groucho.



5) Which piece in the collection is your favorite and why?

While I'm partial to anything Groucho wrote about his days in vaudeville I can say that there is one piece that stands apart for me. It was one of the things I read at a very young age that made me think the world needed a collection of Groucho's essays. "Our Father and Us" was one of the very few things written by anyone about Sam Marx, the father of the Marx Brothers. There are many articles and stories about their mother, Minnie and she developed legendary status as a result. But Sam was a very special and unique man who was so beloved that his sons considered him a sixth brother. This piece was published shortly before Sam died in 1933 and it shows a sweet and loving side of Groucho that is rarely evident in anything else he ever did. I first discovered this piece when I was around twelve years old and recall it making me more aware of the great relationship I shared with my own father, who always seemed like a friend first and a parent second.

6) My favorite piece in the collection is What This Country Needs. Could you tell us about the history of it and how Groucho came to write it?

Groucho became a very prolific writer in the early 1940s. The Marx Brothers were winding down their film career and Groucho had yet to find success on the radio, so he planned on becoming a full time writer. He wrote topical humor, quite a lot of which was published in This Week, a Sunday newspaper supplement to The New York Herald Tribune and other papers around the country. It was during this time that Groucho was involved in some collaborating with his writer friend Arthur Sheekman, who is sometimes erroneously referred to as Groucho's ghost writer. The truth is that Groucho helped Sheekman make a little money by hiring him as an editor and letting Sheekman sell a few of his own humor pieces through Groucho's agent. When he had trouble selling his own stuff Groucho and his agent let him sell the material under Groucho's name. "What This Country Needs" came to be as Groucho and Sheekman kicked around ideas and decided it would be a good time for a political piece, since it was an election year. Sheekman made some uncredited contribution to this piece but it is unmistakably Groucho's. I almost didn't include it in the book because of Sheekman's involvement and the fact that a truncated version of it appears in Groucho's 1963 book Memoirs of a Mangy Lover. But the full length original version from 1940 has so much good additional material I felt it merited inclusion.

7) What is your favorite Marx Bros. movie and why?

Like many Marx Brothers fans I love the five Paramount films – their earliest. It would be ludicrous to say that they were funnier with Zeppo, but I like seeing the Four Marx Brothers because that's how they became stars on the vaudeville stage. We get to see them as relatively young men in these films. Many people don't realize that Groucho was almost forty when the first film was made and Harpo and Chico were a couple of years older. If pressed to pick one I'd select Money Business or Duck Soup. Do I really have to pick only one? It's almost impossible for me. All of their films mean so much to me. I can say Duck Soup now and it'll be Money Business next week.


8) Why do you think people today are still drawn to the Marx Bros. movies?

Obviously they're still funny. The films were very carefully written and considering that some of them are more than 80 years old, that care paid off. There's hardly anything dated in Marx Brothers movies. Duck Soup in particular will continue to resonate as long as countries have poor diplomatic relationships. Wouldn't the world be a better place with a man like Rufus T. Firefly as president of a country? He certainly couldn't do any worse than some real presidents. Groucho's attacks on authority will remain timeless. I recently attended a double feature screening of Horse Feathers and Animal Crackers and was pleased to see a packed house that included many children laughing their heads off. It seems that each generation finds the Marx Brothers and finds them funny.


9) Tell us about your own writing career.

Groucho Marx and Other Short Stories and Tall Tales was my first book – and as it turned out, my second book as well. (I can count the new edition, can't I?) A few years ago I wrote and produced a documentary film called The Dawn of Sound: How Movies Learned to Talk and I've written a few other things for television as well as several magazine articles and things like DVD and CD liner notes – usually for projects I've produced. I've also nearly finished a collection of S.J. Perelman's lost writings, which will be very similar in format to the Groucho collection.


10) What are you working on now?

For many years I've been toiling away on an exhaustive history of the Marx Brothers vaudeville and stage career. I hope to finish it in the next year or so. It's taken on a life of its own and has turned into a history of the vaudeville business as seen through the eyes of the Marx Brothers. There will be a lot of information in it that will be new to the story of the Marx Brothers – a substantial amount of material that has never been in any previous study of them. I'm also writing scripts for a weekly radio show that should debut sometime in the spring.

Thank you Robert!

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Groucho Marx and Other Short Stories and Tall Tales

Groucho Marx and Other Short Stories and Tall Tales
Selected Writings of Groucho Marx
Updated and Expanded Edition
Edited by Robert S. Bader
9781557837912
Paperback 312 Pages
$19.99
November 2011

Groucho Marx had a way with words. To me, his famous puns and one-liners are what made him so funny, more so than his funny walk and his black grease mustache and eyebrows. Most of you may not be familiar with Groucho's writings and this collection of short pieces serves as a great introduction.

Editor Robert S. Bader has compiled a varied collection of stories, editorial letters, gag pieces, advertisement copy and articles from Groucho's long writing career (1920s up until Marx's death in the 1970s). Groucho was published in Variety, Reader's Digest, the Hollywood Reporter, Saturday Evening Post, Chicago Tribune, among many other publications.

The book is very well-organized and put together. It contains a foreword from Groucho Marx's friend and interviewer Dick Cavett. Cavett has always been a great admirer of Groucho and his foreword shows his enthusiasm and devotion to Groucho's talent for wit and humor. There are several more pieces in the front matter including a foreword from Groucho himself, an introduction from the Editor as well as a few other pieces. What I learned from reading the front matter was that Groucho Marx, especially after the breakup of the Marx Bros., was passionate about his writing but also had a respect for other authors to realize that gave him some humility. He would joke about his books not becoming bestsellers and would write funny letters to his publisher about the negative critical response that one of his published books received. In the introduction, the editor quotes Groucho who had some interesting observations of the publishing industry and the realistic life of a book after publication. It still holds true today and I wish other authors would realize how fragile the life of a book really is!

The writings are grouped into 6 sections by theme and usually appear within each part chronologically. Bader does a wonderful job providing the reader context and history for each piece. There is a paragraph before each one that describes where the piece was published, the importance of when it was published (in relation to Groucho's theater and film career) and any information you may need about people, events or cultural history that would be relevant to the piece. These small introductions were very useful! Also, some of the pieces are accompanied by an image of how the original work looked in print.

I've always loved Groucho's one-liners and how he would follow one serious sentence with an absolutely ridiculous one. I just love how he twisted language that way. You don't get this as much in his writing but Groucho's wit and humor are still there. My favorite piece were the ones written in reaction to something happening during the time. The one that stood out to me was "What This Country Needs" which was a political gag piece in which Groucho "campaigns" for Vice Presidency. He extols the importance of good 5 cent cigars and plain ham sandwiches. This is my favorite part:

"But the nation does need, for one thing, a good ham sandwich. I refer to the simple, old-fashioned (now obsolete) single-decker ham sandwich which was a national institution until the druggist, with his passion for mixing things, ruined it for us. 
As an experiment, I went into a drugstore yesterday and ordered a ham sandwich. 
'Ham with what?', the clerk asked. 
'Coffee,' I told him.
'I mean,' he said, ' do you want the ham-and-tuna combination, the ham-sardine-and-tomato, or ham-bacon-and-broccoli? And will you have coleslaw or potato salad?'
 
'Just ham,' I pleaded. 'A plain ham sandwich, without even tomato or lettuce.' 
The young man look bewildered, then went over to the drug counter to consult with the pharmacist who glowered at me suspiciously until I fled. 
That's the sort of thing the country is up against."

I can just visualize Groucho ordering a ham sandwich, being stared down by the pharmacist and server and doing his stooped walk right out of the drug store! Ha. It's a funny joke and it demonstrates how overwhelmed Americans were with choices, as we are even more so today.

If you are a big Marx Bros. fan or just a Groucho Marx enthusiast, pick up this book! I wouldn't recommend it to someone who wasn't totally in love with the Marx brand of humor.

Disclaimer: Thank you to Applause Books for sending me a copy of the book to review!

Stay tuned because tomorrow I will have an interview with the editor Robert S. Bader!

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails