Television Books

When I first saw Visions of Armageddon on sale at the bookstore, I often found myself looking at it more and more. So, finally, I bought it.

This has to be a great book on the 1998 blockbuster film. It contains information on all subjects from the film's genesis to final production. Hundreds of lavish photographs and drawing make it even better. It includes interviews with the cast and crew.

However, for people looking for a good book to read, ignore this. The information skips back and forth. One moment they are telling you about how the film began. Then they are telling you about how the special effects were made. Then they are telling about the genesis and so forth. But the lack of definite timeline does not at all hurt the story of the most overcritized film of all time. As Michael Bay said "There is nothing wrong with entertaining people."

If you love the movie, you might want to have it as one of your book collections. It shows the making of the movie & its illustrations. There are also some nice pictures of the cast for those fans who love Bruce, Ben & Liv. Don't miss it!!!

i love this book. it is printed on wonderful paper. it
will last & the fotos are GORGEOUSE! it explains a lot
the stuff behind the scenes & how it was done. more than
just a quickie movie-tie-in. it is worth having on it's
own!

One word on the movie: bad. Still even though the movie sucked, I found myself just peeking at the book while at bookstores. Needless to say I bought the book, and I enjoyed it ten times more then I did the movie. So if you have a choice between the book and the movie, buy the book. You won't regret it.

If you saw the movie, and loved it, go get Visions of Armageddon because it was so good and shows Dreamquest and Vfx how they did those spectacular Special FX. Great pictures from the movie. Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay makes a great team for a fun, high-paced, action-packed movie for the summer! One of my favorite movies of the summer, IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ARMAGEDDON GO SEE IT AND YOU'LL BE FEELIN' LIKED YOU GOT OUT OF AN KICK ASS ROLLER COASTER RIDE!!!!

I have always been a fan of Orson Welles on radio and television. Having collected a ton of radio broadcasts on CD and audio cassette and having watched most of his movies, I appreciate the genius of his work. I picked up a copy of this book recently and am amazed at the amount of research put into it. An aspect of Welles rarely discussed is his magic career. At the Mid-Atlantic Nostalgia Convention this September in Aberdeen, Maryland, I plan to attend the presentation about Orson Welles and his magic career so I can watch rare footage and films with Welles, and get an even deeper insight to his trickery. Book comes recommended.

Everyone knows that Orson Welles made _Citizen Kane_, possibly the most audacious and most analyzed movie to come out of Hollywood. And then what happened? He had been called a "boy genius", having made the movie (co-written, directed, and starred) when he was but twenty-five years old, but within a decade the term was used with sarcasm, and Walter Kerr wrote that Welles had become "an international joke, and possibly the youngest living has-been." Welles had been knocked down, and in the view of many, he never got up. Certainly, he never made anything like a _Kane_ again, but that isn't really fair: no one has. It is true that he never produced the sorts of films that were Hollywood-popular, but he did not at all disappear. Joseph McBride, a film historian who knew Welles, has answered the title question in his book _What Ever Happened to Orson Welles? A Portrait of an Independent Career_ (The University Press of Kentucky). The answer, quite simply, is that Welles worked and worked for decades in film, writing scripts, making movies, and (perhaps because few would bankroll him) doing things his own way. It's a sad story, in many ways. No one could doubt Welles's genius, and there are so many "if only" episodes in this book that it is often a depressing account. But Welles was not a tragic figure; he reflected years later that he might have made a mistake in staying in films (rather than, say, returning to the theater in which he had previously made his mark). But he would not have had it any other way: "I'm just in love with making movies," he said, and indeed, it was only death that stopped him.

McBride necessarily describes the problems that beset Welles immediately after _Kane_, when Welles could no longer get anything close to the full control of a film which he had practiced on his first movie. Still wanting to make movies, he left Hollywood to continue in Europe. McBride makes the case that contributing to Welles's decision for self-exile was his fear that he would be called to testify in the Communist witch-hunts. Welles loved shooting films and he especially loved editing them (as anyone who has seen _Kane_ can tell). There are plenty of pictures Welles worked on whose footage has been lost, but many others have the footage saved by fans or by creditors, and they frequently propose bringing out a finished version, hiring someone to pull the scenes together into a finished movie even so long after Welles's death in 1985. One producer mentioned she'd like to see a particular film screened not as an unfinished work by Welles, but as a film the way he might have finished it; but she says, "Finished by whom? Who can you substitute for Orson Welles?"

McBride does not go deeply into Welles's inability to finish things. Certainly it was attributable in a large part to Welles's way of skin-of-his-teeth filmmaking, whether or not it was some deep-set psychological disability. Welles could have written a magnificent autobiography, but when he got advances for such a work, he always returned them to the publishers. McBride writes, "Welles was deeply ambivalent about reminiscing, perhaps because he would have had to address issues he usually found too painful or delicate, such as his sexuality, his family life and some of his more traumatic experiences in Hollywood." Some of the stories of incompletion here, however, are extraordinary. His finished negative of _The Merchant of Venice_ was simply stolen from Welles's production office in Rome. The Iranians held funding for his meditation on filmmaking in the sixties, _The Other Side of the Wind_, and then the Shah was overthrown. "It's hard to imagine a movie career more littered with sensational catastrophes than mine," Welles admitted. He seldom admitted that he was the source of the less sensational catastrophes; a cameraman who worked with Welles late in his career said that Don Quixote was never completed because Welles "moved around too much, stuff got lost." For sensational and unsensational reasons, the losses recounted here are staggering. Nonetheless, McBride shows that they cannot be blamed, as some critics say, on Welles's being lazy or dilatory. The decades were filled with work for him, and he was pounding out a manuscript for a brand-new project on the night he died. As an independent filmmaker, Welles may have never fully lived up to his potential, but with a record of films that includes _Touch of Evil_ or the supremely weird _Lady from Shanghai_, his pattern of incompletion must be a minor sin. Much of McBride's personal account comes from his being an actor in _The Other Side of the Wind_ (of course, never finished) as were such droppable names as John Huston and Dennis Hopper. McBride's story won't re-make Welles's post-1950 career, but it isn't just a story of loss and lost opportunities; it is one of real movie history and at least some genuine artistic success.

Along the cinema's history - from time to time - the lucid conscious tends to appear in certain regions of the world. If Griffith gave the first step with (Intolerance and the Birth of a nation), Stroheim made the same with Greed , Robert Wiene with Dr. Caligari, Lang with Metropolis, while the comedy counted with Chaplin and Keaton, then Renoir with The rules of game and The grand illusion and Jean Cocteau emerged as if the same spirits of the Greek dramaturges would have reappeared with his wild mythic expression. Then came Orson Welles , while Kurosawa, Ozu and Mizoguchi showed us unknown facets of Japan, Luis Buñuel , the lavish son of the Surrealism in the cinema, half Spanish, half Mexican but France would have among his most sharp and talented artists as the portentous and unique Robert Bresson, and other not less relevant figures such as Marcel Carne, Max Ophlus, Rene Clement; Denmark with Dreyer, Italy would count with De Sica, Visconti and Fellini , Russia with Tarkovsky, Sweden with Bergman and Germany would have to wait until the early sixties for Scholondoff, Fassbinder, Wenders, Herzog, Von Trotta sisters and Hauff. And so, during the early eighties in Italy the brothers Taviani, Bernard Tavernier in France, Kaurismaki in Finland, The Coen brothers in North America , Quedraogo in Africa, Angelopoulos in Greece, Jarmush, Lars von Triers, Kim Ki Duk, Shohei Imamura and more recently Alexander Sokurov in Russia. Because more than artists this constellation of artists-filmmakers had something to say and how they did it.

But the case of Wells is particularly worthy to pay attention, because he embodied like nobody else the status of Shakesperian tragic personage, his ceaseless mind, his countless projects that never became materialized, the enormous efforts he had to do to make a film without abdicating in his ethic principles.

His devotion and everlasting admiration by Griffith, his sharp opinions, profane irreverence, mordacious opinions, his gastronomic excesses, among other singularities gained him respectable and unsaid enemies who neither didn't share nor understand his vision of the world. It's not easy to fit his hat, but the true of the case is he appealed to many filmmakers around the world, (Fuller, Casavettes, Allen, Saura, Almodovar, Waters, Loach, Huston, Roeg among so many others) to make the humanity would be aware (and I borrow a famous Buñuel's statement) we are not living in the best of the possible worlds. A biography that will absorb you from start to finish.

This excel essay allows us to approach the creative universe and the effervescent mind of a propulsive human being, who refused to accept outer impositions, filming what he wanted along his lifetime.

"A filmmaker is really great when the camera is an eye in the mind of a poet."
ORSON WELLES

Mention the name Orson Welles and his most famous involvement - with the radio scare 'War of the Worlds' - immediately comes to mind; but for a deeper understanding of Welles' life and career you need What Ever Happened to Orson Welles?: A Portrait of an Independent Career. His later projects were largely self-financed and erratically distributed, but film critic and biographer Joseph McBride has a personal familiarity with Welles from previous projects worked on with him and here shows how the Hollywood studio system forced Welles out of the industry. Its value thus is twofold: as a biography for Welles fans, and as a history of film industry operations and politics.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

While I might be biased because a many parts of this book included stories about my father, Gary Graver, this is not something you want to miss out on if you have any interest in Orson Welles or the inner workings of the Hollywood movie industry. I knew Orson when I was a young boy and teenager during the time my father worked with him, but my memories are nothing compared to the vivid details and thoroughness of Joe's writings.

This book taught me a lot about a man whom I admired and feared. He was rather scary from the perspective of a ten year old, but he often took time to have me sit with him while he taught me card tricks. I am so grateful that these stories are now available for everyone to read. Thank you Joe for your commitment in documenting what no one else ever has and sharing these wonderful stories.

Well, okay Im not sure if this book is true existentialism, but it is a fascinating glimpse into a natural philosopher's "consming obsession to understand the nature of sound".

I was delighted when I discovered that Butch Robins had written this book. I never knew him personally, but when I was a teenager at Beanblossom I remember being on the edge of a conversation where he discoursed on Bill Monroe, Peter Rowan (whom he called "the original space cowboy") and zooming down the road listening to Eric Clapton while still channeling the ancient tones from the last set he played.

I was captivated, and always wished I could have hung around and gotten to know this incredible banjo player with the deep thoughts. This book has been that chance, and it is every bit as fascinating as I always thought it would be!

What with popular culture, social promotion, and computerized spell checkers laying waste to the quality of mass media, one might be forgiven for wanting books to be the last line of defense against the total corruption of the English language. Some books fulfill that desire. "What I Know `Bout What I Know" does not. It is chock full of misspellings, orphaned clauses, arcane editing, meandering ideas, and home language. But those are the only indulgences that author Butch Robins allows himself.

"What I Know..." is Robins' musical autobiography. At first glance, it seems depressingly typical of the genre -- family dysfunction, prodigious talent, epic struggles with a tyrannical boss, hard partying, famous friends, emotional pain, death of a loved one, chemical dependency, mental illness, professional exile, rehab, redemption. On closer examination, "What I Know..." reveals itself to be anything but typical. Robins never descends into self pity, and never blames others for his mistakes. He is critical of others, but views his own shortcomings with an equally unsparing eye.

His adventures are hilarious and painful by turns. Fun is "Unkle Butchie's" true north (A recording session is only successful if a party ensues), which makes his subsequent excursions into the heart of the darkness (via his journal entries, copied verbatim here) all the more jarring. His tale of time spent in the Carter White House will have you rolling on the floor, and wondering why he doesn't link his encounters there with a later tax audit (Maybe the law of unintended consequences has made him a bit more circumspect?)

By his own admission, bearing witness to pain is not exactly Robins' superpower. But bear witness he does, no matter how tough it gets, and his emotional discipline yields some piercing insights. His pithy post mortems on Bill Monroe and Jimmy Martin, though not without empathy, are breathtakingly accurate.

Insightful as he is, Robins is a musician first and foremost. His descriptions of the music he makes are so joyous that one wonders why he hasn't cut a deal with eMusic to release his work (much of which is out of print) for downloading.

As Unkle Butchie's Wild Ride comes to an end, he has endeared himself unexpectedly, even as he puts his new found sobriety in doubt. For all his eccentricities, Butch Robins turns out to be a remarkable, even admirable man who has written a remarkable book.

This is a controversial, but I believe to be truthful book by one of the great living banjo players of our time. It engendered a lot of vitriol among bluegrass fans, as Butch is at times unkind in his assessment of some well-known bluegrass stars who were less than kind to him and others over the years. It's a great read for those familiar with the bluegrass ideom and who can let their star-worship fall by the wayside long enough to experience a bit of truth.

Butch Robins is a great banjo player. His writing style may be somewhat unorthodox, but he shares a wealth of information about what he knows - bluegrass and the people (including himself) who helped to shape it.

In this book you will find some tidbits about some of the "stars" of bluegrass music that you are not likely to find anywhere else. Robins also attempts to put to rest some myths about the father of bluegrass through personal observations made during his tenure with the Blue Grass Boys.

The avid fan of bluegrass will want to read this. Be warned, however, that the English language takes a beating and misspellings are rampant. (Jesse McReynolds' name is mentioned often throughout the book and is spelled correctly only a couple of times.) This work could have - should have - been edited a bit more rigorously. Also, be warned that Butch has no reservations about using words that some might consider offensive - hey, we're all adults here - right!?!?!

If the book had been edited a little better, I could have given it five stars just for the information it contains. But with these problems a weak "four star" rating is about all I can muster. Folks who are hungry for anything bluegrass shouldn't let it stand in their way though - buy it!

The first professional job I had playing Bluegrass was with Charlie Moore way back in 1972 and Butch was his banjo picker.I can say without a doubt that what Butch says about Charlie is true right down the line.I found my self shaking my head yes to all the things I had experienced while working with Mr. Moore that Butch wrote about.A lot of people don't seem to like all he stuff about drinking,drugs and the flaws in their heros--truth be known Butch's book only scathes the surface of what you could write about many of the band learders and side men of professional music of whatever genre. Not all are that way,thats true,but many more than you may think. I had no problem with the way Butch writes nor was spelling a problem. The whole thing is the information he delivers. I was also glad to see that Butch has come a long way to burying his demons.I will be coming out within the next 18 months or so with my own book that will cover more of Charlie Moore as my time was 1772-74,78. Plus, there will be a lot about many other lesser bands, musicans and personal insights on Bluegrass in General.I am looking forward to reading Butch's new book.

Scandalous! But unlike the sound bite scandals of today, this is scandalous behavior which is also very provocative and thought provoking. Sparsely written in screenplay style, it amazed me how completely it took me into the scenes. It was like tumbling through a magnifying glass into those intriguing background scenes of colored speakeasies in "Fried Green Tomatoes" or "The Color Purple" with the lyrics of the blues moving the story line along.

Despite the title, this fictionalized history goes far beyond anything racial. Author Moncrief suggests that on one level this is a story of acceptance. For me it also stimulates thoughts and debate on many of today's situations: the complicated society of working women, sexual roles and identities, domestic violence, life on the road, the rap artists and the thugs and the players. . . and on and on. This book also inspired me to delve deeper into Bessie Smith research and I guess that is the greatest compliment that can be paid to any author.
"Blues on my mind . . . I said blues."

I loved this book. It gave me the opportunity to enter a world I could never be part of and to see it from the inside. It took me places I never imagined and, as I read, the author's presence faded and I was swept into the world of the characters. I suffered, celebrated, laughed and cried with Bessie Smith and her entourage. I highly recommend the journey.

This book is easy reading so I was able to finish it fairly quick. Actually I couldn't put it down because I was captivated by its subject, Bessie Smith, as well as by the other colorful characters that occupied her world. "When Color Was Cool" is not only entertaining, but also a look into a very significant part of American history that we don't often hear about. After finishing the book, I ran out to purchase a couple of Bessie Smith cds. What an amazing woman! What a delightful reading experience.

When Colored Was Cool is an amazing story, that with its flamboyant characters, brought tears to my eyes. The often comedic and frequently tragic lives of Bessie Smith and her troupe are woven together expertly by an obviously gifted author. Though a work of fiction, I feel as though I have now had very real glimpse into a time long before my own. I heartily recommend this book.

I could not put this book down! From start to finish, it held my attention. I could picture all the characters in vivid images and felt like I was right there watching every exciting moment take place. I enjoy reading about the Harlem Renaissance period and would definitely recommend "When Colored Was Cool."

This is an adorable love movie for anyone. It's witty humor and charming story combine into making it the perfect romantic-comedy! It's great for watching any time, or even when you're feeling blue! It's sure to lift the spirits!!!!

I have been a fan of this movie for years and have seen it well over 500 times. Although I found three minor erros in the transcript while I read the book, It was still great.

...and will never be surpassed. There's nothing i can add. This simply has to be seen to be believed.

I have seen this movie several times, and I still like it. Each time I review this movie, I can gain different thinking. You'll love it if you have it.

As a screenwriting instructor, I'm always looking for material that will help my students understand the language of story. This is it!

There are so very few books that convey a sense of "being there" when it comes to the Kennedy assassination. This outstanding book takes the reader back to that fateful weekend of November 22nd 1963 in Dallas, Texas and does so in an open, honest and compelling manner.

"When the News Went Live" is written by four journalists who were in Dallas on that day covering the presidential visit. Bob Huffaker and the other three newsmen share many interesting stories that you will not find elsewhere and that have been untold for many years no doubt to all but their personal friends. This is why the book is such a valuable contribution to the historical record. Such first hand observation regarding not just those few seconds in Dealey Plaza, the murder of Officer Tippet and the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby, but how in fact the entire story unfolded, makes fascinating reading.

As an aid to anyone interested in the assassination, this book is a must have. I would emphasize - rarely do you find first hand knowledge like this - much of what is written on this subject is written by people many steps removed from the event where fact and fiction merge into one. Not so here. A fabulous book which is refreshingly free of the conjecture and myth that is so common in the Himalayan pile of work on the Kennedy assassination and is highly recommended.

We have become accustomed (yea, verily, some would say desensitized)to horror unfolding before our eyes in our very own living rooms. Bob Huffaker's book brings us back to a time before the desensitization, when we could scarcely believe what our eyes were telling us. I recommend this book highly to those who were there, watching as I was, and even more so to those who were not there. The young, raised in an era of suicide bombers, need to understand that it was not always thus.

1963 nov 22 brought to life again but with more professionalism.some very interesting facts that confirmed my own thoughts .

I stayed up all night reading when my copy of When The News Went Live, Dallas 1963 arrived. This book is a classic and should be included in the curriculum of every journalism and political science classroom in America.

Huffaker, Mercer, Phenix and Wise have written the Texas story of the Kennedy assassination, the inside scoop on Oswald's murder and the history of the evolution of modern journalism. These four men were Dallas television reporters, on the scene and on their own, in the middle of the news story of the century.

It is a salute to their training and their integrity as newsmen that their coverage under duress stands today as a compelling rendering of those fateful moments. I am glad they were the early ones on the scene, for they were the ones who broke the news to me in my elementary classroom. The story gives their perspectives more fully; all these years later, this book helps me understand the events and how they affected Texas and the nation.

Bob, Bill, George and Wes were there in Dallas with their Southern sensibilities. They weren't easily pushed around or manipulated that dark day and still aren't. They were taught to tell the truth as objectively as possible, and they reverted to that training and their good common sense when placed in positions lesser men might have blown or exploited. These four men cared about truth and justice and fairness and still do. I hope all young journalists will read this and learn about balanced reporting.

"With three shots from a mail-order rifle, Lee Oswald set off a worldwide tragedy that developed too fast to print. .... Broadcast journalism came of age in that crisis of grief and uncertainty, and as it drew its mourning audience, it helped to hold the nation together." -- Bob Huffaker; From the Preface of "When The News Went Live: Dallas 1963"

----------------------

"When The News Went Live: Dallas 1963", published in 2004, paints a vivid word picture of many of the incredible events that surrounded President John F. Kennedy's assassination in November of 1963, as seen through the eyes of four journalists -- Bob Huffaker, Bill Mercer, George Phenix, and Wes Wise -- who covered those events as they happened for CBS affiliate KRLD-TV and Radio in Dallas.

President Kennedy's shocking and appalling assassination on November 22, 1963, was the very first really big "Watch It Unfold Live On TV" news event of the television era, with four full commercial-free days being devoted to nothing but exclusive assassination-related coverage by all three major TV networks (with KRLD's on-the-scene Dallas reporters frequently feeding CBS-TV headquarters in New York).

And the four reporters whose intriguing stories unfold within this 224-page hardcover volume were right smack in the thick of things during the rapidly-developing events -- from the initial sketchy bulletins that told of the President being shot in Dealey Plaza during a motorcade drive through the city of Dallas -- to the announcement of JFK's death at Parkland Hospital -- to the capture of the accused assassin (Lee Harvey Oswald) in a nearby movie theater -- to Oswald's very own murder on live TV (with Bob Huffaker reporting live from the basement of the Dallas Police Department, where the single gunshot from Jack Ruby's pistol added yet another hard-to-believe chapter to the weekend's nightmarish story).

It was a mesmerizing weekend in American (and television) history, to say the least. And those days are re-lived with clarity in this engaging book by way of the recollections of four men who lived through and reported on those events when they were occurring.

"When The News Went Live" contains several excellent black-and-white photographs, too (some of them I haven't seen published elsewhere).

On a personal level, I have had the pleasure of communicating (via e-mail) with Bob Huffaker several times. He has been very cordial and gracious whenever answering the questions that I had for him. His personal insights into the events revolving around JFK's death are fascinating glimpses into the past, and are insights that I have enjoyed reading immensely.

A sample e-mail excerpt from Mr. Huffaker:

----------------------

"David, you're right about the presidential visit and motorcade being the main attraction that all Dallas media were covering, of course. But all our stations had limited capabilities for doing mobile TV, which then demanded either cables or microwave dishes--as well as a receiving dish within line-of-sight beaming or bouncing.

Hence the pool TV arrangements, limited to three planned locations. The local TV stations did live TV from the FTW {Fort Worth} breakfast, Love Field, and the Trade Mart. But this was, indeed, the day the news went live on television, unplanned.

WBAP-TV in Fort Worth had a non-running TV van, which they had towed all the way from Cowtown to Dallas Police headquarters, and we sent both of our KRLD-TV vans into duty--the Bread Truck at DPD and the Blue Goose on the 24th to the county jail, etc.

This was the first time in TV history when on-the-spot news suddenly demanded to go live from the scene. Before that, radio news on-the-spot descriptions such as ours that day were common (like the Hindenburg broadcast--radio only), and live TV was usually reserved for major speeches, sports, etc.

Bob" -- E-mail to this writer; May 30, 2006

----------------------

Relating to the subject of "WHEN THE NEWS WENT LIVE", I'd like to offer up the following observations as an extension of this book review.....

To those JFK conspiracy theorists who seem to favor the Oliver Stone-like or Robert Groden-promoted assassination scenarios (that feature a minimum of three gunmen and anywhere from 6 to 10 gunshots being fired at President Kennedy in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963) -- I always suggest to them that they ought to dig up some of the originally-aired "As It Is Happening" live TV or radio broadcasts from that dark Friday in American history.

After performing that exercise of watching a few hours of the November 22 television coverage of the assassination (in real time), or listening to some of the radio broadcasts in real time (which works just as well) -- I challenge anyone to then arrive at the same conclusion that was slapped up on the big theater screen in 1991 via Director Oliver Stone's blockbuster, conspiracy-laden motion picture "JFK".

Watching the day's events unfold "live" in front of you (or listening to them unfold on the radio as it was happening) should, in my opinion, provide everyone with a good general idea of how utterly impossible a task it would have been to have "faked" so much stuff that was being IMMEDIATELY reported to the world on live television and radio within minutes and hours of the President's assassination (and within a very short space of time following Police Officer J.D. Tippit's murder as well).

Via those original live TV/Radio broadcasts, you're not going to hear a SINGLE report that resembles anything close to the Oliver Stone/Jim Garrison-endorsed nonsense of:

"Three gunmen fired six shots at President Kennedy's motorcade today here in Dallas!!"

What you will hear, instead, is live coverage, as it happened, of a ONE-GUNMAN assassination taking place from where the majority of witnesses said it took place (the Texas School Book Depository Building), with no more than three shots having been fired by the SINGLE SHOOTER, which is a shot count that over 91% of the witnesses concur with -- including the small percentage of witnesses who heard only one or two shots, who are witnesses that certainly don't do Mr. Stone's "6-shot ambush" theory any favors.

Upon evaluating virtually all of the TV networks' live assassination footage from November 22nd, 1963, there is no possible way that a reasonable person could arrive at a conclusion that JFK was shot by three assassins, firing from both front and rear. Let alone arriving at an even more-cockeyed "8-to-10-shot" shooting scenario, as purported by Mr. Groden and some other CTers, which is an outlandish conspiracy-flavored scenario that has John Kennedy and John Connally being shot by way more than just the two Warren Commission-backed Mannlicher-Carcano bullets from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle.*

* = And Mr. Groden's theory (that sports from 8 to 10 gunshots) also features an additional hunk of lunacy, in that Groden thinks it's very likely that NONE of these eight to ten shots came from the "Oswald window" in the Book Depository! (I'm not making this crazy stuff up here. I promise. Anyone who owns a copy of Robert Groden's 1993 book "The Killing Of A President" can check out Groden's preposterous theory for themselves, on pages 20-40.)

The bottom line is -- Very nearly all of the information being reported on TV and radio that November day favored a "Lone Assassin" shooting scenario (including the info concerning the Tippit murder in Oak Cliff), with very little evidence and information being broadcast that would support any type of a "conspiracy" whatsoever; and certainly no "conspiratorial" evidence that has ever panned out and "proved" that a multi-gun plot ended JFK's life in Dallas.

This is quite a telling "One Killer" fact. Because, in my view, if a vast conspiracy and subsequent "cover-up" had been in place on November 22nd (given the immense amount of TV and radio coverage, with reporters scrutinizing everything coming across their desks and digging hard for any type of case-solving clues during those first hours and days after JFK and J.D. Tippit were killed), I think that at least SOME pieces of the conspiracy would have leaked through to the sweeping television and radio coverage surrounding the two Dallas murders.

And I'm guessing that every reporter and newsman in the country (including Messrs. Huffaker, Mercer, Phenix, and Wise) would have loved to dig up some "conspiracy"-proving angle during that weekend in November of '63. Being the person who uncovered such a huge story would certainly be a feather in that reporter's cap, to be sure. But, as it turned out, nothing of that nature occurred....and has yet to occur all these many years later.

To think (as many theorists do) that these conspirators were so smart and so quick to have had the capabilities to immediately eliminate virtually every last scrap of information leading to a conspiracy plot of some kind, making sure that none of the "multi-gunmen shooting event" details seeped through to the media (multiplied by TWO separate murders as well, counting Tippit's!), is to think that any such evil-doers had powers similar to "Superman".

For example -- Almost every one of the initial reports concerning the number of gunshots heard by witnesses stated "3 shots". And while it's true that the very first report of the shooting from UPI's Merriman Smith (which was broadcast over all the television networks) stated "Three shots were fired...", it's also worth noting that Smith's initial bulletin was not the ONLY "three shots" account that was reported during those early hours just after the shooting.

For instance, Jay Watson of ABC affiliate WFAA-TV in Dallas (who happened to be in Dealey Plaza during the shooting and nervously reported the first bulletins to the unaware Dallas TV audience) is heard multiple times on November 22nd saying he heard "3 shots" fired.

Plus, several other members of the media are also on record stating their own PERSONAL beliefs that exactly three shots were fired by the assassin, including Robert MacNeil, Jack Bell, Bob Clark, Jerry Haynes, and Pierce Allman, among still others.

Some of the other "Three Shot" witnesses who were riding right in the Presidential motorcade itself include -- Photographers Tom Dillard, Robert Jackson, Mal Couch, and James Underwood. Plus, both John and Nellie Connally, who were riding in the same car with President Kennedy.

In addition, Presidential aides Ken O'Donnell and David Powers, who were both riding in the Secret Service follow-up car directly behind JFK's limousine, can also be added to the lengthy list of witnesses who heard precisely three gunshots.

And then there's also amateur filmmaker Abraham Zapruder, who took the most famous 26-second home movie in history when he captured the entire assassination with his 8mm Bell & Howell movie camera -- Zapruder showed up on live TV about 90 minutes after the President's murder took place and gave a graphic account of the horrifying event that had taken place in front of his very eyes.

Mr. Zapruder told the WFAA-TV viewing audience that he had heard two or three shots (but definitely no more than three), and he also demonstrated on live television where on the President's head he had seen the effects of the fatal gunshot. Zapruder puts his hand over the right-frontal portion of his own head to demonstrate where he saw the blood coming from JFK's head.

That's pretty amazing "LIVE" stuff from Mr. Zapruder's own lips (within approx. an hour-and-a-half of the assassination). And it's especially incredible and amazing if there had actually been many more than just two or three shots fired at the President, and if the fatal shot had actually (as many CTers believe) caused a huge hole in the BACK of John Kennedy's head, instead of the location where Zapruder placed it on live television -- i.e., the RIGHT SIDE AND FRONT portion of the head.

How could the so-called "conspirators" have possibly gotten THAT lucky with respect to Abraham Zapruder's live "on-the-air" WFAA-TV statements and head-wound "demonstration"? How?

And -- Could these ultra-clever conspirators have somehow managed to "manipulate" several reporters who were relaying the news live to the world immediately after the event, and have them ALL report on hearing just "three shots" (or, in a few cases, hearing only TWO shots, which is a number that certainly does not favor a "Multi-Shooter Conspiracy Plot")?

Or did the plotters just happen to get really, really LUCKY (again) when virtually all of the news reports favored the "Three Shots Fired" conclusion? With this 3-shot scenario matching the precise number of bullet shells that were found on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository after the shooting; and also perfectly matching the exact number of shots heard by TSBD witness Harold Norman, and also perfectly matching the precise number of bullet shells (3) that Norman heard hitting the plywood floor directly above his 5th-Floor location within the Depository.

Which, per Oliver Stone's movie, would mean that a full 50% of the ACTUAL number of gunshots were somehow inaudible to the enormous majority (91%+) of the earwitnesses! And, remember, Oliver has NONE of the shots within his movie's six-shot assassination ambush being "synchronized" in order to merge together with the sound of some of the other shots.

And yet, per Mr. Stone, we're supposed to actually believe that approximately 9 out of every 10 witnesses somehow missed hearing HALF of the gunshots fired that day! A reasonable thing to believe....or not? I ask you.

Were these so-called conspiratorial shooters so good that they could make 4 to 10 shots sound like only three to the vast majority of witnesses scattered all throughout Dealey Plaza? Highly doubtful, to say the least.

Again -- I'd advise all conspiracy theorists to sit down and watch the live TV footage....or listen to some of the surviving 11/22/63 radio tapes....and then try to find a "Multi-Gunmen Conspiracy" lurking within ANY of those original broadcasts. If anybody finds proof of a conspiracy via those means, please let me know. And let the world know too.

David Von Pein
December 2006
January 2007

If you're trying to break into news on the AM/FM dial, this is a book that you must read and follow. It helps you format the way most of Radio Broadcasting does it today.

Ten years ago, I had the privilege of taking introductory radio writing from Mr. Block while earning my master's degree in journalism at Columbia University. If memory serves, Mr. Block also revisited my spring semester radio news course as a guest editor and instructor. He was a tough and fair instructor -- one of the many highlights of my year at 116th and Broadway.

Mr. Block's book has been indispensible to me ever since. Every so often, I reread a chapter to keep my writing fresh, and to jolt me out of the workaday rut so many reporters and anchors inhabit. Television news works on two levels, the words and the pictures, and it is a challenge and an art to make the two levels work together!

Whether you're a journalism 101 student or a seasoned professional, it never hurts to have this book on your desk (and occasionally at home!). Your viewers, producers, photographers, and managers will thank you!

This is the bible of broadcast news writing. Well organized. I'm a 25 year veteran of broadcast news and I still find information in this book that improves my writing and reporting.

This book should be required for every broadcast writing class. I have learned so much from just the first chapter alone, that it has even changed the way I write personal notes. Thanks Mr. Block for inspiring those of us who want to be great writers instead of celebrity newswriters.

To paraphrase Mr. Block, "if newswriting is easy, then you're doing something wrong." This book is for the lover of action verbs and simple words. You're taught to think and to see the beauty of simple writing. And if you want to be GOOD, you must learn to TELL a story. After you read this book, the news will likely not sound the same.

I recently saw some movies of Yul Brynner and was much impressed by his talents as an actor and his incredible screen presence. I read this book to find out more about the man behind the actor. I felt extremely sad after learning how he would put fame above family and friends. Myself an immigrant twice in two different countries, and having to learn French as a second language and then English a while later, just like Yul had to, I experienced the same exclusion and injustice as he did and I understand his anger against the Fox executives and those who profited from the actors. I wished he did get a chance to become a movie director...and succeed as such because his life probably would have been very different. It is ironic that he would hate his father so much to the point of wanting to kill him for not being there for him but that he, would too, abandon his wives and children. Despite being disappointed in his behavior, he remains the greatest actor to my eyes. Bless his heart and I wish that in his next life, he would be a more forgiving and compassionate person.

I recently stumbled on this biography. I meant to flip through it to look up some trivia and ended up reading it cover to cover. It's an eye-opening and quite moving account of the actor we've come to associate with The King & I. The book details much of the circumstances around Brynner's films which I found most interesting. It's sad that such a gifted actor with a talent for directing ended up making so many B-movies. I really enjoyed this book. His rocky relationship with his son (no pun intended), adds a new dimension to his personna. The only drawback for me is that some of the events are told out of synch. For a good companion piece, read Yul Brynner: The Inscrutable King by Jhans Robbins. The chronology of events are clearer there. Plus, it has a complete list of Brynner's works.

This book, written by his son Rock Brynner, is a poignant and revealing look into the life of his famous father, Yul Brynner. Rock unveils "The King," and shows that his father was a flawed, and sometimes wreckless man behind the "King's" facade. Rock uncovers how life was growing up with his famous father, and how he could never live up to the expectations of a King. Rock's literary style mix fact with his own feelings about - The Man Who Would Be King.

This excellent biography of Yul Brynner, written by his son Rock, is a must-read for all of the King's many fans. It clarifies the often-conflicting stories of Yul Brynner's birth, describes his childhood in Paris (where he spent his time entertaining in gypsy night clubs), and his memorable stint on Broadway in "The King and I" in the 1950s. His film successes, such as "The King and I" and The Ten Commandments, and his many screen flops are discussed, but it is Yul, the family man, who is at the center of the book.

When Rock was young, his father doted on him; even after his parents divorced and Yul moved on through three more marriages, the two were close. But when his son failed to achieved stability or success as a young adult, Yul summarily cut off all ties with him for a while. In the 1980s, out of money (as always), Yul began an eight-year tour of "The King and I" which was hugely successful, but he identified with the role so completely, he became an unreasonable tyrant, alienating himself from those closest to him. He kept doing eight shows a week even after he was diagnosed with cancer, dying just weeks after his 4,633rd performance as the King.

This is a riveting biography about a fascinating man.

Kona

I enjoyed the honesty of Son Yul Jr. He tried so hard to please his Dad and follow his footsteps Never could quite live up to SR. expectations.So sad that he dumped so many of wives and children the final blow DISOWNING his children in will.. Sad Sad yet I loved him as a talented actor. Where and how is YUL Jr. today I wish him well. He loved his Dad so much

I have been looking for this book for my grand daughter for about a year. It's not in print anymore so the stores don't carry it. I finally went to Amazon.com, and there it was. Thanks for your help. She was delighted.

Madeline

this book was brand new, my granddaughter loves it as her old book has fallen apart from reading it so much. it arrived in record time, before i even thought "when will that book arrive?"

Walt Disney's 101 Dalmatians

101 Dalmatians is a very good book. Its about 15 puppies that get kidnapped by a cruel Cruella Di Vil. They are tooken to her mansion where there were a lot more dalmatians. They then go through a lot of trouble getting home. I think that any age of kids would like this book. I really like how Pongo and Perdita save there kids. I think that this book teaches kids that if they steal that bad things will happen.

This beautiful book is a full color adaptation from the disney movie of the same name. The illustrations captured my child's attention and made for great story time. Timeless tale of good vs. evil. A great read for any generation!

Well i think that this book was GREAT it takes me back to 4th grade were this would have been my favorite book becaues it as exitment and love.It just was a wounderful story and i see why they make more of theses not alone dose it show right from wronge but it tell you about how the family love the doge weather there where 13 dogs or 101 dogs it was great!

I have several books along these lines, and this is probably one of the easiest to follow. It is a good general overview to the business of acting. The DVD enhances the book as you watch Christina talk with her students about the seven steps; I felt I was right in the class with them. At the end of each step is a brief recap of the key points by Wink Martindale. Thanks to Christina's examples of good and bad photos and resumes, I now know what to do at my next headshot session and I've already redone my resume. I will be taking some classes from The Actor's Edge after I move, and I will definitely be submitting myself to her casting agency!

Co-written by founder and president of "The Acting Edge", one of Hollywood's leading acting schools for 15 years, The 7 Steps To Stardom: How To Become A Working Actor In Movies, TV, And Commercials is an easy-to-use workbook-and-DVD set that gives the practical advice on earning success in the entertainment business. Printed in color with photographs and a number of consumable pages, the workbook covers how to network and find an agent, avoiding scams, taking appropriate headshot photographs, writing an actor's resume, the business side of acting, honing one's acting skills and more. The two-hour DVD is divided into seven lesson segments: You are the Product, Acting Skills, Your Photograph, Your Resume, Your Agent, Your Unions, and Networking. Written in a direct, no-nonsense instructional, The 7 Steps To Stardom is a "must-have" for anyone contemplating or getting started in a profitable career in acting.

This book is really well put-together - easy to use. Some of the tips and suggestions may seem like no-brainers, but there are a lot of little things you may not think of when marketing yourself in the entertainment industry. Resumes, agents, your photo, Ferra-Gilmore breaks it all down and gets you to rack your brain for other attributes you can use. A reference/workbook in one, with a two hour DVD.

Usually, when one is looking for information on what you need to really make it in Hollywood costs a lot of money. This little book with a 2-hour DVD is amazing for what it costs! Sure, the production is a bit cheesy, but the content is amazing.

Now that I have redone my headshot, and worked out my resume, I feel that I am much better prepared to deal with what I will be up against at my next audition.

Thanks Christina!

This book is a very quick read yet its pages contain some very helpful, specific tips to enhance your resume, headshots and acting skills.

I am grateful that Ms. Ferra-Gilmore is willing to share her expersites with up and coming actors.