Reading the new I SPY book now. Satisfying length, VERY comprehensive -- only objection (and a mild one), the narrative style is periodically a little melodramatic and pumped up, reminding us how cool the show was, how groundbreaking the participants, how dramatic one turn of events or another was. Wheras the simple facts, simply stated, do most of the work all by themselves without needing -- well, I won't call it "editorial comment" per se. but I will call it "spelling out the subtext" -- and they might have been left to do so. Still, though, the tome is a sprightly read and about as good as a book chronicling the history of a TV show can be; because it isn't just about the show but about socio-political context too, and thus a very valuable history of the medium (I think I've only liked Ed Robertsons books on MAVERICK and THE ROCKFORD FILES as much, for the same reason: they take the larger view). An extremely nice job, and maybe one that will not only magnify the series' place in a history that seems to take it almost for granted now -- but give some of our younger friends who barely know the title at all a more palpable idea of what all the hoohah was about.
One very minor omission I noted -- but a curious one for me -- is in the book's discussion of COURT OF THE LION. When I saw the episode afresh a few years ago (after decades) on DVD, I was flabbergasted to note how much it was an outright modern-day paraphrase of an adventure novel by Robert Krepps called THE COURTS OF THE LION (circa 1949), set in Africa. To the point where Culp's villain, as played by Godfrey Cambridge, considers himself a bloodline descendent of the book's likewise dark (but more complex) force, King Tchaka Zulu. (I got to know Krepps' work because I've collected filmscript novelizations and TV tie-ins since I was a kid, and Krepps did, oh, I dunno, maybe ten for Fawcett/Gold Medal in the 60s. His prose style was so striking that I sought out his original novels, most of which were beyond brilliant. He is, like a lot of writers who never became brand names, unjustly forgotten now, but he creates images and characters that burn into your memory.)
One scene was a particularly striking "steal." The one where one of the Japanese laborers moving the diamonds trips and falls in the mud and Cethswayo has him clubbed to death. In the Krepps novel, during a tribal dance, one of the dancers trips and falls and, you guessed it, the King has him clubbed to death. There follows a scene in which the king explains to the book's hero why he, as a tyrant, is justified in killing his own people when the need arises.
(Personal sidebar: I write primarily for the musical theatre and I'm currently [as composer-lyricist] working on a musical called THE FABULIST, an epic fable of Aesop, based on a swell novel by John Vornholt -- the show is still in its pre-production stages but has won a few nice development awards along the way, including a Richard Rodgers Award. To make a long story short, in Act Two, Aesop's travels take him to Babylon where he's confronted by King Nebuchudnezzar.[My collaborator, librettist Stephen Witkin and I diverged quite a bit from John's novel in places, and here we had only a passing resemblance to a sequence in the book involving warring kings.] It took us a while to devise a simple, but powerful motivation for Neb's needing Aesop's services, but once we did, he was still a little bit too much of a mustache twirler for me, and I thought he needed a bit more depth. By the sheerest coincidence, right around this time I read THE COURTS OF THE LION. And by the sheerest coincidence was impelled, as Culp had been nearly four decades before, to take inspiration from the same two scenes. So, as you can imagine, Culp's version had a lot of resonance for me.)
I was pleased, when I flipped on the DVD commentary, to hear Culp openly acknowledge the novel (though he doesn't mention Krepps by name; only says it was a book someone gave him that they thought would make a good movie, and he thought so too). But I had to wonder -- because, y'know, it's one thing to take selective inspiration from a prior work, but it's another to flat out use it (and its title) as your foundation without attribution -- I have a feeling that by now all of Krepps's original work has slipped into the public domain, but in 1965 or 66, it was, what, only sixteen, seventeen years after the novel had been published? And at the time Krepps was very much a working, visible midlist author. Was Krepps ever compensated? Contacted? Did Friedkin and Fine and/or Leonard know? Or did this somehow slip between the cracks? Was the information about the novel left out of the Cushman/LaRosa I SPY book for a reason?
By the way, for any who are interested in the source material, under the asterisks below is a relevant excerpt from THE COURTS OF THE LION. It is after the dance in which the hapless stumbler has been killed. Our young hero, a white American explorer, and the Zulu king (who has taken a liking to him), are talking during a trek through mountainous country...
***********
The Tyrant Justifies Tyranny
from
THE COURTS OF THE LION
by Robert W. Krepps
ÒTell me, Black Bull, why do you kill so many men?"
ÒIs your breast still paining you for the spilt blood?Ó
ÒI see no need for it, Lion. I see men die and there is no reason.Ó
ÒI kill because I am the king and able to kill, and wish to kill. Tell me now, Ijele,Ó he said, suddenly taking Dan Michael by the neck with one long-fingered hand, Òtell me, Panther, why should I not tear out your throat in this moment, simply because I am able to do it?Ó
The boy thought, this may be death, this is quite possibly the end; and he said steadily, ÒThere is no reason to kill.Ó
ÒReason? I am the Lion, how would men know I was the Lion, if I did not kill them? Do you think we are buck, living in fear from day to day? No, we do not fear. My men fear the Lion, truly, but it is a respect, not a craven trembling at death. If I ceased killing, they would cut me into strips like this meat.Ó He released Dan Michael and strode on. ÒWhat lion on the plains rules the greatest pride of lions? It is he who is strongest, and when he is old they fall upon him like wild dogs. If I became as you, kind like a silly girl, the warriors would slay me at once. Now they do not believe I can die, for I stand on their heads, picking out this one and that, saying ye shall live, ye shall die. Truly man reigns only when he is strongest. Ijele, you are a fool.Ó
Dan Michael faced the dark tyrant as they walked and asked, ÒDoes the Lion never weary of killingÓ
ÒDo you weary of eating, Ijele? Sometimes a man grows sick of putting food into his mouth, but knows that if he stops it he will starve. If blood sickens me, can I now cry halt to its flow?Ó
ÒAll kings do not live by murder.Ó
ÒThen they soon perish.Ó
ÒDo you never sicken, Lion, of the tribes crawling on their belies before you?Ó
ÒPanther, you ask me many questions and I answer them. Why should I do it?Ó he asked, wrinkling his brow. ÒWhy should I feel a warmth in my heart for you, you white-fleshed child? Why do I love you, when I love no other man?Ó He put his arm around Dan MichaelÕs shoulders and now the gesture was no longer impersonal, but that of a comrade. ÒPerhaps I love you because you have always stood up and stared the Lion in the eyes. Even when you thought you have trod upon the brink of your life, you have not cringed. Your friends are like you, and the wizard Umcitu is even more fearless, but I hate him as I hate all men, all men! And yet I have affection for you. Tell me why I love you, Ijele, tell me that.Ó He snapped his fingers and made a gutteral noise of wonder. ÒI do not know. I only think that if I were weak and foolish, I should love you as a man does a woman.Ó
They scaled a deep place on the hillside and when they could move easily again Tchaka asked, ÒWhat was the question my Panther put to me? Was it the reason for death? I have told him that I am king and must kill. Let me tell him more. When I was a boy, a little child herding the cows of the Langeni people, I was unhappy. What child ever knew the terror of life as I knew it?Ó His handsome face clouded. ÒYea, Panther, what babe was ever so persecuted? I was hated because I was born a prince, and my father had cast me out. So they laughed at me and beat me with sticks, and stoned me. They made me hold hot coals and boiling mealie-meal in my two hands. They stared at me and said I was but half man, me, the Lion Cub!Ó He roared angrily. ÒThis tongue that speaks, it has licked blazing wood! These feet have trod the paths of fire! So I said in my heart, I will never show any man mercy; when I am king I will slay and slay, I will kill men until every river from Mfolozi to Imbezana runs scarlet day and night. By my father Senzangakona! When I took the throne I ate up the Lageni, trunk and branch and root and flower! I held the Amazulu in the hollow of my hand, they who had been cowherds and tobacco peddlers, and I breathed the violence of my anger into them. Then, when I had made an army, I slew those young men who had tormented me, and from that hour I have slain all men who crossed my path with evil intent, for they must know and spread the tale that Tchaka is the Lion, the Old Lion, who takes the world by the throat!Ó Then more quietly he said, ÒWas it this Ijele asked me?Ó
ÒI give the Lion thanks for telling me this thing. I asked him if he never grew ill with the sight of men crawling before him.Ó
ÒYou are wise, very wise in some things. Of course I am sickened by their puny fawning. They are often objects of my disgust, Ijele. But they must creep so that they will know who rules them. Do you wonder that I kick them? If a man stands straight, I may kill him, but I admire him for his bravery. I have told you much,Ó said the King. ÒI have opened my heart to you. But you will never speak to another of this talking, for if I have even the shadow of a thought that you will tell any of this, I will hurl you down from the apex of Indumeni.Ó
ÒI will never speak of what the lion has said.Ó
ÒGood. And now we must climb again, and conquer this great rock above us. Be silent and bend down so that I may step onto your back and rise to grasp that hanging bush.Ó
This message has been edited by JohnTiger from IP address 207.38.206.238 on Feb 22, 2007 2:57 PM This message has been edited by JohnTiger from IP address 207.38.206.238 on Feb 22, 2007 2:46 PM
Always good to hear from you, Mr. Tiger, and a pleasure to read your insightful posting. And it's nice to know you are still out there.
You've brought up some interesting points and added to our knowledge of the workings behind "Court of the Lions."
As Mr. Culp said, Peckinpah gave him some valuable writing advice early on.
"Peckinpah used to say in the early years when I first knew him, in TV you are always in a hurry. You are going to steal ideas. Don't worry about it. Just be sure to steal from the best."
And from my background in editing (O.K. - besides Tatia's photography ... ), we always used to say "There are only seven stories out there, the rest are just adaptations - the same stories told in different ways.
Not just Culp's, but many of the "I SPY" stories paid homage to other stories, movies, etc. - let's go with the term "inspiration from elsewhere." (As we've said before "homages" ALWAYS sounds so much better than "rip-offs") ...
We've mentioned that the I SPY writers often set their stories in the backdrops of movies like "The Manchurian Candidate" (Anyplace I Hang Myself is Home), "Born Yesterday" (Trouble with Temple), "Ninotchka" (A Gift from Alexander), "Ipcress File" (It's All Done With Mirrors), "Naked Prey" (Name of the Game), "Pink Panther" (Chrysanthemum), etc. etc. (If anyone else can add to this list, please send them on ....)
I guess I SPY's stories were never judged on their originality, but on their entertainment value (and of course, other shows out there were "borrowing" storylines all the time, also). And, truth be told, I am sure most people never, never gave this aspect of a story's background or source much thought ... (except for us "literary/movie buff types" out there). And many people would not be totally familiar with the source material, even if they were told.
None of the stories (Culp's or the other writers) ever listed a "Based on ..." acknowledgment in the credits at the end of the show. Perhaps it was considered an "honor" to have someone's story "adapted" and used as the basis for another. Or perhaps, some "legal permission" route was attended to before the show was produced.
As to Mr. Culp's stories, he specifically mentions in the DVD commentaries that be was strongly influenced by "The Bitter Tea of General Yen" and "No Orchids for Miss Blandish" and "Terry and the Pirates" in creating his powerful "War Lord" tale, but that he created the captivating characters himself. And I know I read somewhere that "Magic Mirror," which was originally entitled "The Enchanted Cottage" after the Robert Young, Dorothy McGuire movie about a disfigured war hero and his love, who only see beauty in one another while in their enchanted cottage - versus the cruel reality of the outside world. But I believe the studio that made the movie would not give them permission to use the title. (The 1945 film version was based on an earlier 1924 version.) So the story's titled was changed to "Magic Mirror." So maybe there was some agreement or permission granted for the title "Court of the Lions."
As to your comments "I was flabbergasted to note how much it was an outright modern-day paraphrase of an adventure novel by Robert Krepps called THE COURTS OF THE LION (circa 1949), set in Africa. To the point where Culp's villain, as played by Godfrey Cambridge, considers himself a bloodline descendent of the book's likewise dark (but more complex) force, King Tchaka Zulu." ...
Chaka "Great Zulu warrior" was a well-known historical figure (often spelled different ways, including Shaka) ... with many stories based upon him. I looked him up on Google and quotes included "The Black Napoleon" and an "Absolute ruler and tyrant." "He was known for a strong leader and military innovator, revolutionizing l9th Century Bantu warfare." "A man of great power and the heart of a tiger." "It was his legacy that created the powerful Zulu Kingdom and consolidated a nation."
As to Godfrey Cambridge's view and Mr. Culp's vision of the character, Cethswayo, Chaka Zulu's descendant, the I SPY book gives a very interesting background story in the "Story Behind The Story" section for this episode. (A quick aside, "The Story Behind the Story" sections in Marc's and Linda's book for each episode are absolutely wonderful - bestowing us with gems of information mostly unheard before!!)
Apparently Mr. Culp envisioned Cethswayo as a genius/academic type - "a rumpled Albert Einstein, who is black - with grey hair, glasses, cane." Godfrey Cambridge wanted to play a "black Goldfinger." He arrived on the set all stylish in a double breasted blazer. Culp was not happy, to say the least, and he had his work cut out for him as the director on this episode.
Thank you again so much Mr. Tiger for sharing that section "The Tyrant Justifies Tyranny" from THE COURTS OF THE LION by Krepps - and for filling us in on the background of Culp's story. I found it most intriguing. And it was good to hear from you, again!
I take the master point and acknowledge all the sub-points, but this episode strikes me as a little idiosyncratic even within that list. It's one thing to derive THE TROUBLE WITH TEMPLE from BORN YESTERDAY ... or to exploit MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE brainwashing (a spy fiction standard) for ANY PLACE I HANG MYSELF IS HOME (even the "real" John Tiger, under his true name, Walter Wager, did that with his novel TELEFON, which spawned the Bronson film) ... but it's a little different to go from THE COURTS OF THE LION to COURT OF THE LION. And I'm not making a charge of plagerism or any such, merely saying that the episode's ties to the source were naked, exposed and demonstrably conscious. (The others strike me as more oblique homages and variations, if not always subtle about it.)
I remember a number of years ago seeing the STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE NINE episode DUET, in which a supposed Bajoran war criminal (Harris Yulin) is caught, and in trial just flips out, confessing his crimes with mad relish (under Kira's questioning) ... until it is discovered he was but a low level functionary, but so wracked with guilt about what his people had done that he determined someone had to accept blame. Well, I was rocked by the episode -- not because it was powerful (though it was), but because it had been even more powerful when it was written as a novel, then as a play, by Robert (JAWS) Shaw, and later adapted into a screenplay by Edward Anhalt (Shaw took his name off the film, but it was his choice). The episode wasn't "inspired by" the source, it was a direct and shameless ripoff. (Not making this charge against Culp, btw, but I am coming to a point.) A number of months later I was in the Pocket Books STAR TREK editorial offices (this was right around the time they published my ALIEN NATION novel) and said of the episode to then-editor John Ordover, "Did NO ONE know it was a shameless rewrite of THE MAN IN THE GLASS BOOTH?" And I was informed by him that they did know ... but only after the show had been shot and aired and touted as the jewel in the series crown. The story had come in "over the transome" by two outside writers, the ST: DS9 staff were simply too young and/or too unhip to know the Shaw play, they thought the story was fantastic and bought it. The connection to THE MAN IN THE GLASS BOOTH was somehow pointed out to the Powers That Be after the fact, and the producers made a retroactive deal with the Shaw estate to indemnify themselves.
And while the connection of the Culp teleplay to the Krepps novel is nether so shameless nor so mercenary, it IS that direct. Again, the book was not in the public domain at the time as (I have to assume) it is now. It was only about 15 or 16 years old.
So I was just wondering if any such acknowledgement, even behind the scenes, was made to Krepps -- or for that matter if Krepps even knew?
I have no further information on "Court of the Lions," but I imagine since Sheldon and company were consummate professionals and veterans in the entertainment world, that if any permissions or legal releases were needed, they would have been attended to ....
What I found most fascinating in your posting was that Robert Shaw, the man who wrote "The Man in the Glass Booth," was Robert Shaw, the actor. I had always assumed they were two different people. So the talented Mr. Shaw, the actor, was also Mr. Shaw, the talented writer.
I find it interesting that he felt so strongly about the movie that he took his name off the credits ... (sounds a lot like Walter Hill's "catatonic" reaction to Culp's re-write of "Hickey & Boggs." (See Jimmy, I read every word!) I believe Maximilian Schell was nominated for an Oscar for his performance in the movie.
Let's see now talented actor, writer, actor, writer .... hmm, who else does that bring to mind??
O.K. then - but our talented Bob even draws, designs clothes, and directs .... ( I don't know if he does the dishes, too? ) Does Robert Shaw have anything like that on his resume???
Ahhh, but you're assuming that Sheldon Leonard and/or Friedkin & Fine knew that Culp had based his script on the Krepps novel, and I'm willing to bet he kept that to himself. I don't think Leonard would have forked over option money for the rights to a novel to indulge Culp. Plus, it's doubtful a deal would have been made that fast, in the wake of Culp having finished the script. In SL's world the deal would have to have occurred before RC wrote it. (Now if Culp had optioned the book privately -- his DVD commentary says someone introduced him to the book, and it's not impossible that he made a separate deal months or years earlier -- that'd take care of his interets and indemnify Three F. But that considered, and casting no moral aspersions on ol' Bob C, from the vague DVD account and the lack of documentation elsewhere, it just smells like Bob K never saw a penny -- and like Bob C thought he was borrowing more than basing. I'm guessing too that even by then the novel was obscure. And -- now I'm REALLY guessing, but it makes sense to me -- if Krepps was taking novelization assignments for quick money [this in an era when such gigs paid maybe $1,000 to 1,500 bucks], even if he did know, it may not have been financially viable for him to lawyer up for what would likely have been small remuneration in any event.)
As to Bob S ... I can't remember where I read this, and now that Shaw is dead there are conflicting stories about his final reaction, but he was very much alive when the quote about taking his name off the film was published, and an interesting one it is too. Apparently he read the screenplay and said, "It's a perfectly brilliant script, but it has nothing to do with my play." (It's possible I've unintentionally paraphrased a bit, but not in a way that would misrepresent meaning, intent or context.) Shaw was right on the first count and wrong on the second, but it's absolutely true that Edward Anhalt introduced new themes and scenes and even characters, in one of those rare, odd instances in which one genius rewrites another. The rewrite isn't necessary, yet it's fascinating and you wouldn't want to have missed it. The irony though is that the movie was part of the American Film Theatre series, which was dedicated to the preservation of plays on celluloid; so director Arthur Hiller's decision to treat the property as if it were a Hollywood film going through a Hollywood-style process (and producer Ely Landau's approval of it) seems perverse.
As a curious point of trivia, there's a mildly amusing early 60s movie called SITUATION HOPELESS BUT NOT SERIOUS, about two American pilots kept prisoner (and protected from the Nazis) by a German bookkeeper in his cellar, who grows so used to their company that he conveniently neglects to tell them when WWII is over. It's based on a subtler and more artful novel by Shaw called THE HIDING PLACE ... and the stars are Alec Guiness as the lonely German ... and a pre-Sundance Robert Redford with a pre-Mannix Mike (then Michael) Connors as the pilots.
This message has been edited by JohnTiger from IP address 207.38.206.238 on Feb 23, 2007 8:18 PM
I’ve found this discussion fascinating John and Tatia, though I don’t have anything to add, because I don’t know anything. I’ve never heard of Robert Krepps and it’s always exciting to “discover” a new writer, so a copy of “The Courts of the Lion” should be in my mailbox before too long. I look forward to reading the novel (possibly rendering myself slightly less unhip in the process) and then watching the episode and listening to Robert Culp’s commentary again.
I recall there was a potential plagiarism problem in the original Star Trek series concerning the episode Arena. I must have read about it in either “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen E. Whitfield, or “The World of Star Trek” by David Gerrold. I just skimmed through both of my yellowing paperback copies but I can’t find the passage. (Those books don’t have indices, unlike the amazingly complete one in the Cushman and LaRosa I Spy book.) Fredric Brown published the story “Arena” in 1944. I encountered it in the anthology “Science Fiction Hall of Fame” edited by Robert Silverberg which contained the twenty-five or so greatest science fiction short stories published before 1965 as chosen by the members of the Science Fiction Writers of America. So it was a highly regarded and well known story. Sometime during the production of the Star Trek episode (script by Gene L. Coon) someone recognized the similarity between the episode and the Brown story, in time to give Fredric Brown a “story by” credit and some money, avoiding an embarrassing situation. I don’t think there was any belief that Mr. Coon had consciously plagiarized the story, but he must have read it at some point.
I am curious John, if you are in agreement with the reviews of the John Tiger (that other John Tiger) I Spy novels on pages 269-271 of the I Spy book. The reviews are pretty favorable and they particularly recommend the 6th book “Doomdate”. I’m thinking of checking at least this one out. I remember reviews of the books showing up on this Forum in the past that I think were less favorable, though I'm not sure. They might have been by you, or possibly by Tatia. (I’m too lazy to go and find them now.)
Thanks for all the wonderful information.
Jimmy
This message has been edited by jimmymitchell from IP address 66.75.226.186 on Feb 23, 2007 10:09 PM
Personally, I loved the I SPY novels (which is why I adopted Walter Wager's pseudonym as my forum moniker); and even though they were grander in scope, they seemed to me perfectly apt -- at least insofar as they represented an authentic view of the characters as Walter saw them, and as he could absorb them into his own imprimatur. Tie-in books these days are much more the product of devoted fans (even if they're pro writers working on commission), and syncing up with official canon and timeline is pretty much a mandate ... which is not remotely a bad thing. But in the 60s, tie-in novelists tended to be seasoned pulpsmiths or genre writers and their literary versions of popular TV shows were very often (albeit informally) "alternate universe" takes, with their own discrete lore. The variations could be offensive or just plain clueless (i.e. Michael Avallone writing HAWAII FIVE-O's Steve McGarrett as a standard paperback ladies' man); sometimes they could be thoughtful (in a circumstance that would be rejected out of hand these days, Keith Laumer agreed to write the first two INVADERS novels ONLY if he could change some things about the premise, which is how David Vincent was suddenly an aerospace engineer rather than an architect); but they brought with them very strong, muscular and distinct literary styles (if you can locate it, Jim Thompson's take on IRONSIDE is as memorable as any of his noir thrillers.) I read Walter's I SPYs as an impressionable pre-teen, at first, and they had a huge influence on me as a budding writer. One I still feel.
The 60s were also the days before VCRs, so a tie-in writer only had scripts, photos and (if he was lucky) the episodes he watched on the tube at the same time as everybody else. (Even today, a writer might not actually SEE the series he's writing about, if the merchandising machine wants the books in the store early. TORCHWOOD, the spinoff of the the new millennium DOCTOR WHO, just spawned three original novels [BBC Books] that came roaring onto the shelves right after the last of the first season's 13 episodes aired. The novels are excellent pastiches, even better than the episodes themselves, I thought -- and not one of the three authors, Peter Anghelides, Dan Abnett, nor Andy Lane, had seen an episode until after they were done.) As to the I SPYs, I think the first book was Walter's learning curve, but after that he was flying. And I looked forward to his I SPY universe as much as the one on TV. I thought the creation of their boss, Donald Mars, and the particular hierarchy of teams they were a part of, were inspired. I dug it that they had a team identity, that Mars had dubbed them "Domino." The code names were a blast, as were the larger-than-life (yet credible) villains.
And despite Mr. Cushman's assertion that Kelly and Scott worked for Military Intelligence, I thought it made perfect sense for Walter to assume they were CIA. Indeed, I'm not so sure Cushman's right and Walter's wrong. If you actually look up what Military Intelligence is, it's not a division or a department, it's a specialized kind of information and information gathering and it really does pertain primarily to military matters -- not the kind of thing Kelly and Scott would be involved in. Indeed, most of their cases were classic CIA-type assignments. I think the series never NAMED their agency (you'll remember that in time their agency was vaguely referred to as "the department") precisely so that the writers could keep it loose and give Kelly and Scott the widest possible lattitude and jurisdiction (i.e. if your cover is as an internationally known tennis bum, how can you expect to fit convincoingly into a small town for "Trial By Treehouse"? And what in the world does that episode have to do with anything military? Or anything CIA, for that matter, as "in country" ops would be the province of the FBI?); and I think the military fellow in the early episode who is said to have teamed them initially (and any such else that came in its wake) was a convenient invention for the episode and an early continuity sacrifice. Kelly and Scott were simply not military personnel. I would even go as far as to say that by creating Donald Mars, Walter Wager was unintentionally anticipating the creation of Russ Conway -- who is clearly the kind of black ops "suit" who would be a veteran CIA man.
If I am not mistaken, in "Anywhere I Hang Myself Is Home," Russ Conway explains they are like the CIA, but more military. This comes in the begining of the episode while all of the trainees are in class, supposedly for, "Public Information." The exact name of the agency was never given on the show.
John,
Did you notice, how thru the brilliance and speed of my typing fingers (unlike Kelly's hunt and peck method we saw in some episodes) I was able to reply to your posting an hour before you posted it?
And the official title is "No Exchange on Damaged Merchandise.": -) The photo is from the very beginning when Kelly is typing up the story of his damaged watch hoping for some government reimbursement. Great episode!! I re-posted that photo today with a little clearer version. I had just taken a quick screen capture the other night right off of AOL-In2TV. I am so delighted to have those episodes right there - at the click of a mouse. The new photo is a screen capture taken from the DVDs - far better quality.
And speaking of "No Exchange," I believe it was Jimmy, who mentioned that Sue Randall - who plays Louise Richards - was Beaver's teacher Miss Landers on "Leave It to Beaver." Well, ol Beaver was just on "Nick at Night" or "TVLand" last week, and there see was .... about 10 years younger, but with the same sweet, earnest demeanor. Thanks, Jimmy, I never would have known!
Sue Randall - a.k.a. Louise Richards
and go to this site to see a bunch of Miss Landers pics.
And speaking of photos from "No Exchange" - the bottom photos from my Chinese New Year's greeting were from that episode also (except for the very last one).
~ ~ ~ 
