Date: 9 Apr 2003
For my birthday I received the book: "THE ACADEMY AWARDS - THE COMPLETE HISTORY OF OSCAR." It's a large coffee table book, very glossy, with lots of photos, and very expensive. It is billed as a Comprehensive Guide to the Oscars: who was nominated every year, who won, and what happened at every ceremony. It's chock full of backstage anecdotes and Hollywood gossip from years gone by. For an entire week I did nothing but lie around and read this big black book.
At first, I thought the book just had a few typos. Names misspelled, punctuation missing. Then I noticed a few factual errors. Famous 'Old Hollywood' stars were misidentified in photos. Quotes were attributed to the wrong people. Then, I found a few major errors in data. And then, to my horror, I realized that this book was full of JAW-DROPPING ERRORS THROUGHOUT.
It was a mysterious feeling. How could a book that claims to be a comprehensive guide to 74 years of Oscar Magic have been printed with so many mistakes? Imagine if you bought a copy of the Bible and found passages about bikini waxing. What would you do? It makes you feel as if you are in on a very large and weird secret. One that is crying for public attention. I felt like I had discovered a new Watergate. What should I do with my findings? How could I connect with other people who were aware of this national crisis?
Amazon.com. The book was listed and had 8 customer reviews. I was vindicated. Five of the reviews mentioned not just the errors that I had found, but countless others! It was like finding a support group for some bizarre and rare disease. It was awesome.
The other reviewers criticized the book, and the authors, and gently urged the amazon.com patrons to look else where for their comprehensive Oscar information. I felt that while these reviews were acceptable and correct, they were not sharp enough. This was a very expensive book and they are masquerading on the open market as a comprehensive guide. It's shameful.
One of the few positive reviews got me a little peeved (underlining is mine):
It's wonderful, It's marvelous..., December 23, 2002
Reviewer: James R Ferguson
from Brooklyn, NY USA
The book is beautifully layed-out
with wonderful photographs and a narrative style that simmers with savy
insight and salacious asides, perfectly suited to its subject. Some
of the other reviewers seem to miss this point. We
are not deconstructing a scholarly thesis on August Strindberg. This
book is about Hollywood and the Academy Awards. Go ahead; buy the book
and have your guilty pleasure!
My slight disgruntlement blossomed into red-throated rage when I read the following review:
worth every penny!!, November
9, 2002
Reviewer: Ian Becker from
Hartford, CT
Some
of the other reviewers need to get a life. Perhaps there are a few factual errors
( I don't know because I wasn't hunting for them) but this book is
a joy. The writing is jazzy and clever and its look is terrific. Most
of the other Oscar books are stuffy and over reverential but this one
and Inside Oscar hit just the right tone. It's definitely worth the
money!
Some of the other reviewers need to get a life. Some of the other reviewers need to get a life. While this may be very true, these are fighting words. I quickly signed into the site and wrote my own review. I was mad, I am mad, and I intended to settle the score with these so-called-book reviewers who are probably THE AUTHORS THEMSELVES trying to turn the tide back in their favor.
This was MY review:
JAW-DROPPING ERRORS THROUGHOUT,
March 19, 2003
Reviewer: scott prendergast
from Brooklyn, NY United States
Well, it's a nice big book
and there are great pictures. But this book is filled with amazing and
laughable ERRORS.
Most Spectacularly:
West Side Story Oscar Winner for Best Supporting Actress RITA MORENO is identified as CHITA RIVERA. Pg 144
In a blurb about JUDY HOLLIDAY, in the section about her Oscar Win for Born Yesterday, the book tells us that Madonna lists Holliday as one of her biggest influences and that Holliday recorded several great jazz albums with many jazz greats. HELLO? Madonna is talking about BILLIE HOLLIDAY. Pg 99.
Trust me, this is JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG in this ERROR-RIDDEN book. What is fascinating is that this book made it to press at all with these GLARING mistakes.
Who wrote this book? What could possibly be wrong with them? These mistakes aren't typos - they are major errors committed by someone who obviously came to film study by way of sheep grazing.
Fascinatingly wrong, but by no means a reliable reference. I feel completely cheated, but mysteriously entertained.
HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
The review may be a little histrionic, but I had a lot of time on my hands. Perhaps too much time. The next day, while waiting for my review to appear on the site (it takes amazon.com five days to clear all reviews) I logged back on under a pseudonym and wrote another review:
MYSTERIOUSLY AND EGREGIOUSLY
FLAWED, March 20, 2003
Reviewer:
Gail Pyun from Highland, ME
Book
was a gift. Interesting at first, but as all other reviewers have noticed,
it's riddled with mistakes.
Not just name switches or typos, I refer to major gaps in information and logic. It's mysterious because it makes you wonder how a large professional book of this magnitude comes together at all with such errors.
Aside from the racist oversight identifying Rita Moreno as Chita Rivera (which is mind-boggling) the statement that Hepburn won 8 Oscars? That Gable won best Actor for Gone with the Wind?
Impossible to conceive how something like this happens. Unless it was ghost-written by 12 people who never met and had very shoddy information.
Don't waste your money.
I think that Ms. Pyun has a few great points, and she makes them well. I don't know for certain that a place called Highland, Maine actually exists. But if it does, I'm sure it is a peaceful community filled with film-loving, and film-history-loving individuals, who share an award-winning sense of racial harmony, and quasi-asian sounding names.
The next day, as I was still waiting, now for both reviews to appear, I felt my rage against this book bubble over into something uncontrollable. Who do these authors think they are? Passing a shoddy treasury of poorly checked facts off as a comprehensive guide to the Oscars? Would their crimes go un-noticed? Un-scolded?
Sam, being belligerent and uncooperative, would not let me write a review under his name, and so I was forced to create yet another pseudonym:
buying this book was a
mistake, March 20, 2003
Reviewer:
timothy bartlett from Florida
I
spent a lot of money to buy this book when it was new. I feel
totally robbed. I wanted
a comprehensive guide to all oscar winners loser and nominees. I
don't feel I can trust this book because it is so full of spectacular
errors.
If you just want some pretty pictures and don't care about information, then this may be the book for you.
...
Well - what's the point of writing an Oscar book and listing every nominee if you aren't going to fact check your book and print correct information? Why not just concoct all your information from scratch and just slap names on photos at random? Did the authors research the book at all or even check their info? Or did they do the whole thing from memory in one long night before their deadline?
The errors in this book are so shocking that it makes me think the book was put together very quickly by people who knew nothing about the Oscars at all. The book contradicts itself on several points. It is just unreliable - and useless.
What a waste, what a waste. Heartbreaking.
That Mr. Bartlett is right on target. His searing review cuts to the heart of the matter, giving voice to the voice-less consumer, awash in a world of poorly-edited and poorly-fact-checked comprehensive guides. It is indeed heartbreaking, whether or not he actually knows the price of the book or received it as a gift from a friend in Denver named 'Chicken'.
You may have noticed the "..." symbols in the middle of the review. This is where amazon.com, in their infinite wisdom, chose to remove one of Mr. Bartlett's paragraphs, deeming it, I suppose, unpalatable for the type of person who reads and writes reviews on their little site.
THIS is that missing paragraph:
I strongly urge you NOT to buy this book. DO NOT waste your money. There must be countless other comprehensive guides to the Oscars that can be had for less money. And I'm sure none of them will make mistakes like naming Clark Gable as Best Actor for Gone With the Wind. (HE DID NOT WIN!) I urge you to join me in continuing to list any and all ERRORS and MISTAKES from the pages of this travesty on this site!
Perhaps amazon.com are in cahoots with the authors, or maybe the First Amendment has finally been extinguished once and for all. Whatever the case may be, Mr. Bartlett from Florida's call to arms has been silenced forever. It is a shame. His repetition of the phrase "what a waste" brings to mind the finer works of Joseph Conrad, or the final words of the Wicked Witch of the West ("What a world, what a world!" [Wizard of OZ, 1939]). As we bid Goodbye to Mr. Chips in that same year of 1939 (and to Robert Donat who won Best Actor for his portrayal of the oft-departing Mr. Chips) we also bid adieu to Mr. Timothy Bartlett, he of the pear sounding name. Would that we knew ye well...
So...eventually all the reviews appeared on amazon.com, I found something else to do with my life (weather.com) and I forgot all about the book, the mystery and the heartbreak.
And then, just recently, tiring of the constant updates on humidity in my zip code area, I returned to the site of my finest hour, only to find THIS:
Critics should get THEIR
facts correct, March 28, 2003
Reviewer: difnyc from
new york, ny United States
Scott
Prendergast in his scathing review of the book corrects the authors
about their Judy Holiday information.
The exact quote on page 99
is "Listed by Madonna as one of her biggest influences, Holliday
co-wrote and performed songs with jazz legend Gerry Mulligan for the
album Holliday with Mulligan." That information is CORRECT. Holliday
was married to Mulligan and was an accomplished jazz singer with a few
well regarded albums under her belt. As for Billie Holliday being an
influence on Madonna, I DON'T THINK SO. So Mr. Prendergast, you might
want to brush up on some of your facts before you claim your movie expert
title.
Also
in regard to Gail Peylun's unfortunate aspersion that confusing Rita
Moreno and Chita Rivera was "racist", the error was probably
wishful thinking rather than any racism.
As any informed movie goer knows, Chita legendarily created the role of Anita on Broadway and was robbed of the opportunity to play her in the movie. Perhaps the authors were attempting to right an aggregious wrong.
So enough was this nit picking. THIS BOOK IS FUN. It is beautifully written and great to look at.
You can not imagine how shocked (SHOCKED!) I was, to find my own (real) name sullied on the pages of this tawdry little book-and-patio-furniture-sales site! It was, and is, outrageous. Whoever this "difnyc" is, the "dif" must certainly stand for Difficult. While Sam did verify that Ms. Holliday has in fact made several jazz albums (thank you for that information two weeks late!) I don't feel that my error justifies this kind of public 'E'xcoriation. I stand by my assertion that Ms. Ciccone takes no influence from the Oscar winning star of "Born Yesterday." And I stand by the assertion of one Ms. Pyun of Highland, Maine that Chita Rivera is NOT Rita Moreno. (And Peylun? How difficult is it to spell a made-up Chinese name? RACISM!)
A little cloak and dagger work (commonly known as 'scrolling down') revealed this juicy tid-bit:
Best Oscar Book Yet, October
3, 2002
Reviewer: difnyc from
New York, NY
Being
an Oscar fanatic since childhood, I'm somewhat of a maven on Oscar
history books and this is the best one yet. Although not filled
with as much info as the Wiley/Bona Inside Oscar , it's a much better
looking book, beautifully designed and very user friendly. The
writing is snappy and witty and never dry or overly reverent. It
captures the insanity, glamor and silliness of the Oscars as a true
American kitsch spectacle while paying appropriate tribute to its place
in our cultural history. The
book is a great gift idea as well as a valuable contribution to any movie
lover's library.
Ah-ha! And so it comes to light that Mr. difnyc (which must stand for not just "difficult" but "difficult and dramatic homosexual") was the VERY FIRST reviewer of the book (and that his affinity for poor spelling can be traced back at least until October of 2002). It all says to me, PAYOLA. He is clearly an agent of the publisher, a friend of the authors, or one of the mincing research assistants hired by the authors to 'pad' their salacious bag of golden statuette LIES.
Not one to be struck down by one of my own kind, I quickly shot back with a review written proudly under my recently blackened name:
I STAND SLIGHTLY CORRECTED,
April 21, 2003
Reviewer: scott prendergast
from Brooklyn, NY United States
Yes,
Judy Holliday recorded albums with Jazz greats. However, she is not one
of Madonna's influences. (reference US Weekly April 1998 article in which
Madonna discusses her love of BILLIE Holliday - the singer.)
I don't claim to be a movie expert. But neither can the authors of this book. Of the 19 online reviews of this book, 12 note the large number of factual errors. It's simply not a reliable reference.
Yes, Chita Rivera originated the role of Anita in West Side Story. On Broadway. But she was not in the movie, did not win an Oscar, and was not "standing in the winner's circle" with George Chakiris. If the authors want to fancifully "right an aggregious wrong" then their book should be sold under FICTION. And if they want to spell words correctly, it's EGREGIOUS.
What is the excuse for saying that Katharine Hepburn won 8 Oscars, difnyc? For listing Clark Gable as Best Actor for Gone With the Wind? More righting of "E"gregious wrongs?
Ah, I wish it were so. Does this mean I can write an Oscar book where Helen Hunt never won? Where Dances With Wolves was trounced by GoodFellas? Where Julie Andrews wins for "My Fair Lady?" (Because you know, she did originate the role on Broadway.)
It's a poorly-edited, poorly fact-checked book. Case closed.
I am quite proud of this review. Whether or not it will see the light of day is up to the biased and penny-counting editors of that sham-site amazon.com.
And no, I don't know if there is actually a Madonna interview in the April edition of US WEEKLY, or if she even knows who Billie Holliday is. But if the editors of the "shoddiest book ever written" don't have to hire copy editors and fact checkers, then neither do I.
To keep abreast of this developing story just direct your truth seeking eyes and your clicking fingers towards this link.
Until we post again
Scott Prendergast
Well. A lot has happened.
First of all, yes yes and yes. I was wrong. Judy Holliday is APPARENTLY one of Madonna's influences. I have not heard it for myself from her lips, but a number of readers of this public service announcement have written in to say "blah blah blah Madonna blah blah blah Judy Holliday."
There is no physical evidence. But, for now we will accept it as nominally true.
This does NOT change things, however, for the corrupt shysters masquerading as film scholars and book makers at Black Dog and Leventhal Publishers, Inc. Their tome, "The Academy Awards, The Complete History of Oscar" is still RIDDLED with errors.
So riddled with errors that this reader found himself immersed in a fog of misinformation that most probably led to the unfortunate yet understandable aforementioned mix-up (Judy/Billie/Roman/What have you).
Also it must be said that 80% of the blame for the Billie/Judy mix-up must fall on Sam's shoulders. He works on Broadway! He's a musical prodigy! Shouldn't he have re-guided me when originally CONSULTED? Legal action is pending.
Why rail against this book? Why not! What are you doing with your time that is so important and time-worthy if you are sitting there reading these 10 page emails? I waited a long, long time to own a book like this. I was excited when I got it, and then was horribly crushed when it was filled with mistakes. If you have ever waited for the F line subway on a Saturday at 2 a.m., only to be heart-broken by the TRASH-TRAIN, you will understand how I feel.
I will not be a voiceless consumer. I will not be a hapless and powerless cog in the giant machine that is consumers vs. large printed academy awards guides. I will not be a rat in a maze blindly calling the automated MTA complaint line (which results, you should know, in a form letter signed by one Ms. "Yolanda Jiminez" that includes the line, "the MTA understands your frustration.")
In any event, my "CAMPAIGN FOR mostly TRUTH" goes FORWARD!
Amazon.com did in fact print my last review of the book. Which can be seen on their site, and begins with the title "I STAND SLIGHTLY CORRECTED."
They also chose to print two other reviews that I wrote under assumed pseudonyms. Or asseudonyms:
Faulty information, nice
pictures, April 21, 2003
Reviewer:
Dehlia Bradhurst from Portland, Maine
I
just finished the book, and then read all of the online reviews. If
I had paid full price for the book i would be upset too. It's just
not accurate about so many things.
I can't agree with the review by dfnyc which says that the authors were righting a wrong by confusing Chita Rivera with Rita Moreno. That makes the whole book seem unreliable. And the Clark Gable mistake is a pretty big one.
I don't really understand all the furor on here though. I would imagine that these positive reviews are probably written by the authors themselves and their friends and maybe rightfully so. But otherwise who would back up a book that is so clearly built on an unsteady foundation? The facts are incorrect.
But the pictures are lovely and their are a lot of them.
Thank you.
Ms. Bradhurst, who is incidentally from my home town but in a different state, has a charmingly befuddled sense of sentence structure and word timing. She is probably elderly. I am also enormously glad and relieved that someone finally had the courage to point out the GOOD REVIEWS/AUTHORS connection to the other amazonites and to the public at large.
Her misspelling/misuse of the word "their" is simply quaint, but her misspelling of the handle "difnyc" as "dfnyc" can be taken as either an oversight (she IS elderly) or a clever jab against a man who has chosen to sublimate himself (the missing "i") inside the folds of a large, black, book about movie awards.
Her choice to end her review with "Thank you" is decidedly old-world, and quite surprising in these times of Instant Messages, "LOL!", and online sex chat-rooms that charge 4.95 per hour. A classy review, from a classy, classy lady.
For those of you who may have forgotten, "difnyc" is a the gentleman who has challenged my earlier reviews, and written a few puffy ones of his own. I would not be surprised if he were puffy in person, nor would I be surprised if his real name were Jim Piazza, co-author of the book. (Please note that PIAZZA is one letter away from PIZZA).
After reading Ms. Bradhurst's gentle, homespun review several times, I realized that she refers to the "Clark Gable mistake" but does not explain it. Hence my next review:
LOTS OF MIX-UPS, April
22, 2003
Reviewer: P. Beard from
Magosha, New York
I also found a number
of errors in this book. It is handsome and large and filled with
pictures. But
so much of the information is inaccurate.
Wallace Beery is identified incorrectly, as is Rita Moreno (as Chita Rivera!!). Kate Hepburn didn't win 8 oscars. This is lunacy. Jane Wyman and Loretta Young are each identified as the other on page 55. Spielberg did not buy "Clark Gable's Best Actor Oscar" (pg. 291). How could he have? Gable didn't win. An unforgivable error. Spielberg bought Vivien Leigh's Oscar! And "King Kong" never won any oscars, not ever. Not the original, not the remake.
Also, the delivery man who brought the book to my door found it necessary to point out that his name was Oscar again and again. It was tiresome.
Good title for this book? See page 29: Frankly Embarrassing.
Kudos to Mr. Beard for calling Ms. Hepburn "Kate" and for writing in on Earth Day!
But Mr. Beard is ANGRY! And rightfully so! ALL OF THE ERRORS that he points out are ACTUAL ERRORS committed in the pages of Ms. Kinn and Mr. Pizza's book!
(Except, however, for the King Kong one. I made that up. The review just needed something! Something glitzy, something enormous and hairy that claws its way up buildings and eats ladies.)
(It's not like anybody over at Black Dog and Leventhal [which sounds like a bar/urologists-office combo anyway] is going to notice A FACTUAL ERROR.)
Persistent and diligent television watching in my youth gave me the insight into Spielberg's Oscar purchase. It was covered on Entertainment Tonight. No one else on the amazon site (none of the real people) has caught this mistake! Only me and Mr. P. Beard from Magosha, New York. And if you haven't visited Magosha, you really should go. It is located inside Sam's head as Magosha is the name of the made-up-place where he used to play as a child.
I must admit that I don't know who Wallace Beery is and that I did not catch this error. I cribbed it from another review by "Rhett Bartlett from Melbourne, Victoria Australia." He also makes a few other good points in his review:
[the book] says that Helen Hayes won in her screen debut then a few years later notes that Gale Sondergaard becomes the first person to win an Oscar in her debut film. As well as that it notes the Laurence Olivier is the only person to direct himself to an Oscar, totally ignoring the fact that Roberto Benigni did it in 1998.
Excellent sleuthing from Mr. "Bartlett from Melbourne, Victoria Australia." Is that a real place? It sounds like Canada and Australia at once. Also, I am just realizing that I not only stole his info for my review, but I also stole his last name for my earlier fake review by "Timothy Bartlett." This is becoming more confusing than a poorly edited comprehensive guide to the Oscars!
Lastly, did you know that Gale Sondergaard, mentioned in the above review, is the actress who was originally slated to play the Wicked Witch of the West? This information was given to me by Sam. He may hold out on the Madonna's influences stuff, but he knows his Wizard of Oz (1939).
So - those are all the reviews that I wrote. About the Academy Awards book. It took four days for them to post and none of them were edited whatsoever.
Mr. "difnyc" has not yet responded. I have been checking the amazon site quite diligently and there has been no sign of him. He's probably out campaigning for David Duke or something. Maybe selling asbestos acoustical tiles to third world countries. Or if he IS the author Jim Piazza, writing a new book about the American Presidency and Geraldine Ferraro's scintillating run as Vice President.
But so far, nothing. Silence.
I am a little nervous to see what he has to say. You may not have experienced this very ought-3 dilemma yet, but when you are waiting for someone to trash you and your fictional book reviews on a website that sells Target merchandise at a discount, you can get a little jumpy.
Also, he has me over a barrel, at least a little bit. The Madonna/Judy/Billie thing is a little embarrassing. So just to cover my tracks in that department, I put a few more reviews on the site.
For the Billie Holliday recording DVD entitled: "LADY DAY - THE MANY FACES OF BILLIE HOLLIDAY":
SO INFLUENTIAL!!!!, April 23, 2003
Reviewer:
scott prendergast from Brooklyn, NY United States
This
Billie Holiday album was like a ray of light to me when I first listened
to it! It's so inspiring! You can see why so many artists
of today are influenced by it! The music really took me to the
borderline. I thank my lucky star that this album came along!
Hopefully, it strengthens the Madonna/Billie Holliday connection. And for the Judy Holliday CD collection: GERRY MULLIGAN AND JUDY HOLLIDAY: THEIR ONLY RECORDINGS TOGETHER, I wrote:
Has anyone ever really
heard of this album?, April 23, 2003
Reviewer:
scott prendergast from Brooklyn, NY United States
This album is so good!! It's
so good you would think that broadway pianists would know all about it
and would have informed their significant others of its existence a little
bit sooner!! But no matter - the music is beautiful! It's
a shame that so very few of today's artists still listen to this sort
of thing and take note of it. It clearly resides in some sort of
cultural black hole. And that Judy Holliday! She is one cat
that can never be topped, replaced, imitated, mimicked, paid tribute
to, emulated or referenced ever again! That's how good she is!
Maybe that will confuse him, or at least throw him off the track. Look, until Madonna appears on national television in a remake of the Judy Holliday vehicle "Bells are Ringing" (1960) - nobody has the final word.
("Bells are Ringing" had only one nomination that year, for Scoring of a Musical. But it lost to "Song Without End." Which I suppose makes sense. If the song in actuality Does Not End, then it is probably deserving of some sort of award.)
(NOTE: do not confuse "Song Without End" with "The Song That Never Ends" - the children's favorite performed by Shari Lewis, Lamb-chop and the little Cajun Dog puppet.)
Yes, I should have used a fake name on those last two reviews. Frankly, I was surprised to see my own real name when they posted on the site. I guess I was just too wrapped up in all the injustice to notice.
And finally, don't feel bad for the people who go to amazon.com and look to these above reviews for actual information on these products. The other reviews are all incredibly dippy and banal. Like this one:
Paul L Benedetti from Bensalem, PA
I just adore Judy
Holiday! As
an actress, she was magic. As a singer she is just as magical.
Ignoring the flashing red sign over his head which says "HOMOSEXUAL", Mr. Benedetti's comments are ridiculous. "Magic" and then "Magical" in the next sentence? Please. What is he - from Magosha?
(Actually no, he's from Bensalem. Where they tie the Benwitches to Benposts and Benburn them.)
Why write false reviews you may ask? Why fight mistakes with lies? I respond: for my honor. My name is now printed all over the Internet, possibly incorrectly identifying Billie Holliday as one of Madonna's influences. I CAN NOT let this error overwhelm what is an OVERWHELMING-ER mistake on the part of the authors of this book. A comprehensive Oscar book that one reviewer called "Full of Black Holes."
(That reviewer is Tab L. Uno from Clearfield, Utah. His name can be rearranged as AUNT BLO, or A LOT BUN, but why would you?)
And for the few of you who wrote in to say that I should be spending more of my time and energy PROTESTING THE WAR or WRITING LETTERS TO MY CONGRESSMAN, I would like to tell you that today's screening of the WILD THORNBERRY'S MOVIE will be cancelled and replaced with a LECTURE about SYPHILIS and the HOLOCAUST. With slides.
Sincerely,
Gail Peylun, from Magosha, USA
You can visit the AMAZON site and witness the bloodshed by clicking here.