Curses, Drudged Again! An Exclusive Podcast with David Zucker

Zucker, producer of comedy classics like “Airplane,” created the now infamous ad with co-producer Myrna Sokoloff who also participates in the podcast. As it turns out, and thanks in no small part to Drudge, this “ad you will never see” has been seen by millions at YouTube, with millions more at the door. How did it get made? Well, the GOP actually asked for it. “Then we mailed it in,” said Zucker, “and they just sort of gulped.” Sokoloff agrees but notes that at one and a half minutes, “This is the director’s cut.” Zucker then reveals that there is a second ad concerning taxes: “The premise is ‘What if you could wake up a year from today and you could see your new tax bill if the Democrats get into power.’” Well, we could wait forever to see that bill, but not the Zucker take on it.

TRANSCRIPT:

Transcribed for use only by PAJAMASMEDIA
by Lisa Bar-Leib
eScribers, LLC

ANNOUNCER: This is a PAJAMASMEDIA PoliticsCentral presentation.
SIMON: This is Roger Simon for PAJAMASMEDIA and I’m here with David Zucker and Myrna Sokoloff. David needs no introduction to our audience. He is the gentleman behind such mega hits as Airplane and Naked Gun, which we all laughed like crazy. Recently, Scary Movies of various numbers. And Myrna is a former Democratic party campaign fundraiser and organizer.
And I think it’s safe to call both of these people 9/11 Democrats in the phrase that was coined by Ron Silver, I think and —
ZUCKER: Or just plain traitors.
RS: Traitors — traitors — oh, my God. Oh. Anyway — we may have to cut this —
DZ: Well, I’m still speaking from the Democratic side.
RS: We may have to cut this off right here.
SIMON: Anyway, they have recently caused a little bit of a consternation making their second political commercial that has insulted a lot of people including Madeleine Albright. But more to the point, it was, I think, made for the Republican National Committee, or someone like that and then not used by them because it was too outrageous, I guess, in some way.
RS: You know, maybe Myrna first. Can you tell us how this all came about?
SOKOLOFF: Well, the Republican National Committee contacted us and, knowing our past work, asked us to do a couple of ads, one on domestic policy on taxes and one on foreign policy. But they sort of left it up to us what we were going to focus on. And they did mention that they — when we were talking about foreign policy, someone related the story of Madeleine Albright bringing the basketball to Kim Jong Il and we thought that was such a great image that we wound up building the script around it. And you see what happened.
RS: Shades of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar in Airplane, as I recall. One of my favorite scenes —
DZ: We were supposed to get a better target.
RS: So, David, then what happened next?
DZ: Well, we started — we set up a company called Crocket Productions and we shot the videos for two weeks and we handed them in. And as we hear since, they kind of gulped, I guess, when they saw the Madeleine Albright one. And they were — it was hard to discern from their replies exactly what they intended to do with it. But I think the decision was made for them when Drudge got a hold of it. And whatever plans they had to maybe release it on network TV as a paid ad or whatever they wanted to do with it later on in the campaign was upset or, as it turns out, perhaps aided by what has transpired.
RS: So Drudge is the culprit here?
DZ: Drudge is the culprit.
MS: Yes.
DZ: And well, you know, Roger, I’ve written him an angry letter already so I’ve handled it. There’s no need for you to, you know, insult him on the air.
MS: No.
RS: Okay. Because I want to get this straight. Because we read on Drudge — as you know, the whole world reads Drudge — that the Republicans National Committee apparently had already put the kibosh on your short film. But this is not true?
MS: No, they did. I’m sure they did. They just weren’t telling us, you know, what —
DZ: We weren’t in on the political and internal machinations.
MS: Right.
RS: Oh, so they told — they leaked it to Drudge before they — someone leaked it to Drudge before you guys knew?
DZ: We kept wanting to know what they indeed thought of it. And they were very polite to us.
MS: Yes, very polite but not answering our e-mails sometimes.
DZ: And never showering us with praise what a brilliant and funny ad that we did. And we were wondering what — is it — maybe it wasn’t that funny as we thought.
RS: So you read about it first on Drudge that they weren’t using it?
DZ: You know, we had — some people gave us some heads up that it was being — you know, it was going to be on Drudge.
MS: Right, but we didn’t —
DZ: We have our contacts, Roger.
MS: We had no contact with Drudge.
RS: Right. But you found out first via Drudge that it wasn’t going to be used?
DZ: Right.
MS: Right.
RS: All right. Well, that’s interesting. But to this point, who was it that you submitted it to at the — are there people at the Republican National Committee that are in charge? There must be.
MS: Sure. You know, Ken Mehlman, Adrian Gray, whoever works there. We sent it by whatever, QuickTime, however you do that over the internet, you know. And they got it and we waited for their okay.
DZ: These are just how things are done today, Roger.
MS: Yeah.
DZ: You probably didn’t know that.
MS: No. You know, they don’t even —
DZ: I’m teaching a remedial internet course on Thursday nights that you’re welcome to attend. That’s right. I know this is all new to you.
MS: You know, it’s a new world. It’s a new world.
RS: It’s a new — we’re struggling to play catch-up here at Pajamas, but —
MS: Yes.
DZ: And actually, you know, it’s had a huge response on YouTube. YouTube didn’t even exist in 2004.
RS: Right. And now they make more money than Hollywood.
DZ: Yeah, I know. Why didn’t I think of this idea?
MS: That’s right.
RS: Well, yes. Everybody is saying that themselves, why didn’t they think of YouTube.
DZ: Everybody thinks it seems like a simple idea, doesn’t it?
RS: Right.
MS: And just a few days before when Google bought it they — on every report, they said that YouTube was becoming the most important factor in political advertising.
DZ: Yes. But, Myrna, let’s focus this on us.
RS: Yeah.
MS: Oh, we don’t want this to be intelligent. Right.
RS: Yes, yes.
DZ: Are we staying on the subject? Or are we going why don’t you just start talking about the new car that you bought?
RS: Yeah. I was going to talk about PAJAMASMEDIA. But, no. Let me ask you another question. Let me ask you another question here about the video, your short, which I enjoyed. But I noticed that a talk show host — I forget whose name it was — driving into my office this morning was talking about it, and a lot of people are talking about it, and pointed out that it was one minute and thirty-two seconds long? I think that’s what it is.
DZ: Yes.
RS: Where paid political advertisements don’t tend to run that long. You guys were probably aware of that, no?
DZ: Yeah. Well, this was what we call a rough cut.
MS: Right.
DZ: And we were going to try to cut it down or convince them to buy even more time.
RS: I see.
DZ: I mean, I conceived it really — I mean, with Myrna — as a thirty second spot and then it was just — the material was just too good to censor any more of it. And what we had to say and the jokes we had really built the one and a half minutes. And I think we did have in the back of our minds that this could be released on the internet.
MS: Right. And then it didn’t matter how long it was. But this is the director’s cut, yeah.
DZ: I’ll be putting out a special DVD with the —
MS: With our comments.
DZ: Yeah, with our commentary and with a full-color brochure, you know, a tour of my house — yeah.
RS: Now, have you done the one on taxes yet?
MS: Yes.
DZ: Yes, that’s done.
RS: When can we expect to see that? It’s a very sexy subject.
DZ: Yeah. Again, they don’t let us in on any of this stuff. We’re just kind of the workers in the factory here churning out these propaganda videos for the Republicans.
RS: Well, it’s kind of interesting that, you know, most of us, I think, will acknowledge that most political advertising is pretty dreadful. And when they have a major Hollywood director stepping up to do it, you would think that they would be a little more excited and a little more forthcoming, don’t you?
DZ: You know, we don’t know. It’s a lot of this is what can be put out there. I mean, they may well be excited about it but, you know, it’s like trying to read what’s going on in China in the 1970s. No one really knew what was going on.
MS: And, you know, events — they could have a plan of what issues they want to focus on every week but you know events intercede.
DZ: This test just came out —
MS: Right.
DZ: — the North Korea nuclear test, and I think just events just took hold.
RS: Well, I mean, it may be, and I’m sure this has occurred to you guys, that this thing gets more play by being not used than it gets by being used.
MS: Right.
DZ: Right. I mean, it always happens that way. You cannot cover things up. The more you make something exclusive the more people want to see it.
RS: I mean, would anybody have heard of Henry Miller if he hadn’t been banned back in the 1930s.
MS: Right. Right. So I guess we were banned and now we’re hot.
RS: You’re hot. Now, how about — so the other one, the tax one is in the can?
DZ: Yes.
MS: Yes. They have it.
RS: Can you give us any exclusive preview of what’s in that?
DZ: Well, a hint is what if you woke up a year from today and you could see your new taxes if the Democrats got into power. Pretty much on that premise. And it’s pretty funny. It’s clever. It’s not as, you know, in such bad taste as our Madeleine Albright commercial is —
MS: Right.
DZ: — but I think it goes up to that line but not quite over.
RS: So no one gets — no zipper is open or anybody gets embarrassed —
A. DZ: No. I don’t know if anybody will be — I don’t know if it will make people —
MS: No, wait. We pull the clothes off of somebody in a dance, you know.
DZ: Yeah, but I don’t think it’s going to make anybody angry. It’ll just be —
MS: No.
DZ: I think the ad is just very in place.
RS: Oh, well that sounds boring then. You guys are not going to be — you know, this one may be ignored on the internet.
DZ: Oh, I don’t know but it’ll be helped by the notoriety of our Madeleine Albright stunt.
MS: Yes.
RS: Oh, a sequelitis here.
DZ: It’s like any sequel. It may not be quite as —
MS: May not work.
RS: Well, this is fun. You guys have anything else to add on this?
DZ: Well, I think I should add my defense of Madeleine Albright.
RS: Go ahead.
DZ: Which is, you know, her statement was during the two terms of the Clinton administration there were no nuclear weapons test by North Korea. Through our policy of effective constructive engagement, the world was safer. So, I mean, we should give her side of it but it just seems that that’s not enough since they — Jimmy Carter engineered this whole deal where we’d give them millions of dollars and they would promise not to develop nuclear weapons and the fact that now they have nuclear weapons and it happens to be under a Republican president has nothing to do with the fact that what she did was pure appeasement.
But, here. Let me give you a further defense of Madeleine Albright. She’s in really good company. You know, one of the world leaders I admire most is Winston Churchill. And Winston Churchill was quoted as saying after meeting with Stalin that Neville Chamberlain was wrong about Hitler. I’m right about Joe Stalin. And he thought that Joe Stalin could be trusted and was a friend, et cetera. And then it always happens that these guys, as it says in the ad, evil dictators will be evil dictators.
And this is true today. More than just criticizing a particular administration or a Secretary of State, we mean to criticize a policy. And that should be — the Bush administration needs to be held at that standard in addition.
So it shouldn’t — I hope that people don’t take it as a purely partisan or personal attack. But it’s an attack on a policy.
RS: Very well said. Very well said.
DZ: I meant that to get big laughs, Roger.
RS: I know. But I was just going —
DZ: — but all I can hear is silence. All over the country. What are people doing? Silent prayer now?
RS: What I was thinking while you were doing that — I was thinking to myself, isn’t that interesting how better known comedy directors in the business is able to talk in an articulate manner in a serious way. But it doesn’t really surprise me. Years ago I worked with Richard Pryor and, you know, he never told jokes.
DZ: Really? Yeah. That’s what you hear about people. Like, Steve Martin is also very serious in person. But I’m not to compare with either of those guys.
MS: David’s not serious in person.
RS: Neither am I. So that’s all right.
DZ: No, but you know what? Seriously, I am a history channel junky. I read a lot of history books and I listen to a lot of talk radio and politics is interesting to me. And not the least of which for the reason of it’s so outrageous. I mean, when you think on it, that they actually — that Madeleine Albright and Jimmy Carter did broker this deal — it made me angry. And sometimes humor is the best way to tell the truth.
RS: Indeed. Now, let me ask you since we have you on here, and this is a subject which is close to my heart and a lot of people’s who work in the business, why is it you think that only a few of us — I mean, really, not that many when you think about it — Ron Silver, you, me, a few others — made any kind of real change after 9/11? In the movie business, I’m talking about.
DZ: You know, I’ve thought about that. It’s a good question. It’s a tough question to answer. The same may be asked about people like me as Jews who, you know, think that voting for John Kerry they’re voting for Roosevelt or JFK or Truman. And it really is different. I mean, the only lesson that I’ve been able to learn from it is not to be loyal to a political party. You have to be loyal to policies, positions and have some kind of a moral compass, as they say. And sometimes the political parties change. I mean, in the 30s the isolationist bad guy party was the Republicans. And Roosevelt had to do all sorts of machinations in order to get the Congress to support giving help to the democracies who were being attacked by Fascism. And then you get used to — you just get so used to the labels on the good guys being Democrats. And for many years it was true. You just don’t notice the change.
It’s kind of like the traffic in LA. I don’t think it’s any worse than it was when I got here in 1972 but it’s horrible. And you just don’t notice the change if it’s gradual. And I think the Democratic party has really, really changed. And I just can’t support it anymore.
MS: But I hardly know anybody in my circle that’s changed. I’m the only one. I had to find other people to talk to, you know, about politics. And that’s why I joined a Republican Jewish coalition.
DZ: Also, Myrna, people didn’t talk to you because of your shoplifting conviction. I mean, let’s be truthful.
MS: He just keeps me laughing all the time. See?
RS: David Zucker and Myrna Sokoloff, thank you. This was a terrific interview. I enjoyed it.
SIMON: This is Roger Simon for PAJAMASMEDIA. Bye.
ANNOUNCER: You’ve been listening to a PAJAMASMEDIA PoliticsCentral presentation at www.politicscentral.com.
(END)