THE SUPERMAN WARS

Fans of Superman will know that his creators, writer Jerry Siegel and artist Joe Shuster were screwed out of reaping the financial bonanza that followed after the Man of Steel quickly became the most famous superhero on the planet. This was all due to the machinations of publisher, pornographer and gangster Harry Donenfeld and his criminal cronies, who feasted on the profits after paying Siegel and Shuster a measly $130. Admittedly, it was a fair amount of cash in the 1930s, which is equal to about three grand these days.

Ironically, Siegel and Shuster were the victims of their own kryptonite that surrounded the legal wall built by Donenfeld and Co. that prevented them from any recourse for decades. By the 1950s, Shuster was destitute and resorted to illustrating fetish magazines to get by. Siegel fared little better and struggled to make a living on and off for years.

Attorney and author William Bernhardt has just published a book that uncovers and lays bare the legal trials faced by Siegel and Shuster. He is interviewed in crimereads.com below.

William Bernhardt on Comics, Superman, and the Legal Drama Behind an Icon's Creation

The author of The Superman Wars in conversation with L. Wayne Hicks

By L. Wayne Hicks | April 27, 2026 |crimereads.com

Keen-eyed readers of William Bernhardt’s last novel, Justice For All, might have noticed the dedication: to Jerry Siegel, Joe Shuster and Bill Finger, three legendary figures in the world of comic books. Published in 2024, Justice For All dives deep into the legal machinations a comic book artist must go through to win back the rights to his characters. The initial idea, that of art vs. commerce, served as a springboard for Bernhardt to explore the tragic tale of Siegel and Shuster.

Siegel, the writer, and Shuster, the artist, created Superman. The first superhero, Superman made millions and millions of dollars for its publishers but by comparison relatively little for the two.

Siegel dreamed up the character in 1933 and tried without success for years to find a publisher. The boys finally saw the debut of Superman in 1938, but in their eagerness to make that happen signed away the rights to the character for $130. The money they made after that came from what they received per page for their stories and artwork (and, decades later, pensions from the publisher).

Bernhardt’s nonfiction tome, The Superman Wars, tells their story. An attorney as well as a writer, Bernhardt spent more than two years researching what Siegel and Shuster endured.

Their initial publisher found himself squeezed out by two men with mob connections—Harry Donenfield and Jack Liebowitz—who benefited from the Superman radio series, movie serials, television shows and merchandise sales. By the time George Reeves donned the familiar costume for the 1950s The Adventures of Superman television series, Siegel and Shuster were practically destitute—fired after having the nerve to sue the publisher in 1947.

The story of Siegel and Shuster has been told before—most notably in Brad Ricca’s 2013 book Super Boys: The Amazing Adventures of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster—the Creators of Superman. Bernhardt has updated the long-running legal battles the two men and their heirs endured over the rights to the character. The subtitle of his book is A Battle for Truth, Justice, and an American Icon.

Bernhardt is a longtime fan of comic books. A virtual interview from his home office in Oklahoma shows Bernhardt wearing both a sweatshirt and ballcap bearing the familiar Superman insignia. Behind him are shelves of his books. Superman Wars is his sixty-seventh.

*

L. Wayne Hicks: What are people going to learn from your book that wasn’t in Brad Ricca’s book?

William Bernhardt: There are several things. And don’t think I’m putting down Brad’s book, because I like his book, and I like him. I thought he was a really generous guy when I interviewed him. The first thing I said was, “Are you thinking about doing a second edition or an update or anything?” He said no. I said, “Okay, I don’t want to step on your toes.”

But for one thing, his book’s about fifteen years old now, and we’ve discovered a lot since then. I’ve discovered some things since then, and others have as well. He couldn’t tell the end of the lawsuit, because that hadn’t happened yet. That didn’t happen until 2016, that it was all over. The Siegel family did not talk to him, at least not on the record, because there was pending litigation.

I did eventually get them to talk to me, which was a real treat. I dug up the bankruptcy papers and figured out what really went down, and so I’m able to explain that, and I think the other lawsuits as well, in a way that will make it more comprehensible. And at the same time, I tried to write those things so that you don’t have to go to law school to understand it. It’s going to be understandable to anybody.

LWH: The mob ties kind of threw me. I didn’t realize the publishers were connected.

WB: Harry used to brag about it. He wasn’t embarrassed in the slightest about that. He ended up getting a house on Long Island near Frank Costello. Harry did some rum running back in the day. He was indicted twice for pornography. That was another appeal of Superman for him – doing something that was clearly for children. It was not what those guys called a “Sing Sing job,” meaning it’ll end you up in prison.

LWH: Justice For All, which you dedicated to Jerry and Joe and to Bill Finger, did that start you thinking about writing The Superman Wars?

WB: Maybe not at first. I probably wouldn’t have dedicated the book to them if I realized the next book was going to be about them. I’m probably going to get some grief from people because I focused on Jerry Siegel. I really was not trying to cast any shade on Joe Shuster at all, but it was Jerry’s idea, and Jerry’s the writer. I like writers. I can relate to writers.

The whole history of comics might have been altered if Jerry Siegel had just had an agent or a lawyer, but he didn’t. He lost his father when he was seventeen, so he really had no one to advise him. Joe’s father was an elevator operator at a local hospital. Nobody had any business or legal experience. Nobody could teach them how to invest their money. That ended up hurting them in the long run.

LWH: How long did it take you to write The Superman Wars after finishing Justice For All?

WB: Around two years. I ended up traveling to eight different states to talk to people or look at library collections. I interviewed more than fifty people. I went through…I couldn’t even tell you how many books and periodicals. There’s a lot of good material and interviews with people who have long since passed in some of those old fanzines or magazines that focused on comic book collectors, but nobody had ever brought it together in one place before. That was valuable.

I wrote it in kind of a narrative nonfiction style, because I didn’t want it to just be here are the cold facts. And I wanted it to be not just what happened, but why. And to understand that you need to understand who Jerry Siegel was, so I started there and moved forward.

LWH: You said people are going to be upset that you did not focus as much on Joe Shuster. Is that partly because Jerry left a better historical record?

WB: Yeah, in a way. That’s true. But that’s because Jerry was always, in effect, their agent. He was the hustler. Joe was, by all accounts, a very gentle, mild-mannered, relaxed guy, but he never could have gotten anything published. Jerry was the guy who relentlessly sent the material out over and over again, and as you know from the book, we’ve got ten years of correspondence between him and Jack Leibowitz, where Jack is, in my view, absolutely abusive, insulting, infantilizing, constantly threatening them with being fired, despite the fact that they’ve supposedly got this five-, then ten-year employment agreement.

What is really immoral is their name was removed from their creation. I mean, sure, legally, you could say Jerry messed up. He shouldn’t have signed that document, but taking their name off the strip, that’s wrong. That is fundamentally wrong.

LWH: Which was the bigger problem: the boys being naive, or the publishing executives being crooked?

WB: I’m going to go with the latter. Because, you know, the Major (Malcolm Wheeler-Nicholson), the guy who founded the company, was perhaps not the world’s greatest businessman, but he was a writer. He understood that creatives deserve to be paid, and sometimes he was late, he didn’t pay that much, but his idea was that someday we’re going to have a breakthrough, and then I’m going to share it with everybody.

That’s what he says at the bankruptcy courts. He says, if you let this go through, these guys aren’t going to treat the creatives the way I did. And boy, was he right about that. This was such an unexpected windfall to Harry Donenfeld and Jack Liebowitz. This is what they did. They acquired other people’s companies by basically creating debt or finding people in debt, or both, and using it to take over their companies. They had no idea that just weeks, if not days, after they fully controlled the company, Superman would come out and be an immediate sensation.

Harry Donenfeld is a millionaire less than a year later. Jack is not far behind him. And they had no intention of letting go of anything. They didn’t have to. Jack’s attitude was always, “Anybody can write this stuff. If you don’t cooperate, we’ll get somebody else to do it.” To be fair, Jerry and Joe did make some real money, especially given that the Depression was going on and a lot of people weren’t making any money. They made good money in the early days. But it doesn’t last.

LWH: It seems as though Joe might have been willing to let things go and just keep working, but Jerry was more dedicated to fighting for the money and eventually the credit.

WB: I think that he wanted to control his own character, which I totally get. Although we all like money, I don’t even think that was the main thing. He wanted his name on it, and he wanted a seat at the table. Unfortunately, he took what he knew was a big swing when he filed that lawsuit in 1947.

LWH: How soon did Jerry realize he had made a big mistake in his deal for the publication of Superman?

WB: Almost immediately. Even before Action Comics No. 1 hit the stands, the McClure syndicate requested samples for a Superman newspaper strip, which was what Jerry had wanted all along. But he couldn’t negotiate the deal because he no longer controlled the rights. He had to settle for no control and a percentage of the profits, while Harry Donenfeld pocketed a $100,000 advance.

LWH: Why did the various legal fights over the rights to Superman last into the twenty-first century?

WB: Congress changed the Copyright Act in the 1970s allowing creators to recover their copyright fifty years after assignment in some situations. Jerry didn’t want to use it for another lawsuit because he was afraid of losing his pension, but after he died, his wife Joanne and his daughter Laura brought suit. This lasted for almost twenty years until finally, in 2016, a court enforced a settlement they’d reached fifteen years before.

LWH: What does Superman mean to you?

WB: I loved Superman when I was a kid. Part of that was when I started reading comics, the Batman comics were trying to imitate the Adam West series, the comedy series, so they were trying to be funny, not really very successfully. That didn’t appeal to me very much, but Superman stories were more science fiction, and that’s what I liked.

There were two main magazines, Superman and Action Comics. Superman, in my era, usually told the slugfest super villain stories, but Action Comics usually told science fiction stories. He’d go up in space and encounter a world where something’s different and I loved that stuff. In time, I came to realize that over and over again, Superman has been a symbol of hope, which I think is why he continues to be meaningful to people.

LWH: Did you ever wear a towel around your neck to imitate Superman when you were a kid?

WB: I don’t know that I ever did that, but I liked comic books. And here’s the nice thing: I took care of them, probably just because my mom raised me to take care of my stuff.

NEW ARTICLE PUBLISHED!

During my computer fiasco, I managed to get a little good news with the publication of my 7th installment of "Fear in Four Colors: The Hideous History of American Horror Comics" in Dead Letter Press' NIGHTMARE ABBEY #10. This chapter is entitled, "Little Shoppes of Horrors (A-C)".

Here is a sample of the article:

Thus far in this series, we’ve learned about the origins of the American horror comic book and the writers and artists who worked behind the scenes creating them. We’ve also learned how they were relentlessly criticized and maligned throughout their short history by parents, teachers and religious organizations until most of them buckled and collapsed under the weight of the onerous restrictions brought about as a result of public outcry.

But, what about the people who were actually involved in printing these vile, salacious and foul things as they were often referred to by their detractors? Many of these individuals got their start publishing pulps, then superhero, Western, humor, crime and romance comics, turning to horror only when it became obvious after watching EC Comics’ now-legendary titles fly off the spinner racks that they were the new four-color cash cow. At their peak, horror comics were an exercise in which every month publishers sought to outdo each other to produce the most grisly, gory and blood-soaked books they could come up with in their unbridled imaginations. And readers loved it.

Publishers were well known to form multiple corporations and tiered companies, with any number of brands and imprints for any number of reasons, including legal protection, taxes and other fees, all with the purpose of maintaining any kind of advantage they could over their rivals.

As a consequence, comic book publishing was an intensely competitive business. For example, the pulp paper that comics were printed on was a coveted commodity and not always easy to acquire, especially during wartime when there were strict allocations. In addition, distribution could be problematic, and the lack of it could make or break a fledgling enterprise. As a result, distributors had the upper hand and often made demands that were viewed as underhanded and predatory.

While most publishers were normal, law-abiding citizens, there were a number of cunning thieves, pornographers, cutthroats and ex-cons who would extort, leverage and resort to other shady methods to get a leg up on their competitors.

Beginning with this installment of Fear in Four Colors we’ll take a closer look at the entrepreneurs who published horror comics during the pre-Code years, a handful that are still around today. Some flourished and some floundered, but at the very least, when the presses were rolling, they provided a steady paycheck to business owners, printers, writers, artists and others during a time when it wasn’t always so easy to make a buck.

From the publisher

• 10th mammoth volume of the critically-acclaimed horror magazine/book.
• Creepy GHOST STORIES & other WEIRD TALES!
• FEAR IN FOUR COLORS (History of American Horror Comics, part 7)
• 12 terrifying tales by today's top writers!
• New HORROR DELVE list: 13 Greatest pre-WWI horror tales
• Another chilling visit to Bone Street!
• Classic horror movie: Corman's THE HAUNTED PALACE
• A new Magnus Supernatural Dog Tale
• INDY (the Horror Husky) TAKES OVER!
• Art by World Fantasy Award-winner Allen Koszowski
• Heavily illustrated: movie stills, comic book covers, cool facts!
• Get it now, fellow fiends!

Order a copy at Amazon HERE.

Visit my Amazon Author Page HERE.

MONSTER MEME NO. 13

AP- Japan has joined the U.S. Navy with their mine-sweeping effort in the Strait of Hormuz this week. Enlisting the help of Godzilla is intended to facilitate the job of removing mines from the critical passage, as the legendary sea monster is impervious to explosives. In addition, the creature will be able to down swarms of drones with his incendiary breath. The Navy is expected to see shipping back to normal by the end of the week.

WORLD OF MONSTERS IS BACK ONLINE

Hi, monster fans. Well, it was a while coming, but after frying a capacitor on my motherboard, buying a replacement laptop, file recovery and assorted other tasks, I'm pretty much back up and running. I've still got a bit of organizing to do, but I'll be able to provide some entertainment in the meantime.

During my blog hiatus, I was suddenly slammed with multiple writing assignments (with deadlines). Consequently, my priority is publishing over posting, so there may be some shorter and sporadic entries here for a while.

In other news, there's just a few more days to vote in the Rondo Awards. Voting ends at the stroke of midnight, May 1, 2026 EST (that means folks on the West Coast have until 9:00 pm.). If you haven't already, I'd sure appreciate it if you would cast your vote for World of Monsters for best website and ‘The Phantom of the Opera, A Centennial Retrospective,’ by John H. (typo, should be M) Navroth, CASTLE OF FRANKENSTEIN #42 for best article.

Click HERE to see the ballot. You're not required to cast a vote in every category. You could even send a simple email to David Colton at taraco(at)aol.com and just vote for my entries if you like.

Thanks for your support and there's much more monster goodness to come!

TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AT THE MYSTERIOUS MANSION

UPDATE: I've got my recovered files on my new laptop. Need to do a little organizing and then get back to business. Should be a few more days before you see a new post.

I'm having some technical difficulties here at the Mysterious Mansion. After 12 years of faithful service my laptop gave up the ghost. I have a backup laptop to monitor the site and reply to comments, but it doesn't have my working files on it to create new posts. I'm waiting for a recovery disc from my backup provider to upload my files onto my new laptop. As a result, it will be a while until I'm back up to speed.

In the meantime, I invite you to use the search tab on the right sidebar or the label index at the bottom of the page and poke around for lots of archived material.

Thanks for your patience.

Your Sinister Scribe

POLICE INTERROGATIONS: FACT AND FICTION

We've all seen it in police shows, gangster movies and the like: the suspect is dragged into a tiny, claustrophobic room and detectives begin grilling him/her to force a confession (aka "the third degree"). As the questioning proceeds, if the suspect hasn't "cracked" by now things get a little more forceful and sometimes a "deal" is offered in exchange for the answer they're looking for, usually without a defense attorney present. Back in the 30s, detectives even used physical force (i.e. a whack on the back of the head with a phone book, a slap across the face, a rubber hose or other techniques) to coerce the subject to cave in and confess.

You might be surprised to know that Hollywood's version of this scenario is largely inaccurate (and much of it illegal in reality). Granted, some latitude is always used in lieu of the truth when it comes to movies and TV.

Retired detective and author David Swinson clears up much of the misinformation connected with police interrogations in this informative article from lithub.com.

THE ART OF INTERVIEW AND INTERROGATION

A retired police detective discusses his approach to interviews, in fiction and in life.

By David Swinson | April 2, 2026 | lithub.com

Several of my books have scenes where the investigator/detective has to interview or interrogate other characters. In my latest book, From the Dust, there are quite a few of these kinds of scenes. As a retired detective with the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, DC, a question I am often asked by readers and some writers is: Do those scenes in your books play out like they do in real life? 

I have tried to stay true to the reality of both interviewing and interrogating characters. It obviously helps that a lot of what falls onto the page is based on my experiences and the intensive training I received when I was on the job. I was sent to what were the latest classes on investigative interviewing and advanced interrogation techniques at the time. Those classes were certainly worth the time, but hypothetical scenarios are nothing compared to years spent actually interviewing victims and witnesses or being in “the box” or other debriefing settings with a suspect or defendant. It is one thing to attend classes for eight hours a day to learn about how to evaluate a subject’s verbal and non-verbal behavior (specifically suspects or defendants) and quite another to actually sit across from them in real life. The experience doesn’t always play out the way you think it will and, unlike fictional interview and interrogation scenes, it can sometimes take hours or even days. Sometimes not. There are, occasionally, those not-so-common situations where the interrogation is as quick as a subject’s bow of the head, followed by a quiet, “I did it” or some statement to that effect. One thing I have learned, though, which is something I now use in my writing, is how the little things matter- that sometimes they are not so little and can have a great impact. For instance, when interviewing a witness or a victim, but especially a victim, it is important to take copious notes. They will often, even subliminally so, feel comfortable seeing you do this and gradually open up more to you. The act of taking notes during an interview demonstrates to them that what they are saying is important enough for you to take the time to not just listen but also write it down. On the other hand, suspects and defendants become uncomfortable and may shut down when, after they say something, they see you stop to write down their response or take notes. They can start to think: What did I say? Should I have said that? Maybe I should just shut up. So, when you’re talking to a suspect whom you have reason to believe committed a terrible crime, or to a defendant who has already been arrested for committing a terrible crime, then your memory had damned well better be sharp. Fortunately, you don’t need a sharp memory to write a fictional procedural scene because you have already written about the circumstances leading up to it, so you can just look back. When I’m rereading one of my interview or interrogation scenes, I will sometimes catch a plot hole – something the subject had said earlier that the detective should have brought up again later and I can fix it. You don’t have that luxury during real life interviews and interrogations, though, the benefit of writing yourself out of a hole.   

Honestly, I never really liked the word interrogation. It’s not the meaning that bothers me because it is completely accurate. It is simply the word itself, and how it must sound to the person being interrogated, whether they are a person of interest in a crime that has been committed or they are someone who has already been charged with a crime. I have always preferred to use less negatively charged terminology like I’d like to interview you; let’s have a conversation. Those phrases are not so uncomfortable or foreboding. Although, sometimes, depending on the person, leaving them with a feeling that something bad can happen can be a good thing. Learning that, though, first comes with knowing who you are talking to. That is why framing interviews and interrogations as friendly conversation was a better approach for me. In fiction, it can work out that way too. It’s all about communication and, like I said, just plain simple conversation and trying to develop a trusting relationship. Again, this is something that worked for me as a detective and now in my writing.

Something I used to do in real life as a detective, and now something I do while writing, is to act out the conversation in my head, posing questions I want to ask and getting the response I would give based on the hundreds of hours I was involved in interrogations and interviews. This was/is something that usually took place in bed after I turned the light off. It often keeps me up very late at night, especially when writing, because then I’d usually have to stop, turn on the light, and note the answer the fictional subject would give me, or I’d forget it by morning. For some reason, this compulsive behavior has helped me in both the real life interview scenarios and when writing them.

I mentioned earlier that some of these conversations do not always pan out the way you want them to. They can take a turn. Sometimes an awful turn that leads to the subject shutting down or lawyering up. That can also happen when I’m writing, so that is something that is very similar to real life. My characters can surprise the hell out of me. Sometimes I have to find my way out of a deep hole. I try not to delete the scene because I want it to feel authentic so, unfortunately, my dear protagonist has to find a way out just like I did when I was a detective in that same situation. Regrettably, sometimes they cannot. I both hated this and at the same time loved it because that meant the story had taken on a life of its own.

One thing I want to mention here that irks me to no end is when I’m reading a book or watching a television series or a movie, and the detective(s) have a suspect or defendant in the box and, during the course of the interview, the subject shuts down and lawyers up and the detective(s) either become more persistent or make promises that should never be made, like being able to get them a deal, or even flat out lie about something. In real life, even with a half-assed defense attorney, that subject would later walk. Then there’s ‘good cop, bad cop’. Sure, that can sometimes work. It has never worked for me in reality, though it has in my writing – as long as I don’t cross the line and have my characters break police procedure.

Interview and interrogation are simply conversation, but it is also an art, and I have been fortunate to have been able to experience both firsthand and now draw on my real-life experiences and education when writing fictional scenes. So many of those faces from which I sat across from are still with me. Some of those faces I don’t want to see anymore, but they are there for me when I need to go back to the feelings they gave me to use in my writing. I have never related any actual events from cases I’ve worked in my fictional interview and interrogation scenes. The mental and psychological experiences were more than enough for my fiction and I am thankful for both the good and not-so-good memories. 

***

David Swinson is a retired police detective from the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, DC, having been assigned to Major Crimes. He is the author of the critically acclaimed Frank Marr Trilogy, including, The Second Girl, Crime Song, and Trigger, and the standalones City on the Edge and Sweet Thing. He lives in New York. His latest book is From the Dust.

SORDID DEPRAVITY OF THE LIVING DEATH!

In today's installment from the wild side of Hollywood we've got hot rods, motorcycles, bad girls (and really bad girls) and much more titillating trash from the cinematic gutters of Tinseltown. Don't miss the loony blurb for ONE MILLION YEARS AC/DC.

LUGOSI'S PRIVATE PHOTOS

Bela Lugosi saved a considerable amount of memorabilia from his career and even amassed at least three large scrapbooks which sold at auction on August 10, 2013 for $5,000.

The two photographs below were sold separately last week by Heritage Auctions headquartered in Dallas, Texas. The WHITE ZOMBIE photo sold for $275.00 and THE MYSTERIOUS MR. WONG photo sold for $154.00. Lugosi's Mr. Wong (a villain) was a different character than Karloff's Mr. Wong (a detective).

The stamp on the back indicates they were given to Lugosi by the Don Marlowe Agency. Marlowe had the reputation as an unscrupulous and downright flaky talent agent. For example, in September 1970 he placed an ad in CLASSIC FILM COLLECTOR that read:

Bela Lugosi – For Sale: Screen test Bela Lugosi made for the original Frankenstein. 35mm sound, running time 21 minutes; same scene is shown twice with change in lighting, etc. Between scenes camera was left running and Carl Laemmle Junior, James Whale, Colin Clive and Lugosi can be seen and heard discussing test and wardrobe Lugosi was wearing. Film can be examined and screened before purchase is made. Price: $4,000. Don Marlowe. Hollywood, Calif. 90028

What really makes this stand out as specious is that James Whale was out of the picture when this test shot is made under the direction of Robert Florey. One wonders if this was a flim-flam on the part of Marlowe.

Marlowe is nevertheless is credited with reviving Lugosi's career in the late 1940s. Among other jobs, in one roadshow, before a screening of DRACULA, Lugosi would perform a live reading of Poe's "The Tell-Tale Heart".

THE MANY FACES OF KARLOFF

Between THE INVISIBLE RAY and SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, Boris Karloff played a Chinese warlord in the Warner Bros. adventure film WEST OF SHANGHAI in 1937. He would also play the Chinese detective Mr. Wong in a number of films beginning in 1938. While unfavorable sentiment regarding white actors playing Asian characters from yesteryear exists today, it shows Karloff's versatility as an actor.

This issue of BOY'S CINEMA from April 2, 1938 includes the text/photo adaptation of WEST OF SHANGHAI.

Read more "The Many Faces of Boris Karloff" HERE.

Read the BOY'S CINEMA photo story of DR. X HERE.

TOP SCREEN PORTRAYALS OF SHERLOCK HOLMES

Last month marked the 124th anniversary of Arthur Conan Doyle's seminal Sherlock Holmes novelization, "The Hound of the Baskervilles", first serialized the year before in THE STRAND MAGAZINE. I was introduced to the story as a lad via the 1939 film starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. Those two actors would carry with me the imprint of Holmes and Watson for years before I saw any other actors play them (as far as I can recall). By that time I'd watched nearly all of the Rathbone/Bruce pictures and their characters were inculcated in my impressionable young mind.

Honestly, I wasn't satisfied with any other treatment of Holmes and his faithful assistant until the 1984 PBS starring Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke when I finally found a new favorite. In the late 70s, I'd seen Brett in his version of DRACULA on the stage along with the magnificent sets by Edward Gorey and he'd brought a few of his mannerisms to Holmes

Since then, I've come to appreciated other Sherlocks such as Christopher Plummer and I'm particularly fond of James Mason's Watson.

The article below from crimereads.com shows the final five from the list of a hundred different Sherlocks ranked over the years. It's way too lengthy to include here, so I've included a link to the complete article at the bottom of the post.

THE 100 BEST, WORST, AND STRANGEST SHERLOCK HOLMES PORTRAYALS OF ALL-TIME, RANKED

Once you eliminate the least compelling Sherlock Holmes performances, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the best.

By Olivia Rutigliano | April 8, 2021 |crimereads.com

5. Benedict Cumberbatch, Sherlock (2010-2017)

In this modern BBC version which adapted individual Holmes stories (until it paid too much fan service and thus went off the rails), Benedict Cumberbatch delivers a sturdy, compelling performance—abrupt, eccentric, calculating, and a tad sentimental, seemingly everyone’s favorite Sherlock in the early 2010s. Though less waggish than the literary Holmes, his buddy-buddy chemistry with Martin Freeman’s John Watson is the best and most sincere part of his magnetic presentation. Sherlock is a few steps ahead of John basically at all times, but he clearly adores him and always wants to impress him. (I think this is one of the key factors in a solid, traditional Holmes-Watson dynamic, Holmes wanting to show off specifically for Watson). Cumberbatch’s Sherlock is, though, a bit of an asshole, and although the show lifts the corners of this very frequently (most specifically and sentimentally with respect to Watson), the show drills this until it becomes a cliche, fetishishizing his hard exterior as much as his soft heart. His famous line, “I’m not a psychopath, I’m a high functioning-sociopath” is the show’s ultimately-laborious thesis statement.

4. Douglas Wilmer, Sherlock Holmes (1964-1965)

Douglas Wilmer’s Sherlock Interpretation is one of the best, helped by the fact that he looks a lot like Sherlock Holmes in Sydney Paget’s original illustrations (so, a bit, do Basil Rathbone and Arthur Wontner). Wilmer’s Holmes is the first take on the detective that actually makes him a bit arrogant; he is tough, confident, and exacting. Wilmer’s obituary in The Guardian even went so far as to call his Sherlock a “steely antihero.” But he pulls this off without seeming off-putting; there’s no vainglory or pomposity. There’s focus and drive. In 1975, Wilmer made a cameo appearance as Sherlock in Gene Wilder’s The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes’ Smarter Brother. That film isn’t really about Sherlock, as the title suggests, so it might not even be worth critiquing Wilmer’s performance as Sherlock, since the point of it is the cameo. But he’s a slightly more exaggerated version than his Sherlock from the series. Slightly.

3. Arthur Wontner, Sherlock Holmes’ Fatal Hour, (1931), etc.

In 1933, the critic Vincent Starett wrote, in his foundational collection of Sherlockian scholarship The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, that “No better ‘Sherlock Holmes’ than Arthur Wontner is likely to be seen and heard in pictures, in our time… The keen, worn, kindly face and quiet prescient smile are out of the very pages of the book.” I have to say, I quite agree. He’s a softer Holmes than those we normally see, but nonetheless shrewd. There’s a gentleness to him, even when at his most brusque, that feels very authentic. As I’ve said in my introduction, I’m not staunchly using ‘fidelity to the source material’ as a criterion to measure the quality of performance, but looking for performances acknowledging that the literary Holmes is such a comprehensive, dynamic character. Adaptations that stray from his literary identity are tasked, then, with inventing qualities that are just as compelling as the original Holmes’ qualities. Wontner’s capturing these elements of the literary persona (even despite these films’ setting in the 20s-30s!) gives his performance a kind of wholeness and realness that isn’t often seen. (Furthermore, I think he’s more of a dead ringer for the Sydney Paget illustrations than Douglas Wilmer, but that might just be me.) For his countenance, he might be my personal favorite Holmes. I’m not sure. But he might be.

2. Basil Rathbone, The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939), etc.

The consummate actor Basil Rathbone, besides having my favorite name ever, is often considered to be the gold-standard for Holmes portrayals, having played Holmes in fourteen films in the 1930s and 40s. For many out there, he is *the* Holmes, and this is more than fair. Rathbone’s Holmes is an interesting take… very logical, though not wry, but also very vigorous. While he’s certainly very affable, there is little whimsy, nothing too nonconformist about him. It’s truly marvelous to behold (though more marvelous is how he never once turns around to flick Nigel Bruce’s idiot Watson on the head).

1. Jeremy Brett, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1984-1985), etc.

It’s really, really hard to pick a #1 slot, but I think first place has to go to Jeremy Brett, whose long-running Holmes (from 1984 to 1994) is both serious and brilliantly diagnostic while also being a tiny bit absurd (Brett’s Holmes, though rather unsmiling, does lean into Holmes’s nutty penchant for disguise and performance). He might be a flash more arrogant than Doyle’s Holmes, but he’s never overweening; he’ll even occasionally burst out laughing or grin with excitement. He also says great things like: “You are the stormy petrel of crime, Watson.” A faultless performance. CASE. CLOSED.

Click HERE for the other 95 entries.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, BILLIE HOLIDAY!

Happy 111th birthday, Billie Holiday (born Eleanora Fagan; April 7, 1915 – July 17, 1959), one of the best jazz singers ever.

SVENGOOLIE'S APRIL MONSTER MOVIES

Last Saturday night, horror TV host Svengoolie treated monster fans with AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON. There's three more to go this April and I'm looking forward to HOW TO MAKE A MONSTER at the end of the month. It's one of my favorite B-movie cheapies.

Svengoolie is shown on the MeTV network. I'm not positive that it's available in all areas, but you can check out the listings HERE.

YOU'LL DIE LAUGHING

THE TROUBLED LIFE AND TRAGIC DEATH OF SUSAN CABOT (PART 2)

In preparing the following case history, I have relied predominantly on newspaper accounts, the original police incident investigation report, the coroner's report and courtroom testimony.

On the night of Wednesday, December 10, 1986 sometime after 10:00 p.m., police from the West Valley Division responded to a call to 4601 Charmion Lane, Encino, located in the San Fernando Valley in the City of Los Angeles. The call was made by Timothy Scott Roman, who said that a robber had killed his mother, according to Detective Joe Diglio. Paramedics arrived at 10:46 p.m. to assess the incident. Roman was waiting to let them in through a security gate in front of the house. He had also secured four large Akita dogs in his room so that they were out of the way and would not interfere with the investigation. Animal control personnel would later remove the animals from the premises.

4601 Charmion Lane, now demolished and a new home built.

When police arrived shortly thereafter, they observed "signs of a struggle", but no property had apparently been taken. The condition of the household was in a considerable state of disarray, with newspapers and magazines either stacked or strewn around, and spoiled food present. In short, the interior of the home appeared to have been ransacked. It is interesting to note that in the postscript of Tom Weaver's interview as referenced in yesterday's post, he states: "None of the above [the unkempt state of the house] was even faintly evident to this frequent visitor to the Cabot home".

The murder scene.

Roman, a 22-year-old art student at Pierce College in Woodland Hills, claimed the robber was dressed in a Japanese Ninja's costume and stole $70,000 in cash during the attack. Roman also claimed he was injured while trying to fight the man off.

The victim, a female believed to be Timothy Roman's mother, Susan Roman, , was found in the master bedroom lying prone on the bed wearing a purple nightgown. Extensive injuries to her head indicated she was bludgeoned to death. There was considerable blood spatter on the bedroom mirror, wall and floor with instances of hair and brain matter exposed on and around the body. Cranial bone fragments were also visible. Her face had been covered with a piece of the bed linen and presumed placed there premortem. Ten Polaroid camera shots were taken at the scene by a police photographer. The victim was pronounced dead at 10:46 p.m. before she was removed from her home and transported to the county morgue.

During questioning, Timothy Roman revealed that he and his mother argued frequently and at the time of the murder they had had "a long-running feud between mother and son", although he [Detective Diglio] didn't know what exactly what the argument was about. "Basically, he said a burglar did it," Detective Diglio recounted in a statement. "He gave a complete description of the burglar, who looked like a Ninja warrior. I guess he's into that kind of stuff."After further questioning, police concluded that his answers were becoming less and less credible. As a result, on the morning of December 11th, he was transported to the West Valley Station where he was interrogated for approximately three hours. 

Susan Cabot-Roman and son, Timothy.

Excerpt from the police investigation report:

According to Det. Diglio, when Timothy Roman was questioned about the incident, his statements became increasingly inconsistent. Mr. Roman reportedly told police that he heard his mother being being 'hit with a hammer', which awoke him at approximately 2130 hours on the evening of the incident. Mr. Roman told police, that after awaking, he went into the kitchen. In the kitchen, Mr. Roman reported confronting the 'burglar', and was cut with an unknown object and hit on the head. After his confrontation with the 'burglar' Mr. Roman stated that he went to his mother's room, did not enter, but knew something had happened to her and called paramedics.

The decedent [sic] was taken to LAPD, West Valley Station where he was interviewed by Det. Conmay. Reportedly, the son, Timothy Roman, told police he and his mother were very close, and that they would talk about anything, including intimate sexual matters.

Due to the inconsistent statements, and the observations made at the crime scene, Timothy Roman, was placed under arrest for investigation in this incident.

Roman requested that he return home and retrieve his medication. The police obliged and when they arrived, Roman broke down and confessed to the crime. He led the officers to his room where a box of laundry detergent was recovered from his clothes hamper. The box was found to contain the bar from a weight-lifting dumbbell and a scalpel (which he claimed later his mother had attacked him with). The bar was recovered into evidence as being the murder weapon.

An autopsy on Susan Roman was conducted by Los Angeles County Deputy Medical Examiner James V. Wegner, M.D., Pathologist at 11:30 a.m. on December 12, 1986, during which time she was officially identified as 59-year-old Susan Cabot-Roman (aka actress Susan Cabot). The cause of death was ruled a homicide as the result of "bludgeoning head injuries". One a side note, Dr. Wegner was working under the often controversial Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner Dr. Thomas T. Noguchi, M.D.

A funeral service was conducted for Susan Cabot-Roman at the Malinow Silverman Mortuary in Westwood, California. Approximately 40 mourners were present, comprised of friends and family members, including her mother, Mildred Shapiro. Miss Cabot-Roman (as she was referred to in newspaper accounts) was interred at Hillside Memorial Park in Culver City, California, in the Sunland Gardens, Wall Crypt C, Space #242.

Timothy Scott Roman at his trial.

Timothy Roman was incarcerated for about two-and-a-half years before his trial, the first of which was declared a mistrial by the judge when Timothy's defense attorney was hospitalized for a "stress-related" heart condition.

On October 6, 1989 Timothy Roman took the stand at the no-jury trial and reversed his previous plea from not guilty for reasons of insanity to not guilty. Thus, the trial continued with accusations of Timothy becoming deranged because of his pituitary gland treatments on one side and his mother descending into the pits of violent madness on the other.

Indeed, while the proceedings were largely focused on Timothy Roman, testimony made it increasingly clear that Susan Cabot-Roman had been displaying a pattern of increasingly disturbing behavior which manifested itself in emotional outbursts and abusive language aimed at her son (no sexual abuse allegations were ever claimed). In addition, there was no outward appearance of malicious behavior or foul play in their home to those who lived nearby.

One of the individuals who was a frequent visitor to the home was Timothy's tutor and testified that Susan was frequently verbally abusive to her son in his presence. A film taken inside the residence was shown at the trial which verified the interior's deplorable state.

Four days later, on October 10, Van Nuys Superior Court Judge Darlene E. Schempp ruled the case involuntary manslaughter. After considering time served, Timothy Roman was released to his grandmother whom he lived with until it was necessary for him to live in a rest home when his health began to decline. He died in Los Angeles on January 22, 2003 at the age of 38 from complications of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. He was cremated and his ashes scattered at sea.

On a final note, Susan Cabot's crypt remained improperly marked for many years with only a small, faded tag from a label maker to identify her. In 2012, Scott Michaels of the now-defunct Hollywood's Dearly Departed Tours and FindaGrave.com petitioned Hillside Memorial Park to have a bronze plaque installed. His request was granted as there were no other living relatives to consult. He subsequently raised the money for its completion. Since then, Mr. Michaels has graciously funded a number of other placards for the unmarked graves of celebrities such as Elsa Lanchester, "Schlitze the Pinhead" from Tod Browning's FREAKS, and Donald Jerome "Shorty" Shea, a murder victim of the Manson Family.

Son Convicted of Killing Actress Mother : Justice: Because there was no evidence of premeditation, Timothy Scott Roman was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, not murder.

By Patricia Klein Lerner, Times Staff Writer | Oct. 11, 1989 | latimes.com

A judge on Tuesday convicted Timothy Scott Roman of involuntary manslaughter in the 1986 bludgeoning death of his mother, actress Susan Cabot, famed for her roles in B-movies and her romance with Jordan’s King Hussein.

However, Van Nuys Superior Court Judge Darlene E. Schempp declined to find Roman guilty of murder. She said there is no evidence that Roman premeditated bludgeoning Cabot to death with a barbell in the Encino home they shared. Premeditation would have been required to prove murder.

“There is no question that the defendant loved his mother very much,” said Schempp, who presided over Roman’s six-day, non-jury trial. Cabot, 59, was found dead across her bed in a blood-soaked nightgown on the night of Dec. 10, 1986. She had been clubbed repeatedly on the head.

The verdict was delivered just 10 minutes after closing arguments, which lasted less than an hour. One of Roman’s two attorneys ushered him out of the courtroom through a rear exit immediately afterward. His grandmother said she and Roman are “just overjoyed at the verdict.”

“Oh, what we have gone through. Timothy and I are just drained,” said Elizabeth Roman, who sat through her grandson’s trial. “It’s time to start a whole new life. We are taking him away from this area, this town.”

Roman, a 25-year-old former art student, could receive a maximum sentence of four years and a minimum sentence of probation. Since he has already spent about 2 1/2 years in jail, he could conceivably have enough credits for good behavior and jail work to have fulfilled his sentence, officials said. Schempp scheduled sentencing for Nov. 29.

“It was an extremely tough call for the judge to have to make,” said the prosecutor, Deputy Dist. Atty. Bradford E. Stone.

Stone originally was seeking a murder conviction but asked Schempp in closing arguments to convict Cabot of voluntary manslaughter, an unlawful killing without malice but with intent to kill. Stone said he decided to seek conviction on the lesser offense late last week after hearing the defense case and deciding Roman did not act with premeditation.

Richard P. Lasting and Michael V. White, Roman’s attorneys, did not dispute that Roman killed his mother. However, they asked Schempp to acquit Roman or find him guilty only of involuntary manslaughter, which is unlawful killing without malice or intent. They contended that Cabot provoked the killing with aggressive, irrational behavior and that Roman’s actions were caused by hormones and drugs he took because he did not have a pituitary gland.

Born a dwarf, Roman’s growth to his present height of 5 feet, 4 inches was induced with thrice-weekly injections of a hormone derived from the pituitary glands of cadavers. A former attorney once called him “a failed human experiment.” The attorney claimed the experimental treatments caused aberrant behavior.

Schempp said she was swayed by testimony that Cabot was deeply depressed, suicidal and suffering from increasing mental deterioration in the days before her death.

Schempp particularly cited the testimony of Cabot’s longtime psychologist that his 50-minute sessions with the actress were so emotionally draining that he felt sorry for Roman, whom he surmised constantly lived with Cabot’s fears.

Schempp also noted her shock at a videotape showing the slovenly, unkempt condition of Cabot’s Encino house. The tape and testimony showed the house to be littered with newspapers that were three to four years old and spoiled food.

“It was beyond my imagination that a person of such success and notoriety at one time could live in such indescribable conditions,” Schempp said.

During the trial, Roman testified that his mother seemed not to recognize him and was screaming, talking to herself and calling for her mother on the night of the killing. When Roman tried to call paramedics, he testified, his mother attacked him with a weight bar and scalpel.

Roman said he later found Cabot dead but does not remember killing her. He admitted lying to police, telling them a burglar in a Ninja mask had killed his mother, and said he hid the barbell and scalpel because he didn’t think anyone would believe his story.

Roman, who has been free since June on $25,000 bail and living with his grandmother in Los Angeles, had faced a maximum sentence of life in prison.

In May, Schempp granted Roman a mistrial about a month into the proceedings after his attorney, Chester Leo Smith, was admitted to a hospital with what were said to be stress-related heart problems.

Had he not bowed out, Roman’s family had vowed to fire the attorney for, among other things, revealing to jurors that Roman had confessed to police that he killed his mother. The information otherwise would have been excluded from the jury since Roman had asked to have a lawyer present before confessing.

The CIA memo, now highly-redacted.

CIA files reveal Jordan's King Hussein fathered a child with Jewish Hollywood actress

Their child would grow up to kill Susan Cabot in a violent argument

By Rosa Doherty | January 12, 2018 | TheJC.com

CIA files have revealed that Jordan’s King Hussein fathered a child with the Jewish Hollywood actress Susan Cabot. According to USA Today, which cited newly declassified CIA files, King Hussein was set up with the actress by the American intelligence agency. The CIA memo from 1959 revealed that the 24-year-old king “was especially desirous of female companionship during his Los Angeles visit and it was requested that appropriate arrangements be made through a controlled source of the Office in order to assure a satisfied visit.” The King went on to meet the divorced 32-year-old actress who stared in movies like “Sorority Girl” and “The Wasp Woman.”

Ms Cabot, who was born Harriet Shapiro, spent a lot of time with the King, who was also divorced. According to the memo the CIA arranged for her to meet him in New York later that month. It is believed that Ms Cabot was told by her handler: “We want you to go to bed with him.” “The actress said that she rejected the proposal but finally went to [Hussein’s] party,” the memo stated.

“She became quite taken with the foreign official and found him to be most charming.” The actress dated the King for seven years and gave birth to their son Timothy in 1961. He was adopted by her second husband Michael Roman after they married in 1968 and took his surname.

Timothy Roman, who was born a dwarf, eventually grew to 5’4” due to weekly injections of a hormone derived from the pituitary glands of cadavers.He killed his mother in 1986. She was beaten to death with a weightlifting bar. Her son was charged with involuntary manslaughter and convicted in 1989. During the trial he said that she had attacked him and his reaction was due to the drugs he was forced to take.

Chester Leo Smith, a lawyer in the case wrote in court filings that Ms Cabot was found to have received $1,500 a month from the King. “For better or worse, it looks like child support,” he said. King Hussein married three more times after his relationship with the actress.

“Very special. I loved her very much.”

- Timothy Scott Roman

on the night of his mother's murder.