Andy Kaufman probably would have had an amazing memoir in him. Heaven knows how factual it would have been, this being Andy Kaufman — but he did actually have some talent as a writer. At the turn of the millennium some of his writings were independently published, including the infamous, unfinished would-be epic…

"Worst Episode Ever" was one of the last episodes I really, really liked. (I was with the show from the 1989 Christmas show onward, so I experienced the "golden age" firsthand.) I agree that it's a great Milhouse episode. Plus, drunk Mister Rogers outtakes!

I've long wanted to see that kind of a screening, but they never come around to my neck of the woods. Here's your virtual blue ribbon…

Also, it's Super Bowl weekend and studios assume most people are focusing on parties, etc. so at most they will try counter programming with "chick flicks".

"The Producers" is a good musical. It rings up quite a few changes on the film's plot, so it's not just one of those adaptations that adds superfluous songs to a work that was perfectly fine without them. That said, if the actors aren't absolutely top-tier, the work suffers for it.

Ah, I liked SCTV. They wound up spoofing a lot of early '80s movies, didn't they? Including the one you're doing next week!

Yeah, "Nashville" is interesting but not great. I'd read an assessment by one critic who felt much as I ultimately did and I agree with him that the subplot involving Keenan Wynn is one of the high points of the film. And as on-the-nose as the finale is, it is effective.

Cool, Turner Classic Movies did that one year to organize their "31 Days of Oscar" marathon.

Busy weekend for both relatively new comics and old movies that are getting talked up again:

I literally just learned about this one two days ago, tops.

And if the studio was confident, why release it the week after another 1990s kid-friendly remake? "Beauty and the Beast" is exciting a lot of people for not changing all that much from the original…

Yeah — I think if WB were more confident about the Kong movie, they wouldn't have sandwiched it in between "Logan" and "Beauty and the Beast" (especially given the deluge of hype the latter is getting — the tie-in books hit stores this week).

Many pro critics will agree with you about Cocteau's version being definitive. Even Disney hype will occasionally cop to it being an inspiration for their take.

Actually it was released in France in 2014, and only just got to this country…possibly to cash in on the Disney remake! Sheesh!

With an extra credit course from the Joel Schumacher "Phantom of the Opera" correspondence course in Lush Fantastical Romance = Gobs of gilt and roses, wigged-out wigs, impossibly lavish costumes for everyone, and "hideously ugly" leading men who just need a skin graft/a shave!

Yeah, and CGI at this point can be as expressive as hand-drawn — look at any fully-animated feature Pixar and Disney themselves are bringing out now — but for some reason, some of these Objects are so much more lifeless-looking than their 1991 counterparts, and it seems to be by design. It's most obvious with Mrs.…

I know, just making a joke about how this movie is mainly exciting people because it looks pretty and is a remake of something they already love.

I think so. If they had to do this in live-action, why not try some animatronic puppets? "Labyrinth" has stuff like the two door knockers that still look good 30 years on. I think part of it is that the live actors can much more easily interact with solid effects than CGI.

At the same time, they left that to the end credits.

Guess it's just a matter of judging by appearances! Ironic, really…