The Pied Piper of Cleveland

[HoneyTalkNelson]

There is a wealth of primary source materials to be found in the Universal Studios collection at USC, including the Daily Committee reports which cover - in great detail - everything happening on the lot or with the studio on a daily basis.

If they were producing this short, information will be found within those documents.

Has anybody done research in those files?

[poormadpeter]

There is a wealth of primary source materials to be found in the Universal Studios collection at USC, including the Daily Committee reports which cover - in great detail - everything happening on the lot or with the studio on a daily basis.

If they were producing this short, information will be found within those documents.

Has anybody done research in those files?

What's the point when we have Randle's testimony?

[Channeling Elvis]

I'm still digging around and, as usual, enjoying the chase; I'll let you know if I find anything else. I'm also going to find the tape of my own 1999 interview with Randle and see if it contains anything enlightening. He seems to have had a tendency to often place himself at the center of these events, which is how he may have remembered them or wished they had been. Peter Guralnick's book, Last Train to Mephis, has quite a bit of info on Randle's activities at the time, including his jockeying to become Elvis' manager and to get him a record contract, only to be outmaneuvered by the Colonel.

His inconsistencies and inaccuracies continue to mount. Notice that in one of these audio clips he refers to Carl Perkins' car accident in March 1956 while he and his band were on their way to New York to do the Perry Como Show. Everyone in the car was asleep except for Perkins' manager, Dick Stuart, who was driving the car and apparently fell asleep at the wheel. Randle says that Perkins was driving and crashed while overloaded with drugs. I think Randle also tended to exaggerate and invent things if he thought they sounded more interesting. Given his track record, illustrated by the several quotations on this thread alone, he makes for a most unreliable witness.

[poormadpeter]

Regarding the owership of the movie at the time it was set up to be filmed - according to James V. Roy's excellent website, it was Randle who paid ($4,000 in all, including $250 for cameraman Jack Barnett to shoot the extra footage of Presley) that price also included the "rights" to the movie. Randle says he "did" show the movie to the Students at the Euclid Shore junior High School and on WEWS-TV in '56, which isn't hard to believe considering it's his film. He also paid $20,000 for the setting up of footage in New York, which as we know didn't go through. He also paid $7,000 for the footage of Presley Shot in Las Vegas '56, so he's legally the ower of that footage too.

Everything written on the website in question is heresay and simply relies on what Randle himself has said. There is no concrete evidence for any of the information that he is quoted as giving. The idea that Randle paid the cameraman etc himself out of his own pocket for the show at the school seems ludicrous - the film was being made for Universal; they would have paid those costs. What's more, if "Bill established ownership and copyright in his name" as the website says, then there would be records to show this - none have appeared. We also know that a thorough search of the Universal vaults came up with no such film cans as those described on that website. It's nice to believe in fairy stories - but that's all this is, albeit a well-written one. Believe the comments made by the clearly unreliable Randle if you wish, but doing so is probably only getting people further away from the truth or where this material resides, if indeed it is still extant.

Sadly for you, poormadpeter, we can only go by what is already written about the movie - whether the stories are or false or not. Unless, if you, or anyone can come up with any other evidence then so be it. But coming on here and giving us your one-sided opinion with no evidence doesn't really wash.

On the contrary, there is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to believe it.

The film was never shown: if it was shown at the school it would have made the local papers. Is there a report stating that the kids of a local school were treated to a preview of a film featuring some of the country's hottest musical acts? Nope. No-one has yet been able to produce such a newspaper story in this thread or in their research on the project. Therefore the evidence points to the story about the film being shown at the school as false.

The film was never finished: if it had been it would have mentioned in trade journals, Variety, Billboard. Is it? No. The only mention is in October 1955 where it is stated that filming has begun. Therefore the evidence points to the idea that the film was finished and edited for screening as wrong - tying in with the false story about the school preview.

Others on the board have already stated that the film was not in the Universal vaults (and provided evidence to back it up), and it has been proven by ChannellingElvis by the various links on this page that Randle talks out of his backside, drumming up his own PR but giving false accounts of what has happened to the film, changing his story when it suits him. It's also been proven that the Polygram sale never happened either.

So, bearing in mind that virtually everything written about the whereabouts of this film and what happened to it and when and where it was shown has been completely and utterly blown out of the water within this thread, the only thing to do is what I stated in my previous post: start again from the beginning - trace where the film went from 1955 onwards using primary sources, not from 2014 backwards using unreliable interviewees.

Sadly, no-one here has access to the archives required, unless they fancy a couple of weeks of research in LA - but that doesn't mean that we should believe the crap that has been fed to us over the years instead. It simply means that someone, at some point, needs to do the research properly in order to find out the truth.

But you go ahead, and believe everything you read.

You have not supplied any evidence

Did you read the post of mine you quoted?

[HoneyTalkNelson]

Every short subject produced by Universal was assigned a production number, usually four digits.

If anybody has the number for this short, I can ask a studio contact to do some digging in the paper files.

[Aussie Jan]

Alas, what people say in interviews and what is reality are not always the same thing (which might be the reason for his vagueness!).

So true! Randle was one of the strangest interviews I ever did, but I did it by phone, so I was not anywhere near him and there was no chance to ask to actually see film cans, let alone the film itself. I recall Randle alluding to legalities that kept the film under lock and key. I was never sure he had the film, but Roger Hall was and he knew Randle well, worked with and for him, and had no reason to invent things.

I dug out Roger's CDROM and there's not much on it that you probably didn't already know. The gist regarding "Pied Piper of Cleveland" is in one of Hall's footnotes, which refers to Randle introducing Elvis on "Stage Show" and then summarizes what's known about the film:

"Randle’s introduction is included in the film, THIS IS ELVIS (1981), available on video and DVD, and also on the 50th anniversary 4 CD set. Randle mentioned “a movie short.” It was titled, “The Pied Piper of Cleveland: A Day in the Life of a Famous DJ,” and was filmed on October 20, 1955. The star attractions were Bill Haley & His Comets, Pat Boone, and the Four Lads. After the movie short was made for Universal, it was never released and sat in their vault for decades. According a story in People magazine in 1993, Bill Randle sold the rights to the movie short for a reported $1.9 million to a British production company. They in turn sold the film to Polygram for $2.2 million."

The following is also from the CDROM:

"The Pied Piper of Cleveland: A Day in the Life of a Famous Disc Jockey - The filming took place at Brooklyn High School in Cleveland, Ohio. The other performers included: Pat Boone ("Ain't That A Shame"), Bill Haley & His Comets ("Rock Around the Clock"), The Four Lads ("Moments to Remember") and Patricia Wright ("Man in a Rancoat").

This documentary was never finished and released. According to an article in People Magazine dated 11 January 1993, the existing footage was sold to a European company for nearly $2 million. It remains a mystery why this very rare footage has not been released.

How much of this footage still survives? It is difficult to know for sure, but the complicated copyright rights issues may be to blame for it not being released.
I was told by Bill Randle that he was asked to be Elvis' manager before Col. Tom Parker took over. He even said he had a contract ready to be signed, but I never got to see it."

Early in 2013, Roger told me that "Pied Piper of Cleveland" had been sold to Polygram for over $1 million, but had then " seemingly disappeared." He added that a friend of Randle's (who had died by then) told him that the film was likely being held up due to high costs of obtaining clearances from everyone involved in the film, but primarily from EPE. So, there is some conflicting or inconsistent information regarding where this film is and how much was paid for it. I wonder if anyone would spend millions on a film without also having the necessary clearances to actually use the film.

One of the problems with Randle's various claims is that he never produced any proof of them and remained secretive about them.

Heres another picture that was shot during the filming. I have no doubt the film was shot, but there are conflicting stories as to whether it was ever completed, edited, etc., but Dr. John is quite right in saying that Randle refers to it quite clearly on Stage Show in a way that implies it has already been shown somewhere.

Thank you!

Here's a great candid of Bill Randle backstage with Elvis towards the end of 1956:




Backstage with DJ Bill Randle, Cleveland Arena, Cleveland, OH - Friday, November 23, 1956



And here are some snaps from the year before:

551020_rehearsal w Randle_Cleveland.jpg

551020_w Randle_Edwards_Cleveland 01.jpg

551020_w Randle_Edwards_Cleveland 02.jpg

WERE radio personalities Bill Randle and Tommy Edwards, Elvis Presley and bass player Bill Black at the Brooklyn High performance

551020_w Randle_Cleveland.jpg

551020_w Moore_Cleveland.jpg

great photos and it is shame that this fotage may never be found.

[poormadpeter]

Every short subject produced by Universal was assigned a production number, usually four digits.

If anybody has the number for this short, I can ask a studio contact to do some digging in the paper files.

The second Variety snippet you include is the only reference I have found to the short in any of the trade journals.

[Channeling Elvis]

Well, I don't think there's any doubt that the event was filmed; plenty of witnesses have described it. What happened to the film is the question.

[mysterytrainrideson]

Well, I don't think there's any doubt that the event was filmed; plenty of witnesses have described it. What happened to the film is the question.

Yes, what happened to the movie is the big question. It's not so much what happened that day, who was in it or what songs were sang by who (though all that info is great to know) but: where is it? This is where Bill Randle becomes the focus of much controversy, not so much what happened that day in '55. We've had plenty of witnesses, including memories of some of the students who were in the audience, and also, the artists themselves, namely Pat Boone and Priscilla Wright. Has Bill Haley ever been ask to recall his memories about the event? I don't recall anything.

I don't believe this film as been destroyed, someone, somewhere, has it.

[GuyLambert]

There is a wealth of primary source materials to be found in the Universal Studios collection at USC, including the Daily Committee reports which cover - in great detail - everything happening on the lot or with the studio on a daily basis.

If they were producing this short, information will be found within those documents.

Has anybody done research in those files?

I went to USC and went through the reports...nothing Pied Piper related.

[HoneyTalkNelson]

Thanks, Guy.

Do you have the four digit studio production number that would have been assigned to the short? I can go to my contacts at the studio with that and dig around.

[poormadpeter]

There is a wealth of primary source materials to be found in the Universal Studios collection at USC, including the Daily Committee reports which cover - in great detail - everything happening on the lot or with the studio on a daily basis.

If they were producing this short, information will be found within those documents.

Has anybody done research in those files?

I went to USC and went through the reports...nothing Pied Piper related.

Thanks for this. Do we know when the title "Pied Piper" was attributed to the film? We know that it was referred to as "A Day in the Life of a Famous Disc Jockey" at one point - could there have been other working titles that we are not aware of?

[poormadpeter]

Regarding the "Star Parade" UK TV programme from 1961, I have now sent an email to the North East Film Archive to see if they might have a copy. It's a long shot, but you don't know till you ask. The archive has just been revamped and reopened, so one would assume that materials there are now properly catalogued etc. When I get an answer, I shall let you know.

That's great. Thank you !

I received a reply this morning regarding the Star Parade UK TV programme. Alas, they have confirmed that the only element of the whole series (over its various incarnations) that has survived is the Beatles segment which is currently available on Youtube. There is no known footage in existence from any other episode.

I will also add this to the thread about that TV programme, so that if someone finds that thread in the future they will be aware of the situation.

[Channeling Elvis]

Do we know when the title "Pied Piper" was attributed to the film? We know that it was referred to as "A Day in the Life of a Famous Disc Jockey" at one point - could there have been other working titles that we are not aware of?

Randle once referred to it as "Top Jock" (in one of his newspaper columns, I believe).

[poormadpeter]

Do we know when the title "Pied Piper" was attributed to the film? We know that it was referred to as "A Day in the Life of a Famous Disc Jockey" at one point - could there have been other working titles that we are not aware of?

Randle once referred to it as "Top Jock" (in one of his newspaper columns, I believe).

It's hardly surprising no-one can find it, is it? Randle's a compulsive liar, and the film had at least three titles!

[drjohncarpenter]

It's hardly surprising no-one can find it, is it? Randle's a compulsive liar, and the film had at least three titles!

How unusual!

[poormadpeter]

It's hardly surprising no-one can find it, is it? Randle's a compulsive liar, and the film had at least three titles!

How unusual!

It's not unusual - but it makes it more difficult to find given that the film seemingly had no "final" title due to not being released. With no final edit (or possibly ANY edit) having been completed, the raw footage could exist in film cans with any number of titles. Had their been a finished product, it would be much easier - you'd only be looking for the finished edit, which would be stored under the released title. And let's be clear - normally short films of fifteen minutes were unlikely to go through this many name changes. They would be filmed, edited and released and then junked or stored - these were factory line products, not works of art.

[HoneyTalkNelson]

Film cans at Universal are identified by production number, not title.

[Channeling Elvis]

Come to think of it, the motivation for this film remains somewhat muddled, possibly (again) by Randle himself. No one seems to have seen any official records pertaining to the film, such as contracts or studio correspondence, let alone the film itself. From what I gather, only Randle claims that he made the film and paid some, if not all, of the costs. But the film was shot by Universal and, presumably, bankrolled by them. The sketchy information we have suggests that the entire project may have been Universal's idea and was intended to profile both Randle, then a top nationally-known DJ, as well as the acts on the bill. If that's true, then Universal would have determined the fate of the film. All else that Randle told about it could have been fabricated by him.

If this is the case, then it may be that, for whatever reason, Universal scrapped the project. It is very odd that no copyright was ever filed for this film by anyone; not Universal and not Randle, especially given the big names who appear in the film. Even if the film were thought insignificant in 1955, by the next year Elvis was big news and some of the others on the bill were huge stars too. It would have made sense for the studio to resurrect the film at that point and make some money on it. It's even more odd if no paper records of any kind survive in Universal's archive.

One thing that does seem to be more clear all the time is how unreliable Randle's own stories are. He contradicted himself a number of times and never produced a shred of evidence that he owned the film or had possession of it. For years Randle also claimed to be writing a book about Elvis called "The Selling of Elvis Presley." He told me that in 1999 and mentioned it in the 1994 article I posted here yesterday.

I'm still digging around.

[poormadpeter]

Film cans at Universal are identified by production number, not title.

That, at least, helps!

[poormadpeter]

Come to think of it, the motivation for this film remains somewhat muddled, possibly (again) by Randle himself. No one seems to have seen any official records pertaining to the film, such as contracts or studio correspondence, let alone the film itself. From what I gather, only Randle claims that he made the film and paid some, if not all, of the costs. But the film was shot by Universal and, presumably, bankrolled by them. The sketchy information we have suggests that the entire project may have been Universal's idea and was intended to profile both Randle, then a top nationally-known DJ, as well as the acts on the bill. If that's true, then Universal would have determined the fate of the film. All else that Randle told about it could have been fabricated by him.

If this is the case, then it may be that, for whatever reason, Universal scrapped the project. It is very odd that no copyright was ever filed for this film by anyone; not Universal and not Randle, especially given the big names who appear in the film. Even if the film were thought insignificant in 1955, by the next year Elvis was big news and some of the others on the bill were huge stars too. It would have made sense for the studio to resurrect the film at that point and make some money on it. It's even more odd if no paper records of any kind survive in Universal's archive.

I agree on both counts. I had a look over the weekend for copyright records, and nothing seems to have been filed - although the online tools for such a search are not foolproof and some things certainly slip through the net thanks to the 28 year rule.

I don't believe that Randle paid anyone - if it was Universal's film, then they would have paid all costs. Randle's testimony about his part in/with the film seems to be an exercise in self-publicity, but in all probability his only contributions to the film was setting up the concert in the first place and appearing in it. He certainly wouldn't have edited it (he wouldn't know how anyway), and he certainly wouldn't have shown the film anywhere without it first being copyrighted.

The fate of the film isn't a mystery from 1958, but a mystery from November 1955. That's where the trail stops. It may even be one wild goose chase - there's nothing to say that the filming even produced anything worthwhile. It could have come out too dark, or there could have been sound problems etc. In other words, the materials could have been junked almost as soon as they were filmed.

[stranger]

Here the article from People Magazine 1993

[poormadpeter]

Here the article from People Magazine 1993

Thank you for this. The story can be debunked very quickly. Randle didn't establish ownership and copyright - if he did, there would be a copyright record for this and, presumably, legal records as well. What's more, Randle says there that he sold the film - and yet still claimed afterwards that he has the film cans in his possession!

[stranger]

Tommy Dorsey: Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to present one of radio's most listened-to disc jockeys, Bill Randle. William?

Bill Randle: We'd like at this time to introduce you to a young fellow who, like many performers, Johnnie Ray among them, come up out of nowhere to be overnight, very big stars. This young fellow we saw for the first time while making a movie short, we think tonight that he's going to make television history for you. We'd like you to meet him now, Elvis Presley! And here he is.

"Stage Show," CBS-TV Studio 50, New York - Saturday, January 28, 1956

Here a screenshot of Bill Randle introducing Elvis.

[Channeling Elvis]

The fate of the film isn't a mystery from 1958, but a mystery from November 1955. That's where the trail stops. It may even be one wild goose chase - there's nothing to say that the filming even produced anything worthwhile. It could have come out too dark, or there could have been sound problems etc. In other words, the materials could have been junked almost as soon as they were filmed.

I spoke to both the USC Arts Library and the Universal Archivist, Jeff Pirtle, and found that no record of the film exists anywhere at either place; neither any film footage nor any paperwork (contracts, correspondence, pay records). Universal has had numerous inquiries about this film over the years and the studio's former head-archivist, Bob O'Neill, did an exhaustive search for the film and any records pertaining to it and came up with nothing. No copyright for the film exists and none was ever filed by anyone, under any of the rumored titles - not Universal, not Randle. It's as if the film never existed.

It is possible, as you suggest, that the film was either ruined or destroyed somehow -- truly a "lost film" -- or (wait for it) perhaps Randle did own it! This is highly unlikely because the man's stories are so contradictory, sketchy, and unreliable and there are several loopholes in the theory. But let's just suppose that he came up with the money to make a film like that, contracted with Universal to shoot it (Whoops! There we are with no surviving contracts again!), and a Universal crew shot the film on that basis. Universal did weekly newsreels for theaters from the 1920s through the 1970s, so maybe it was not unusual to have crews around the country that could have shot the film. Arthur Cohen, the film's director, specialized in shorts and this may have been the sort of assignment he might have gotten. If this scenario were true, then Randle could have, indeed, owned the film. But he then would have had to hire a professional editor and, since he claimed the film would be shown in theaters, a distributor. These services are costly and normally handled by the studio, which has the infrastructure, personnel, etc. to perform them routinely. So none of that adds up.

Maybe the thing is really lost, destroyed, ruined somehow. Perhaps we ought to invoke Sherlock Holmes' rule of thumb here: "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

I still have one more highly improbable lead and will let you know what, if anything, I learn.