Uncategorized
In Max and Richard Fleischer, was father like son?
Spare a thought for Mr. Boop’s bald spot — or is it a yarmulke?
In Max Fleischer’s 1932 cartoon “Minnie the Moocher,” Betty Boop is shown at home, harangued by her heavily-accented immigrant parents. They want her to eat her hasenpfeffer. For a particular subset of cartoon neurotics, what exactly is going on with Betty’s dad’s pate is a point of obsession.
It’s not a kippah. A wisp of hair tells us it’s male pattern baldness, and, anyway, hasenpfeffer has rabbit, which is treyf. But if you watch enough Fleischer cartoons, you can be confident that the man’s lone follicle was meant to be challenged by landsmen.
The first cartoon the Betty Boop appears in — more properly a Boop prototype, a lounge-singing anthropomorphic dog — has similarly scrambled Yiddishkeit. And 1930’s “Dizzy Dishes” captures the shift of a psychopathic canine short order cook.
At one point, an animal with a hat and beard, and a distinctly Eastern European accent, pokes his head through the window. “I want ham,” he says, and his face is immediately smacked by a loin printed with the letters כּשר, or kosher. It makes no sense.
There’s no more logic when, in 1932’s “I’ll Be Glad When You’re Dead You Rascal You,” Koko the Clown, fleeing from the disembodied head of Louis Armstrong, sprouts a speedometer from his rear, first reading 70, then 90, 100, a question mark, an exclamation point and, finally, כּשר.
It’s an inside joke from one Majer (later Max) Fleischer, who was born to a tailor in Krakow, and came of age in Brownsville, Brooklyn, when it was the domain of poor Jewish factory workers. The question of Boop’s paternity — and whether it is any strict sense Jewish — may come to mind at Film Forum, where Fleischer père et fils, a retrospective of Max Fleischer’s cartoons and his son Richard’s live action work, is playing from May 8 to 28.
The elder Fleischer was a pioneer in animation. He patented the rotoscope, allowing artists to draw over filmed live action and create more realistic movement. He invented the bouncing ball used in sing-a-longs to indicate words. He pushed the boundaries of cartoons, bringing a manic, New York sensibility to the medium: Mickey Mouse drove a steamboat; Betty Boop went to hell.
It’s hard to explain the work of Fleischer and its sheer lunacy, but Jewish examples may suffice. Like a jumpscare, Semitic caricatures spring up from graveyards or along waterfalls with interjections like “ya needed ih” and “vat can we do?” Why? Why not?
At the same time Fleischer was capable of incredible, painterly refinement, as in his Superman cartoons. The curators at Film Forum have devoted programing to the Man of Steel, Betty Boop, Fleischer’s Popeye shorts, musical novelties and “head” cartoons, the kind favored by stoners in the 1960s and ‘70s.
They are all remarkably weird, but perhaps no less strange than the filmography of Max’s son Richard, who helmed the original Doctor Dolittle, Soylent Green and the 1959 adaptation of Meyer Levin’s novel Compulsion, a fictive account of the Leopold and Loeb case.
It’s difficult to say what Richard’s work has in common with his father’s, as so many of Richard’s projects have nothing in common with each other save his name in the credits.
What there is, from contained noirs like 1952’s The Narrow Margin to the spaghetti biblical epic Barabbas, is a brilliance for visuals and staging. (And a seeming affinity for lady pinnipeds.)
In the widescreen formats of VistaVision and CinemaScope, the younger Fleischer worked depth of field in ways that rivalled Orson Welles. (There may be no greater testament to Fleischer’s talent for wrangling tall personalities than Welles’ appearance in both Compulsion and 1960’s Crack in the Mirror.) He relished the chance to experiment with underwater cinematography in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. He once insisted on delaying production to film during a solar eclipse.
On the rare occasion that he tried comedy — 1948’s So This is New York — Fleischer made early use of freeze frames and, in a sequence that prefigures Airplane!, provided genteel subtitles to rough-spoken New York cabbie.
Notable in Fleischer the younger’s oeuvre is its detached engagement with Jewish themes. In the novel of Compulsion, Levin pays lip service to Jewish self-hatred motivating the murder at the center of the story. But Fleischer never makes much of his killers’ or their victim’s Jewishness, caring more for their nihilistic thoughts on Nietzsche and the Welles character’s atheism. (The character was based on Leopold and Loeb’s real attorney, Clarence Darrow, and often gives voice to his verbatim quotes.)
Barrabas, a film in the mold of Ben-Hur, follows Anthony Quinn as the titular reprieved bandit, the one Jesus replaced on the cross. The contours of his story resemble the Talmudic account of Reish Lakeish, a brigand turned gladiator turned believer, but it is a remarkably goyische production that doesn’t even bother to have matzo for the Passover week of the Passion.
Fleischer’s Jewishness perhaps feels akin to that of one of his collaborators, Kirk Douglas. It was never denied, but seldom a feature. But just as Douglas had The Juggler, where he went from Holocaust survivor to halutz, Fleischer had The Jazz Singer.
That remake, from 1980 and starring Neil Diamond, is wisely excluded from the Film Forum’s particular lineup, sparing filmgoers the Jewish Elvis’ blackface, and perhaps affording Fleischer the grace owed him as a replacement director who stepped in mid-production and couldn’t save the picture.
Per Jason A. Ney’s biography Richard Fleischer: Journeyman, Fleischer described the performance of Laurence Olivier in that movie thusly: “This very gentile gentleman had done his damnedest to portray a very Jewish cantor by using every broad cliche in the book. Rolling eyes, grimacing, gesturing, it was a performance worthy of the Yiddish Art Theater at its worst.”
Fleischer, it must be concluded, knew from Jews, and so surmised Sir Laurence wasn’t up to leading Kol Nidrei — not that Diamond did much better.
The yikhes in the Fleischer family is strong, with father and son producing countless hours of too often undersung entertainment. Perhaps the greatest tribute to their overlap and influence will not be screening at Film Forum, but it’s worth recalling.
In a season two episode of the Rugrats, Chuckie swallows a watermelon seed. Through the magic of animation, the babies, drawing inspiration from a sci-fi film, imagine themselves shrunken down and entering his body to retrieve it before it grows.
It’s a parody of 1966’s Fantastic Voyage, directed by Richard Fleischer. It’s safe to say, without the contributions of both father and son, the episode couldn’t exist.
Film Forum’s series Fleischer père et fils begins May 8.
The post In Max and Richard Fleischer, was father like son? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Palestinian-American to challenge John Fetterman for Senate seat in 2028
(JTA) — Ahmed Moor, a Palestinian-American writer who has worked with anti-Zionists, is the first Democrat to challenge Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman in the 2028 primary.
Fetterman, who has faced sharp criticism from within the Democratic Party for his staunch support for Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, has yet to announce whether he plans to run in 2028. A defeat or retirement would remove one of the Democratic caucus’s most pro-Israel voices.
Moor, 42, enters the playing field with radically different positions on Israel, and on foreign policy in general, from those Fetterman has promoted. Claiming that the United States “funds wars based on corruption and lies and has turned its back on its own people,” Moor pledged on his campaign website to ensure “this never happens again.”
Moor, born in Gaza, moved as a child to Philadelphia, where he earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Pennsylvania. He completed a master’s degree in public policy from Harvard. He switched from finance to journalism, reporting in Beirut and Egypt for The Guardian and other outlets, and co-editing the book “After Zionism: One State for Israel and Palestine.” He also spent many years in Jordan, where he launched a peer-to-peer lending organization, before moving back to Philadelphia in 2021.
“A few years ago my birthplace was turned to rubble in a genocide funded by our tax dollars,” Moor stated, saying that this has occurred “with the support of politicians on both sides of the aisle who can’t find money for transit or removing asbestos from our schools.”
Moor, who has served on the Philadelphia Democratic City Committee, has never held public office. He says he is determined to address corruption, affordability, foreign policy and constitutional authority, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer, which first reported his candidacy.
Moor told the Inquirer that he was “not really running against Fetterman” but instead “running for the rule of law.” He acknowledged that he would face an “uphill battle” against Fetterman, who took office in January 2023.
Fetterman has irked some fellow Democrats by siding with Republicans on numerous issues, especially on Israel. He has also drawn praise from the pro-Israel community and Israel’s leadership. With Democrats securing a Senate majority of at least 54 seats, including two independents who caucus with the party, Democratic leadership will be less dependent on Fetterman’s vote when the new Congress convenes in January.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Palestinian-American to challenge John Fetterman for Senate seat in 2028 appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Northwestern launches civil rights investigation into club that banned pro-Israel group from its food festival
Northwestern University’s Office of Civil Rights is investigating a club that said it canceled its annual “Cultural Food Fest” after students objected to its initial inclusion of a pro-Israel student group.
Spoon University Northwestern, a student-run food magazine, wrote in an email to students that it was calling off its Nov. 6 food festival because of concerns about the participation of Wildcats for Israel, a club housed within Hillel that describes itself as focused on Israeli culture and society.
“There’s been a lot of disappointment expressed in and around Hillel today,” Michael Simon, executive director of Northwestern Hillel, told the Forward on Friday. “What should be an opportunity for connecting across differences and having really positive engagement got turned into a sort of political catfight.”
Students involved with Wildcats for Israel were initially “really excited” to participate in the fest, Simon said.
But amid student backlash, Spoon reversed course and disinvited Wildcats for Israel, Simon said. In a statement posted to Instagram, Spoon cited “the ongoing genocide in Gaza” to explain the group’s removal.
Yet even that exclusion was not enough for some student organizations. Northwestern’s Asian Pacific American Coalition; Alianza, the Latinx student alliance; and the Middle Eastern North African Student Association, issued a joint statement saying that they were withdrawing from the fest because of the original inclusion of Wildcats for Israel.
“A ‘culture’ born from the active land theft and genocide of Palestinians should not be recognized,” the student groups wrote on Instagram.
Spoon then cancelled the event altogether.
Now, Spoon’s status as an officially registered student organization has been frozen while the investigation into allegations of discrimination is being conducted, a Northwestern spokesperson wrote in an email to the Forward.
The investigation comes as Northwestern faces additional obligations to address and report allegations of antisemitism as part of its $75 million settlement with the Trump administration in November 2025. As part of the agreement, the university pledged that its Office of Civil Rights would publish annual reports with data about complaints of antisemitism, including investigative and disciplinary actions taken.
Spoon did not respond to the Forward’s request for comment.
In its email to students, Spoon said Wildcats for Israel was removed because of its status as “a political action group, not a cultural organization.”
Simon pushed back on that characterization of the club. “They’re not engaged in political advocacy or political work, certainly not in their current iteration,” Simon said. “They’re really focused on doing cultural and educational programming, connecting with Israel and with the Israeli people.”
The idea that Wildcats for Israel is considered political, while other student organizations opposing Israel are not, “appears to be a real double standard,” Simon said.
Still, Simon said the cancellation did not prevent Wildcats for Israel from having its own cultural food event — inviting students to the Hillel building on Friday to talk about what had happened over slushies in two flavors popular in Israel, limonana and iced cafe.
“They’re really turning to a place of being in community and supporting one another,” Simon said.
The post Northwestern launches civil rights investigation into club that banned pro-Israel group from its food festival appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Israel’s love affair with Trump may be over – with no other suitor in sight
Israelis were among the few groups outside America who genuinely liked Donald Trump, and they had persuaded themselves that the feeling was mutual. Now, as the American president pledges to terminate military assistance and blames Israel’s unpopularity for the Republicans’ electoral humiliation, they are confronting the possibility that their greatest supposed friend may become one of their gravest strategic liabilities.
In a 2025 Pew Research Center survey of 24 countries, 69% of Israelis expressed confidence in Trump to do the right thing in world affairs. Israelis saw a champion where much of the democratic world saw a menace.
Israelis, who tend to be more direct and plainspoken than other Western societies, were less inclined to be scandalized by Trump’s personal shortcomings. But mainly it was policy that made him so popular: Trump moved the American embassy to Jerusalem, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and cultivated a conspicuously warm relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite his increasing toxicity around the world. Trump opposed Hamas and ultimately joined Israel in attacking the Iranian regime.
Still, warning signs were there – in the displays of U.S. dominance over decisions in the 2025 and 2026 Iran confrontations and in the Election Day announcement last week that Trump plans to terminate roughly $4 billion in annual military assistance to Israel this year.
The announcement threatened a cornerstone of Israeli security planning established under Barack Obama, whose administration negotiated a 10-year, $38 billion assistance agreement extending through 2028.
The precise legal and financial consequences remain uncertain, not least because Congress controls appropriations. But the political significance is unmistakable: The president whom Israelis regarded as their most dependable protector was proposing to dismantle an arrangement that even administrations regarded as unfriendly to Netanyahu had sustained.
Moreover, the aid is far more than a gift. Its greatest value is not financial but geopolitical: the unmistakable message to Israel’s enemies that Washington stands behind it.
As the dismal election results became clear, Vice President JD Vance highlighted a supposed demand among disaffected Republican voters to “change our relationship to Israel,” placing the alliance itself among the issues requiring political reassessment.
In Sunday’s 60 Minutes interview, Trump went further, identifying what he called a “great dislike” for Israel as one factor in the Republican electoral defeat.
Trump certainly has a point. A 2026 Pew survey found that 60% of Americans viewed Israel unfavorably, up from 42% in 2022, including 57% of Republicans under 50. Gallup found that, for the first time in its 25-year tracking, Americans were no longer more sympathetic to Israelis than Palestinians: 36% favored Israelis, compared with 41% for Palestinians. The longstanding bipartisan consensus is unraveling. Among younger Americans, the situation is even worse.
Whether the reason is a global propaganda campaign against Zionism, social media manipulation, Netanyahu and his noxious far-right allies, or Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank are almost beside the point – the collapse in Western and U.S. opinion is undeniable.
Trump also asserted that “those countries that we’ve protected” from Iran – meaning Israel – “wouldn’t exist” without the U.S. and “are going to pay us back any and all costs that we’ve had for the war,” which was another major surprise and mystery that caught Israelis off-guard.
Whether this implies a demand that Israel reimburse the United States, and for precisely what, remains unclear. What is clear is that Trump has begun discussing a relationship Israelis considered existential in the language of electoral liabilities and financial transactions.
Writing in Maariv on Monday, veteran Washington correspondent Shlomo Shamir reported that senior Washington commentators described Netanyahu as having become effectively persona non grata in Trump’s inner circle – and that Trump’s seeming affinity for Netanyahu was “more a media relationship than a genuine friendship.”
The change in atmosphere in Israel has been extraordinary.
On Monday, Israeli television seemed preoccupied with little beyond the coalition negotiations following Israel’s election and the growing fear that the country might lose its most important international relationship.
Appearing on Channel 13, I argued that another Netanyahu government would have faced economic sanctions from Europe and even serious discussion of an American weapons embargo. This provoked very little disagreement.
“Netanyahu put all his chips on Trump, and it’s falling apart,” observed anchor Daniel Zilberstein. “It wasn’t only him, but the entire system,” replied Omri Rolls, an expert in monitoring and countering anti-Israel propaganda. “We put all our attention on the United States. Europe, we’ve completely given up on. All over the world, important elements are simply not on Israel’s agenda.”
The alarm was loud and clear this week across the Israeli political and diplomatic establishment.
Tovah Herzl, a former Israeli diplomat who served in Washington as liaison to Congress, captured the predicament in the title of her article in Maariv: “Netanyahu Bet on Trump — and Israel Could Lose Far More Than Money.”
“Israelis are unaware of the depth of the hole into which the country has fallen,” wrote Yedidia Stern, a leading expert on Israel-U.S. relations, in Ynet. “The hourglass has been turned over: we have two years to regain the legitimacy that has been lost” before a Democrat potentially wins the White House.
Ashley Perry, a former senior Israeli government adviser, wrote in The Jerusalem Post that Israel must urgently start arguing its case – “consistently demonstrating what Americans gain” in intelligence cooperation, joint defense development, investment, trade and Israeli contributions to scientific and technological progress.
Beyond all that, there is a general understanding that Israel will need some real policy changes – for example, cracking down on Jewish extremists in the West Bank. And it will need to court the U.S. Democrats and the Europeans once more – as it did decades ago.
There is a grim lesson at play, and it has more to do with morality than ethics.
Israelis are people badly traumatized by the conflicts that implacable enemies have forced on them. Over the decades, however, they took some pride nonetheless in what they believed was a moral high ground. It’s safe to say this has eroded, at least somewhat.
In a reflection of that erosion, one of Trump’s greatest attractions to Israelis – sadly enough – was his indifference to Palestinian human rights, an issue that had long complicated Israel’s relations with more conventional Western leaders. Trump was clearly untroubled by the West Bank occupation, the expansion of settlements or the absence of a credible political horizon for millions of Palestinians. In February 2025, he even proposed removing Gaza’s Palestinian population in its entirety and placing the territory under American control, a scheme whose breathtaking implications seemed scarcely to concern him.
Many Israelis overlooked the dark aspects of such absurdities, seeing only evidence of exceptional friendship. They overlooked the possibility that a president so utterly uninterested in Palestinian rights might also prove indifferent to Israeli interests whenever they ceased to coincide with his own.
They celebrated his willingness to discard diplomatic conventions – or even basic human decency – when it worked in their favor. They are discovering now that sometimes cliches are true: What goes around comes around.
The post Israel’s love affair with Trump may be over – with no other suitor in sight appeared first on The Forward.
