Ugly Turn of Events : Group Flips Its Wig Over Plans to Close Museum

Dr. Frankenstein’s monster visited the Max Factor Beauty Museum on Saturday, carrying a “wild child” in a cage. They did not come in for a make-over.

Like the bogus Charlie Chaplin, the ersatz “mayor of Hollywood,” and the “world’s only live cigar store Indian,” they had come to protest the imminent demise of a genuine relic of movie capital history.

And if they are not enough to get Procter & Gamble’s attention, let the P & G board of directors hereby be warned that at least one unsmiling activist threatened to bring the Prince of Darkness himself into the debate over the company’s decision to shut down the Max Factor landmark June 30.

Satan is a sore point with Procter & Gamble. Michael Kellerman, a community activist and operator of Hollywood Fantasy Tours, knows full well that P & G has long battled rumors that its man in the moon logo symbolizes some sort of evil grand design. And in Hollywood, after all, it is always hard to know where myths end and reality begins.

“Who knows?” Kellerman suggested darkly. “This is an insane world we live in. It’s so bizarre, but it could be something as simple as that.”

At a time when Los Angeles is coping with a post-riot hangover of the worst kind, it is somehow refreshing to note that Hollywood and its politics are as weird as ever.

Odd though their tactics may be, the small but colorful group of activists who convened Saturday outside the old Max Factor Makeup Studio on Highland Avenue say they are committed to preserving the popular exhibit at least until the nascent Hollywood Entertainment Museum is ready to open, an event at least three years away.

Procter & Gamble’s decision to close the Max Factor exhibit was announced May 14 in a press release. That announcement emphasized the corporation’s decision to donate the Max Factor historical artifacts to the Hollywood Entertainment Museum--an act that Procter & Gamble spokesman Jim Schwartz says should be interpreted as the act of a solid and generous corporate citizen.

After Procter & Gamble acquired Max Factor & Co. in July, 1991, Schwartz said, the company set out “to find the best long-term home for the history of Max Factor, and management recognized how important Max Factor is to the history of Hollywood.”

Schwartz predicted that the large collection--only 25% of which is on display--as well as “a very sizable cash contribution” would serve as a magnet to draw other collections and financial supporters to the fledgling entertainment museum.

But Kellerman and other activists were alarmed over the imminent closure of the 8-year-old Max Factor Beauty Museum, located in a popular tourist district not far from the footprints at Mann’s Chinese Theatre. The museum, appointed with autographed glamour portraits of old-time movie stars and exhibits of Factor’s cosmetics and wigs, draws about 1,000 visitors weekly, a spokeswoman said.

Along with the costumed political agitators dispatched by the nearby Hollywood Wax Museum and Guinness World of Records Museum, the Saturday protest was also attended by representatives of the business community.

Maxine Weinman, whose restaurant on Highland Avenue was damaged during the riots, said the closure would hurt businesses that rely on tourist trade. “The economy in Hollywood is suffering. This is devastating to the small-business owner,” Weinman said.

Kellerman urged a boycott of Procter & Gamble products. One protester held a sign that declared “P&G; Stands for Pettiness and Greed.” Meanwhile, veteran announcer Johnny Grant, dubbed the honorary mayor by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, held out hope for a compromise, agreeing with one protester’s suggestion that the Max Factor building could house a temporary Hollywood Entertainment Museum until the larger facility opens in the redesigned Hollywood Pacific Theater.

“If they want to add to it, we’ll get costumes, artifacts, pictures,” Grant said. “Anything they’d like, we can get.”

But Schwartz, the P&G; spokesman, expressed doubt that such a compromise could be reached.

“Our experience with museums shows that long lead times are a natural part of the development process,” Schwartz said. “. . . We decided that closing the museum at this time would allow time to create a new exciting Max Factor exhibit.”

And as for Kellerman’s hints that maybe, just maybe, the devil made Procter & Gamble do it, Schwartz had a warning of his own.

“You know, we take allegations about our trademark very seriously,” the company’s man said. “We have pursued legal actions against individuals--and we’ll do so again if required.”