I DIDN'T LOVE "LUCY"
A Review by Stuart Shostak
OK, let’s go over this once
again…what are the rules for doing a TV movie/biography on two of the most
beloved icons the world over, two people who fans know more about both
professionally and privately than probably some of their own relatives? First, the people producing should be
passionate and knowledgeable about the material so the facts are presented
properly and accurately. Second, the
story should be told in proper chronological order. Next, dramatic liberty should be taken only when necessary and
most likely ONLY when recreating something that happened privately, when nobody
else was around to transcribe an exact account. NEVER try and recreate something the public has taken to heart,
has seen hundreds (perhaps thousands) of times, knows inside and out - every
nuance, mannerism, movement and certainly delivery of dialogue down to the last
gasp of breath and expect it to be an exact digital clone of the original. Last but certainly not least, for God’s sake,
cast actors who look like or can be made to look like the people they’re
portraying so the story IS accepted.
So who produced the May 4
presentation, “Lucy” on CBS? The same
team that gave us the Academy Award winning “Chicago” and the same team that
gave us the Judy Garland biopic on ABC last year – Craig Zadan and Neil
Meron. Maybe their overall track record
convinced CBS they were the ones to produce this film, despite the fact that it
was painfully obvious neither knew enough or even cared enough about the lives of
Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz to undertake such a project. Even then, they could have hired writers and
technical advisors to help make the project as accurate as possible.
But first things first…did
this project actually NEED to be made?
Wasn’t there a CBS movie produced about 13 years ago (capitalizing on
the fact that Lucy had just passed away and the public was clamoring for
anything Lucy at the time) that in essence told the exact same story as we saw
on May 4, and just as badly? Isn’t
there already at least three shelves’ worth of books written on Lucy and Desi,
each basically covering the same material?
Didn’t Lucie Arnaz herself produce a documentary on her parents that’s
had plenty of air time and home video exposure which supposedly told their
“real” story? Lucie’s project turned
out in large part to be confirmations of what we already knew and read, too,
but at least it was told by someone who was passionate about and certainly
competent enough to produce it. So why
did this movie have to be made, you ask?
Ah, well, one word – RATINGS!
CBS has quietly discovered that anything “Lucy” gets ratings. Remember how they milked the cow dry with
the 50th Anniversary Special?
That thing had more prime time airings than any of the original episodes
ever did. Sure, each time the special
reran the ratings went further south, but it still delivered numbers better
than anything else CBS had run in those time slots previously. It was because of the special’s successful
repeating performance that some genius at CBS commissioned this biopic to be
made – TWO YEARS AGO! By the time this
project finally got a firm green light to go into production around November of
last year, a script was ready four weeks later and they shot it shortly
afterward in THREE weeks…in New Zealand, of all places, with the supporting
cast all Australian actors using American accents. It saves money shooting abroad…and it showed. By the way, the ratings May 4 were less than
spectacular. The film won its first
hour, but trailed NBC in its last two.
One of those hours on NBC was filled with rerun programming, too, so
maybe thankfully we’ve seen our last capitalization of Lucille Ball on CBS for
a while.
There was one element to the
film that I did like – the Art Director, Set Designer, costumers, and anyone
else connected with the overall look of the film did a fantastic job with capturing
the periods covered. I’m a little more
critical about the Ricardo living room and Connecticut home sets, but I suppose
they made the best of what they could shooting in New Zealand. Now that my compliments are out of the way,
let’s get down to business.
First and foremost, why does
every one of these movies have to be told in flashback? I pretty much predicted the opening scene –
on the set of “Lucy Meets the Moustache”, with the two of them about to
divorce, then going back to where it all began with Lucy in Jamestown as a wild
teenager. All that opening scene needed
was someone pretending to be Edie Adams singing “That’s All”, and it would have
been THE true corny way to begin the flashback. Thankfully I was spared, albeit a bit surprised that my powers of
clairvoyance had failed. However, after
successfully dropping this wretched scenario from my mind, I was caught totally
off guard later on because they saved this bit of cornball convention to END the
film. I should have known better.
The producers did a pretty
decent job covering Lucy’s Jamestown, New York, and early Hollywood years. As the film progressed, however, the facts and chronological
timeline were played with fast and loose.
Again, we’re dealing with common public knowledge due to the amount of
books and previously made films on this subject, so Desi telling Lucy he wants
to buy RKO in 1953 is about 4 years premature.
The film then suddenly jumps
ahead to 1958, skipping virtually everything in between, and Desi buys RKO. Lucy is shown saying hello to former
co-workers from her movie days, then goes back to rehearsal in the original
Ricardo living room set from the first two seasons! Talk about being inexcusable!
Everyone knows that by this point, the half hour series was caput and
the hour long specials were well into production, with the home base of the
Ricardos being Connecticut. To further
confuse the issue, the next scene has Lucy stomping grapes in Turo, a show filmed
in 1956. In recreating the Communist
incident in 1953, the writing makes it look like Desi did Lucy a favor by
covering up their marriage problems and bailing her out with the press. Any basic research would have shown that not
only prior to this happening was that period one of really true happiness for
the Arnaz family, but that Desi PASSIONATELY supported his wife throughout the
entire ordeal. On another note, I also strongly doubt that in the early
planning stages of “I Love Lucy”, Jess
Oppenheimer met personally with Desi to discuss how both the series should be
shaped and how Desi’s character was to be molded. A simple reading of Jess’ book would have clarified that. Further, I don’t think Desi told Jess prior
to the series beginning production that he really wanted to produce. It also made it seem that Jess was brought
in solely to produce the TV series, when everyone knows he was head writer for
“My Favorite Husband”. There were other
factual inaccuracies throughout the entire film, ranging from the “live” studio
audience at the final filming (the last three Lucy/Desi specials were filmed
without audiences) to Lucy meeting Red Skelton during “DuBarry Was a Lady”,
when in fact, they worked together previously on a film at RKO in 1938. I can go on and on about this, but there are not enough megabytes left on this web site.
Suffice it to say most of
the “I Love Lucy” scene re-creations were an embarrassment and I found myself
constantly cringing, although the club scene from “Lucy is Enceinte” wasn’t
terrible. They at least had the decency
to only show Lucy going through a mirror rehearsal from “Lucy Does a TV
Commercial”. Even THEY realized they
could not duplicate the timing and magic Lucy herself brought to that episode. But seeing the horrendous assembly line and
grape stomping scenes through the eyes of these filmmakers made me almost reach
for the remote (or a barf bag).
Something that is engrained in the minds of millions of fans and is so
beloved after seeing it thousands of times cannot be duplicated even remotely
by anyone who is not truly passionate about it, regardless of how talented an
actor happens to be. I’m not interested
in how many times Rachel York studied a particular video tape to get a scene
“just right”. It’s not enough…it’s
never enough. Classic moments should
remain classic.
Now let’s talk about the casting. Whoever decided on Rachel York and Danny
Pino for the leads should be taken out back and beaten with the rugs. Forget the fact that it’s nearly impossible
to clone major television icons, but it IS possible to come close. Anyone familiar with our conventions knows
that Suzanne La Rusch and Adrian Israel are just dynamite as Lucy and Ricky
Ricardo. When the two of them perform,
it’s almost like seeing the real thing – once they hook you, you’re convinced. The major problem I had with this movie (besides
the factual inaccuracies which were to be expected) was that at NO TIME did I
ever believe I was watching the stories of Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz because
they didn’t look anything like who they were supposed to be. I tried very hard to overlook that and
concentrate on the acting and mannerisms, but their looks kept getting in the
way. Rachel York appeared like a cross
between Carol Burnett and Bette Midler and sounded more like Lucie Arnaz than
Lucille Ball! Danny Pino looked more
like Rick Moranis minus the glasses and with black hair than he did Desi,
although he had the voice down fairly well.
Whoever did his singing was pretty close, too. But Pino was way too thin, and some creative padding would have
helped. Both also looked much too
young, particularly in what were supposed to be the later years of their
marriage. I’m sure Rachel York and Danny
Pino are fine actors, but sadly here they were totally miscast. As for the supporting actors, it appeared the
criterion was only Australians that could do American accents. The actress portraying Vivian Vance had a
“valley girl” sound to her that was irritating, and the actors who played
William Frawley and Buster Keaton looked identical. Red Skelton looked like Danny Bonaduce and sounded like Conan
O’Brien.
So did this movie
disappoint? Yes. Should it have been made? No, but to be honest, any “non fan” or
casual viewer probably would have enjoyed it.
The problem is that there are SO MANY Lucy fans out there, it more than
likely disappointed rather than entertained and satisfied. The ratings seem to reflect that because the
telecast lost viewers as each hour passed.
Maybe we HAVE finally seen the last of CBS trying to make money off
Lucille Ball in prime time. Let’s put
to rest once and for all the need for any more documentaries or biopics that
rehash the same gossip over and over again.
Just let us have the real Lucy in reruns forever, the Lucy we all know
and love.
____________
Stuart Shostak is a life-long Lucy fan. He has been a member of We Love Lucy since 1977, when he was introduced to the organization by his friend, I Love Lucy-writer, Bob Schiller. Stuart subsequently became Lucille Ball and Gary Morton's film archivist, and is now president/owner of Shokus Video. For the past six years he has been co-producer and video editor for our Loving Lucy Conventions. For many years he authored a regular column, "Viewer's Viewpoint," in our club publications.