fyi this movie does have sex and other adult topics in it and is a serious movie. it's not fun or campy like the show at all. (I recommend WandaVision instead, as a real homage to TV shows like "I love Lucy." and it's more family friendly.
The main reason that she gave her approval was because the story didn't make her parents look bad. A lot of the factual info in the film did happen, just not the way it was scripted. There was a 2003 TV movie about her parents that she was very unhappy about because of how Desi and Lucy were portrayed.
As are many here, I’m a HUGE fan if “I Love Lucy” and Lucille Ball in general. But this movie...saying it “didn’t resonate” with me is about the best way to describe how I felt. I thought Kidman did an admirable job as Lucille, but not so much as Lucy Ricardo. Bardem’s performance as Ricky/Desi was just “heavy.” If Desi Arnaz had really been in real life like Bardem portrayed him, he wouldn’t have had the energy for extramarital affairs! J. K. Simmons shined as both Fred and William Frawley--I’d like to see him win another Oscar for this role. Nina Arianda as Ethel/Vivian was good...not great, but good. As much as I was looking forward to this re-telling of the Ball/Armaz story, I have to say I’m disappointed that I didn’t love this movie. I really wanted to love it.
Some of the biggest Cheaters out there are also incredibly dedicated to there work. Might want to look up just about every great athlete. Most of them obsessed with there sport but also have womanizing tendencies.
I’m a huge I Love Lucy fan and grew up watching it in syndication, so I’ll definitely be checking it out even with the mixed reviews it has been getting.
I'm not sure how I feel about this one. Wasn't impressed by the trailer. I knew about HUAC and find that really interesting, but honestly I'm most concerned about Nicole. I gave found many of her performances so wonderful and don't really care how much she does/doesn't look like Lucy. It's the frozen face issue - the last few performances by Kidman I found myself MULTIPLE times stepping out of the story and performance to ponder why she can't move her face. The Botox has become distracting for me. And when you add she's playing what should be such a facially expressive face... I just don't know
This! I've been saying it. Plastic surgery or botox ruined her acting abilities. When you look Nicole in the 90s she would act with all of her face, it was a delight... now she has one expression. I truly belive she isn't getting roles on the level she should or used to for years now becouse she can not act anymore with frozen face. Lucy had such expressive eyebrow and face movement and Nicole, however much she learns body movement or speach can not do her face expressions. It is so distracting. I feel so sad she felt the need to do all that plastic, she is a beautiful woman.
My feelings exactly. The actors were too old . Characters whose age range between early to late 20s to mid to late 30s should be portrayed by actors in their early forties or younger not in their 50s. The problem wasn't Sorkin, it was Nicole and Javier, which is why so many people felt Nina and J.K. stole the movie-.They were properly cast.
Found the movie very intriguing, but as a classic movie buff the simple fact "The Big Street" was a 1942 release, when Ball was 31, the same year her RKO contract ended (not when she was 39, as depicted) and she went over to MGM, threw me out of the movie for a bit, along with the fact that Judy Holliday was a complete unknown in 1942 and would not have been a Ball contemporary vying for the "Street" lead, as mentioned. I know it's not a documentary and artistic license is involved, but someone should be checking the timeline when you're doing a historical piece with A-1 production values to at least stay fairly close to reality regarding the time of events.
Absolutely agree. The continued references to Judy Holliday - who was possibly yet to find herself in her Greenwich Village performance years, let alone stardom, nearly a decade away - was jarring and wrong-headed, to say the least. Even WORSE - in the RKO outer office, a poster of, of all things, STROMBOLI, the 1950 Roberto Rosselini-Ingrid Bergman volcanic Italian island movie that was all about Open City-type docu-style, post WW II. Egregious use of Hollywood history: as Kidman as Ball says herself in the movie, Assume Your Audience is stupid, and they won't forgive you. Lucy's MGM years were also, for the star, a big deal, even if they too dropped her contract in the later 1940s. Also awful: the references to Too Many Girls, George Abbott's Broadway hit from about 1939-1940, in which Desi Arnaz was a sensation: hardly the "terrible, god-awful" musical the movie claims it to be: it was briefly on Broadway a mini-mega-must see, with Arnaz's animal energy rocking the socks off the audience - and it's where Ball first saw him perform. In short, there are SO MANY WRONG references in this movie - never mind "creative license" - that the egregious liberties with actual events completely knocked the movie off its access. Javier Bardem is great - and much, much too old. Kidman is terrific as hard-nosed Ball, but she's no comedienne, and there are zero scenes of any duration showing her hardball comedy clown genius. An awful movie. I hated it. Worst sin? J. Edgar Hoover's phone call, with the inspirational underscore music.
@@bobsanders9114 Thanks for your insight. I missed the "Stromboli" gaffe- shouldn't be that hard to check a year and get movie posters from the correct era, right? Ball did turn 39 in 1950, so I wonder if, following the script, someone thought it was okay to use a poster from that year, even though Ball really left RKO eight years before. And yep, Ball was a showcased star at MGM, no doubt.
I have to admit that I don't know everything there is to know about movies and Hollywood but I do know a little. When they were talking about "The Big Street" and the actor Judy Holliday....I did not know anything about the movie and I was not sure who Judy Holliday was.
I watched this movie last night...had a little time t think about it......The truth? I don't give a damn who directed this movie. It's not very good. In fact it's pretty damn bad. I also thought it was dull and boring. I thought Kidder did a poor job. I never saw her as Lucy. The only actor who earned his money was Simmons as Fred. I was actually getting a mad and kinda felt they were insulting the viewers intelligence. Like the washed out color of the entire movie. Yes we know all of this was 60+ years ago. We don't need special editing to know that.
I just don’t understand why they chose such old actors to play Lucy and Desi. Lucy would have been in her early 40s and Desi in his mid 30s when the communist accusations came out in 1953. These people are so much older. I just can’t accept this. What a sad shame because the film has potential. Big mistake.
I agree. Miscasting of the two leads was the biggest problem, but it could have been mitigated if they had age appropriate actors playing them in the flash backs.
@@StarrKeys lol the ages of the actors had nothing to do with another boring Aaron sorkin piece. You could have cast Lucille ball and desi arnez at their appropriate ages and this movie still would have sucked.
Great review! I’ll probably wait till it comes to Prime to check this out. The way you feel about this film is exactly how I feel about The Place Beyond the Pines. Great performances from Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper, really good filmmaking, but something about the story just didn’t grab me. I think I’ve just seen the plots themselves done better in other mediums and it just felt cliche to me.
I definitely agree with you that it was pretty good but just not very exciting. I don’t see it deserving a Best Picture nomination, nor Nicole Kidman winning Best Actress for it.
Can't agree with you at all!! Yes, it does deserve best picture award. I thought it was a standout movie and I was totally drawn in by Nicole Kidmans performance. The ending was so well written and crafted.
True, there are different elements and subplots. However All these stories have different screen times. For example subplot whether Desi is faithful or unfaithful is only mentioned couple of times in the film. There is only one true story line which is how they created an episode of I love Lucy and How Lucille Ball envision an episode which one of the most successful tv shows. There are some flash backs here and there. It is certainly not stuffed with subplots many people claim. Even though it is very a dialogue -ridden film, it is never boring or complicated. I really like it. One of the best films of the year.
Hi Austin. Too cringy for me at times. The first part of the movie was entertaining but the second part with the drama and all was boring I felt asleep. Javier wasn’t Ricky at all but Nicole Kidman was great as Lucille Ball but very bad at being the character Lucy if that makes sense but I enjoyed the Aaron Sorkin writing and directing in parts. 2 and a half stars. I don’t think it’s a best picture contender.
I just watched the movie. Very unexpected and well done. An intellectual look at behind the scenes. Nicole Kidman going back and forth between Lucille and Lucy is worthy of an Oscar nomination. She might even win. Good movie, deserving of best actress, original screenplay , editing, costumes, hair & makeup, but not Best Picture. Definitely worth watching, because Nicole will be nominated
This movie was good. Very good! Takes place in the span of the week and does what it sets out to be imo. Kidman killed it and did justice to Lucille ball. The supporting cast was great and the tempo was perfect for the era, snappy! Definite watch.
From what I’ve seen, Nicole acts with facelifts 💀 Botox 💉& has no sense of lightness, much less comedy 🎭 Gezz the makeup is awful- a thin lipped, no eyebrows Lucy/Lucille 🤯 Nicole showed she couldn’t do comedy in the movie of “Bewitched” but she is Very Good at Dramatic Boring 😴
The script and storyline were deeply flawed. So many timeline errors and incorrect story elements. That "crazy week" that the film is trying to portray...it never happened. The individual events did occur, but not during the same week during production in 1952. The communist accusation didn't happen until late 1953. The bit about Desi's cheating was in Confindential magazine in 1955, not in a newspaper. The announcement that Lucy was pregnant with their second child was in April 1952, but the episode being filmed in the movie is "Fred and Ethel Fight", which was shot in January of 1952. Sorkin basically padded the script to make it interesting, but the result was a dull story that doesn't make the audience feel about the characters. Oh, you know the director, Donald Glass that everyone was complaining about? There was no such director. The director for the entire first season was Marc Daniels, who was an excellent director and was very well liked. He worked for Desilu well into the 1960s before it became part of Paramount studios. The worst part of the story was how Vivian Vance was treated. None of this was based on fact, only tabloid garbage that was never proven to be true.
Your surprised by this? Sorkin does this every time he is involved with a piece that involves historical figures. He made a baseball movie about an Oakland A’s team that centered around role players and did not mention at all the best players on the team. If you knew nothing about the team you would have thought the role players were the stars of the team from watching it. Sorkin is the master of directing pseudo intellectual stories.
The cast really put me off on this one. Good actors in general but they don't seemingly fit the roles they've been given. I don't know why Sorkin and Scorsese have gotten into the position of grabbing the biggest names and shoehorning them where they don't fit in. Imagine if you had focused less on blockbuster names and created a character piece with true character actors.
@@jasminewilliams1673 which to me made the story so much more interesting this charming interesting person who is outwardly lovable but on the inside he was abusive and a harsh person. But it only works with that outward duality.
This Desi and Lucille Ball bio movie is GOOD. Great acting by Nicole Kidman who yes doesn't exactly look like her but so what. It's about seeing a female comedian deal with real life and be strong. Anyone complaining misses the point. I Love Lucy. I love Being The Ricardos ❤️
Yes it should’ve been edit better because it jumped all over the place like like at the beginning blah blah a few episodes and then it goes off someplace and then later on it goes back to that scenario I was like what is there to lose track of what’s going on because it doesn’t the storyline is not persistent it just jumps back-and-forth but great performances all around did enjoy it but you can’t compare to the real thing because it’s like nobody can compare to the real thing. When you have two strong humans together Lucy and Desi that then men do not basically bout to their women you know….
I think I was just so bored with another boring piece by sorkin that I did not even think about what you said. But you are right this movie is very choppy with the way it cuts from timeline to timeline
I really thought that cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth (David Fincher's cinematographer for Fight Club, The Social Network, Girl with Dragon Tattoo, and Gone Girl) would bring something spicy here but I agree, it's just...bland.
just based on the gross MISCASTINGs itself I just know this won't be good. and I am a fan of Sorkin, Kidman, Bardem and Simmons. but, i just feel this project's all wrong for any of them to do.
Very good review. Unfortunately I could not sit through the entire movie. As a huge fan of I Love Lucy it was not what I was expecting and it didn't catch my interest. I think both, Javier and Nicole are amazing actors but I don't know if they were the right fit for these roles.
Issue was not the actors every actor in this movie is great. Issue is the writer and director Aaron sorkin. He mixes pretentious Debbie downer themes throughout this movie that when he gets to his apex everyone watching is just sitting there thinking yeah I could see that being true not shocking.
I’m really surprised to see such a low score and negative review for a Sorkin film considering I think he’s one of the greatest writers working today. edit: Yeah I finally saw it... it's not great.
Sorkin is highly overrated. Every piece he does is riddled with intentional oversights (when he does historical pieces like this one) with large amounts of pretentiousness. I have never watched a tv show or movie he has been involved with and thought hey I’d like to watch that again. Did not even know he was involved in this till the end credits rolled. Then when I saw his name I thought yup that makes sense.
Just for a historical point it was the House Committee for UnAmerican Activities HCUA,it was the press that changed it to HUAC,go easy on Nick,she’s an actress first,and a comedienne second.
Aww man it sucks you really didn't like it, haven't even heard of this movie until now, and had SO much hope until I seen your review. Wished they could of nailed this
I know the show however it felt like we were supposed to know what happened. I needed some cations or dates to understand when they were showing scenes other that from that same week
yeah, I couldn't get through it. bored and not what I expected. there's no fun or joy like you might want to feel for " I love Lucy." This is a serious film. no nostalgia. and every character seems angry and like they don't want to be there. so why should I?
This movie is like giving someone a Lamborghini (great actors big budget) who has never driven a car before. It was completely mismanaged (bad writing bad directing).
I agree. Bardem is significantly older than Desi Arnaz was during the "I Love Lucy" years. Isaac also looks more like Desi. He's also an amazing actor.
Watched this a few weeks ago and didn't care for it at all. Kidman wasn't good, but Simmons and Arianda both completely missed the mark. Bardem was okay, but still seemed miscast. Definitely not oscar material. The movie has some important things to say about the industry, but the character portrayals are so distracting, it's hard get anything out of it.
Fun question: What pre-1990's show do you all LOVE or have nostalgia for??
I Love Lucy and The Golden Girls.
I Love Lucy, The Brady Bunch, Gilligan's Island, Threes Company pretty much whatever they showed on Nick at Nite in the 90s and early 2000s
Little House on the Prairie. Or pretty much anything Hanna Barbara.
The andy Griffith show, I have literally watched all the seasons a few times, when Don Knotts left it wasn't the same but still good
The Twilight Zone, The Flintstones
My nine year old daughter has been on a I Love Lucy kick lately and I'm not mad at it ...she's an old soul ❤
fyi this movie does have sex and other adult topics in it and is a serious movie. it's not fun or campy like the show at all. (I recommend WandaVision instead, as a real homage to TV shows like "I love Lucy." and it's more family friendly.
The film suffers from no strict plot structure but the acting is superb. And JK Simmons is a national treasure.
"Lucy, you have some splainin' ta do!"
I saw that the DAUGHTER of the ricardos Said that The performance of her Parents were good! So there’s that! (: …
Yes, since Lucie Arnez was paid to promote it.
The main reason that she gave her approval was because the story didn't make her parents look bad. A lot of the factual info in the film did happen, just not the way it was scripted. There was a 2003 TV movie about her parents that she was very unhappy about because of how Desi and Lucy were portrayed.
As are many here, I’m a HUGE fan if “I Love Lucy” and Lucille Ball in general. But this movie...saying it “didn’t resonate” with me is about the best way to describe how I felt. I thought Kidman did an admirable job as Lucille, but not so much as Lucy Ricardo. Bardem’s performance as Ricky/Desi was just “heavy.” If Desi Arnaz had really been in real life like Bardem portrayed him, he wouldn’t have had the energy for extramarital affairs! J. K. Simmons shined as both Fred and William Frawley--I’d like to see him win another Oscar for this role. Nina Arianda as Ethel/Vivian was good...not great, but good. As much as I was looking forward to this re-telling of the Ball/Armaz story, I have to say I’m disappointed that I didn’t love this movie. I really wanted to love it.
Some of the biggest Cheaters out there are also incredibly dedicated to there work. Might want to look up just about every great athlete. Most of them obsessed with there sport but also have womanizing tendencies.
I’m a huge I Love Lucy fan and grew up watching it in syndication, so I’ll definitely be checking it out even with the mixed reviews it has been getting.
Yeah it was on loop for us! Such a sweet show.
I literally did not hear about this movie, until about two days ago lol thanks for the review Austin!
Appreciate you Cash!
I'm not sure how I feel about this one. Wasn't impressed by the trailer. I knew about HUAC and find that really interesting, but honestly I'm most concerned about Nicole. I gave found many of her performances so wonderful and don't really care how much she does/doesn't look like Lucy. It's the frozen face issue - the last few performances by Kidman I found myself MULTIPLE times stepping out of the story and performance to ponder why she can't move her face. The Botox has become distracting for me. And when you add she's playing what should be such a facially expressive face... I just don't know
This! I've been saying it. Plastic surgery or botox ruined her acting abilities. When you look Nicole in the 90s she would act with all of her face, it was a delight... now she has one expression. I truly belive she isn't getting roles on the level she should or used to for years now becouse she can not act anymore with frozen face. Lucy had such expressive eyebrow and face movement and Nicole, however much she learns body movement or speach can not do her face expressions. It is so distracting. I feel so sad she felt the need to do all that plastic, she is a beautiful woman.
My feelings exactly. The actors were too old . Characters whose age range between early to late 20s to mid to late 30s should be portrayed by actors in their early forties or younger not in their 50s. The problem wasn't Sorkin, it was Nicole and Javier, which is why so many people felt Nina and J.K. stole the movie-.They were properly cast.
Found the movie very intriguing, but as a classic movie buff the simple fact "The Big Street" was a 1942 release, when Ball was 31, the same year her RKO contract ended (not when she was 39, as depicted) and she went over to MGM, threw me out of the movie for a bit, along with the fact that Judy Holliday was a complete unknown in 1942 and would not have been a Ball contemporary vying for the "Street" lead, as mentioned. I know it's not a documentary and artistic license is involved, but someone should be checking the timeline when you're doing a historical piece with A-1 production values to at least stay fairly close to reality regarding the time of events.
Absolutely agree. The continued references to Judy Holliday - who was possibly yet to find herself in her Greenwich Village performance years, let alone stardom, nearly a decade away - was jarring and wrong-headed, to say the least. Even WORSE - in the RKO outer office, a poster of, of all things, STROMBOLI, the 1950 Roberto Rosselini-Ingrid Bergman volcanic Italian island movie that was all about Open City-type docu-style, post WW II. Egregious use of Hollywood history: as Kidman as Ball says herself in the movie, Assume Your Audience is stupid, and they won't forgive you. Lucy's MGM years were also, for the star, a big deal, even if they too dropped her contract in the later 1940s. Also awful: the references to Too Many Girls, George Abbott's Broadway hit from about 1939-1940, in which Desi Arnaz was a sensation: hardly the "terrible, god-awful" musical the movie claims it to be: it was briefly on Broadway a mini-mega-must see, with Arnaz's animal energy rocking the socks off the audience - and it's where Ball first saw him perform. In short, there are SO MANY WRONG references in this movie - never mind "creative license" - that the egregious liberties with actual events completely knocked the movie off its access. Javier Bardem is great - and much, much too old. Kidman is terrific as hard-nosed Ball, but she's no comedienne, and there are zero scenes of any duration showing her hardball comedy clown genius. An awful movie. I hated it. Worst sin? J. Edgar Hoover's phone call, with the inspirational underscore music.
@@bobsanders9114 Thanks for your insight. I missed the "Stromboli" gaffe- shouldn't be that hard to check a year and get movie posters from the correct era, right? Ball did turn 39 in 1950, so I wonder if, following the script, someone thought it was okay to use a poster from that year, even though Ball really left RKO eight years before. And yep, Ball was a showcased star at MGM, no doubt.
I have to admit that I don't know everything there is to know about movies and Hollywood but I do know a little. When they were talking about "The Big Street" and the actor Judy Holliday....I did not know anything about the movie and I was not sure who Judy Holliday was.
Really like the movie, one of the best movies. Performances fantastic and i liked how it all came together at the end. Kidman was excellent.
I watched this movie last night...had a little time t think about it......The truth? I don't give a damn who directed this movie. It's not very good. In fact it's pretty damn bad. I also thought it was dull and boring. I thought Kidder did a poor job. I never saw her as Lucy. The only actor who earned his money was Simmons as Fred. I was actually getting a mad and kinda felt they were insulting the viewers intelligence. Like the washed out color of the entire movie. Yes we know all of this was 60+ years ago. We don't need special editing to know that.
I just don’t understand why they chose such old actors to play Lucy and Desi. Lucy would have been in her early 40s and Desi in his mid 30s when the communist accusations came out in 1953. These people are so much older. I just can’t accept this. What a sad shame because the film has potential. Big mistake.
I agree
I agree. Miscasting of the two leads was the biggest problem, but it could have been mitigated if they had age appropriate actors playing them in the flash backs.
@@StarrKeys lol the ages of the actors had nothing to do with another boring Aaron sorkin piece. You could have cast Lucille ball and desi arnez at their appropriate ages and this movie still would have sucked.
Totally agree
Great review! I’ll probably wait till it comes to Prime to check this out. The way you feel about this film is exactly how I feel about The Place Beyond the Pines. Great performances from Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper, really good filmmaking, but something about the story just didn’t grab me. I think I’ve just seen the plots themselves done better in other mediums and it just felt cliche to me.
Just finished watching the movie about an hour ago. 5.8/10 for me, but the acting is great. Kidman is indeed monumental in it. Thanks for the review!
I agree with you on this film, I wasn't ever invested, I thought the actors did a good job and I found the things on the technical side pretty bland
I definitely agree with you that it was pretty good but just not very exciting. I don’t see it deserving a Best Picture nomination, nor Nicole Kidman winning Best Actress for it.
Hi Austin, I'm seeing it Friday. Your review is the first I have seen but really liked what you had to say. I can't wait to see it
Can't agree with you at all!! Yes, it does deserve best picture award. I thought it was a standout movie and I was totally drawn in by Nicole Kidmans performance. The ending was so well written and crafted.
Nooo! How? So many great reviews came out of the early release. What happend? I feel cheated
I wanted to love it more!
@@AustinBurke well at least your honest and that’s what I like about you
@@AustinBurke unrelated but did you managed to watch don't look up or are you waiting for the wide release?
Watch it first before you feel cheated
This is 1 guys review
As long as Kidman is great I’m happy. She was getting quite a bit of flack for taking the role 👍🏼
I thought she nailed it!!
@@AustinBurke This is the only way she nailed it 💅🏻
True, there are different elements and subplots. However All these stories have different screen times. For example subplot whether Desi is faithful or unfaithful is only mentioned couple of times in the film. There is only one true story line which is how they created an episode of I love Lucy and How Lucille Ball envision an episode which one of the most successful tv shows. There are some flash backs here and there. It is certainly not stuffed with subplots many people claim. Even though it is very a dialogue -ridden film, it is never boring or complicated. I really like it. One of the best films of the year.
Totally agreed..we needed more.. They should've made it a series..I honestly first thought it was a series
Hi Austin. Too cringy for me at times. The first part of the movie was entertaining but the second part with the drama and all was boring I felt asleep. Javier wasn’t Ricky at all but Nicole Kidman was great as Lucille Ball but very bad at being the character Lucy if that makes sense but I enjoyed the Aaron Sorkin writing and directing in parts. 2 and a half stars. I don’t think it’s a best picture contender.
I just watched the movie. Very unexpected and well done. An intellectual look at behind the scenes. Nicole Kidman going back and forth between Lucille and Lucy is worthy of an Oscar nomination. She might even win.
Good movie, deserving of best actress, original screenplay , editing, costumes, hair & makeup, but not Best Picture. Definitely worth watching, because Nicole will be nominated
insane lol. nicole is a good actress but the casting was all wrong.
This movie was good. Very good! Takes place in the span of the week and does what it sets out to be imo. Kidman killed it and did justice to Lucille ball. The supporting cast was great and the tempo was perfect for the era, snappy! Definite watch.
From what I’ve seen, Nicole acts with facelifts 💀 Botox 💉& has no sense of lightness, much less comedy 🎭 Gezz the makeup is awful- a thin lipped, no eyebrows Lucy/Lucille 🤯 Nicole showed she couldn’t do comedy in the movie of “Bewitched” but she is Very Good at Dramatic Boring 😴
The script and storyline were deeply flawed. So many timeline errors and incorrect story elements. That "crazy week" that the film is trying to portray...it never happened. The individual events did occur, but not during the same week during production in 1952. The communist accusation didn't happen until late 1953. The bit about Desi's cheating was in Confindential magazine in 1955, not in a newspaper. The announcement that Lucy was pregnant with their second child was in April 1952, but the episode being filmed in the movie is "Fred and Ethel Fight", which was shot in January of 1952. Sorkin basically padded the script to make it interesting, but the result was a dull story that doesn't make the audience feel about the characters. Oh, you know the director, Donald Glass that everyone was complaining about? There was no such director. The director for the entire first season was Marc Daniels, who was an excellent director and was very well liked. He worked for Desilu well into the 1960s before it became part of Paramount studios. The worst part of the story was how Vivian Vance was treated. None of this was based on fact, only tabloid garbage that was never proven to be true.
Your surprised by this? Sorkin does this every time he is involved with a piece that involves historical figures. He made a baseball movie about an Oakland A’s team that centered around role players and did not mention at all the best players on the team. If you knew nothing about the team you would have thought the role players were the stars of the team from watching it. Sorkin is the master of directing pseudo intellectual stories.
The cast really put me off on this one. Good actors in general but they don't seemingly fit the roles they've been given. I don't know why Sorkin and Scorsese have gotten into the position of grabbing the biggest names and shoehorning them where they don't fit in. Imagine if you had focused less on blockbuster names and created a character piece with true character actors.
Or they are professionals and know what they're doing 🙄
@@ykook7000 or they could by just milking the box office because big names sell tickets
Agreed, awful casting. Bardem looks like...Bardem. Ricky had this wonderful light energy to him.
@@jasminewilliams1673 which to me made the story so much more interesting this charming interesting person who is outwardly lovable but on the inside he was abusive and a harsh person. But it only works with that outward duality.
This Desi and Lucille Ball bio movie is GOOD. Great acting by Nicole Kidman who yes doesn't exactly look like her but so what. It's about seeing a female comedian deal with real life and be strong. Anyone complaining misses the point. I Love Lucy. I love Being The Ricardos ❤️
Yes it should’ve been edit better because it jumped all over the place like like at the beginning blah blah a few episodes and then it goes off someplace and then later on it goes back to that scenario I was like what is there to lose track of what’s going on because it doesn’t the storyline is not persistent it just jumps back-and-forth but great performances all around did enjoy it but you can’t compare to the real thing because it’s like nobody can compare to the real thing. When you have two strong humans together Lucy and Desi that then men do not basically bout to their women you know….
I think I was just so bored with another boring piece by sorkin that I did not even think about what you said. But you are right this movie is very choppy with the way it cuts from timeline to timeline
I really thought that cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth (David Fincher's cinematographer for Fight Club, The Social Network, Girl with Dragon Tattoo, and Gone Girl) would bring something spicy here but I agree, it's just...bland.
How do you know?
@@davidmckesey7119 Managed to get my hands on a screener.
just based on the gross MISCASTINGs itself I just know this won't be good.
and I am a fan of Sorkin, Kidman, Bardem and Simmons.
but, i just feel this project's all wrong for any of them to do.
Your loss mate!!!
Very good review.
Unfortunately I could not sit through the entire movie. As a huge fan of I Love Lucy it was not what I was expecting and it didn't catch my interest. I think both, Javier and Nicole are amazing actors but I don't know if they were the right fit for these roles.
Issue was not the actors every actor in this movie is great. Issue is the writer and director Aaron sorkin. He mixes pretentious Debbie downer themes throughout this movie that when he gets to his apex everyone watching is just sitting there thinking yeah I could see that being true not shocking.
I’m really surprised to see such a low score and negative review for a Sorkin film considering I think he’s one of the greatest writers working today.
edit: Yeah I finally saw it... it's not great.
th-cam.com/video/GZpn6TK1E0M/w-d-xo.html
Perhaps he should focus on writing instead of directing, imho
Sorkin is highly overrated. Every piece he does is riddled with intentional oversights (when he does historical pieces like this one) with large amounts of pretentiousness. I have never watched a tv show or movie he has been involved with and thought hey I’d like to watch that again. Did not even know he was involved in this till the end credits rolled. Then when I saw his name I thought yup that makes sense.
Arron Sorkin, although he has his fans, is so one note that his writing has lost a lot of it's luster for me. It's all the same.
Just for a historical point it was the House Committee for UnAmerican Activities HCUA,it was the press that changed it to HUAC,go easy on Nick,she’s an actress first,and a comedienne second.
there were some little subplots and they all tied up in the end very well. nicole kidman was good too. good film, good performances.
Aww man it sucks you really didn't like it, haven't even heard of this movie until now, and had SO much hope until I seen your review. Wished they could of nailed this
I know the show however it felt like we were supposed to know what happened. I needed some cations or dates to understand when they were showing scenes other that from that same week
I watched it at home but would have definitely paid to see it in the theater,
The movie was good 8 out of 10 and definitely deserves the nomination
Good video. Loved the movie. Although, I felt something was missing.
The main reason it did not resonate with me, despite all the individual ingredients, is that the plot was not fully defined or compelling.
yeah, I couldn't get through it. bored and not what I expected. there's no fun or joy like you might want to feel for " I love Lucy." This is a serious film. no nostalgia. and every character seems angry and like they don't want to be there. so why should I?
I don't think it's best picture worthy acting and set design maybe but not that the story was all over the place.i give more of a low 80 though
This movie is like giving someone a Lamborghini (great actors big budget) who has never driven a car before. It was completely mismanaged (bad writing bad directing).
It was a horrible movie. Lucille ball was the most unlikable protagonist since snake eyes
The cinematography in the preview footage looks dark brown toned.
Debra Messing must be so happy!😂😂😂
Hopefully she'll be happy when nominations come out as Nicole is looking like a strong contender. Sweet justice.
How did you manage to see it before the premiere?
Watched it yesterday via digital screening!
Sorkin written films ranking? 👀
Best casting is Javier Bardem as Desi. JK Simmons as Fred Mertz.
Oscar Isaac would've been a better choice for Desi
@@Mmmkay10 yeah but he was busy with the Adams family animated movies.
I agree. Bardem is significantly older than Desi Arnaz was during the "I Love Lucy" years. Isaac also looks more like Desi. He's also an amazing actor.
@@breckrichardson390 both he and Kidman are 20 years older than Desi and Lucy at the time.
I gave this film a 6/10. I found it had no identity and lacked structure. Very lackluster.
Is this in theaters or streaming?
Both. In select theaters starting today, December 10, then streaming starting December 21.
I’ve seen a few of these reviews for this movie and they are all so very different.
Watched this a few weeks ago and didn't care for it at all. Kidman wasn't good, but Simmons and Arianda both completely missed the mark. Bardem was okay, but still seemed miscast. Definitely not oscar material. The movie has some important things to say about the industry, but the character portrayals are so distracting, it's hard get anything out of it.
I hated this movie. It is deeply wrong on so many levels.
The director and crew I guess, wearing masks and the actors not????? And I know they take the masks off for lunch. What is the point?
Steve jobs has one of the film ends he has written
What?
Looks like a load of doggie doo to me. Good luck filling seats in movie theatres!
This film is D U L L
nicole was all wrong for this part
damn :(
🤩🤩