Rating: R
Runtime: 2 hours, 11 minutes
Director: Aaron Sorkin
Quick Impressions:
I got very excited this Christmas when I was able to convince my sister to watch Being the Ricardos. (It helped that a contestant on Jeopardy! told a story about eating bugs, so I was able to show everyone the old Vanity Fair clip of Nicole Kidman eating bugs (as her secret talent. My son used to be fascinated by that when he was three). And then I ever-so-subtly said, “Speaking of Nicole Kidman…”)
(Besides I thought it was my turn to pick the Christmas movie. Last Christmas, my sister picked The VVitch. We all enjoyed it, and best of all, since she picked it, I didn’t have to answer any challenges about the Christmas movie cred of Being the Ricardos.)
I didn’t write a review then because I was trying to be Christmas present for my family. Ordinarily I wouldn’t wait this long to write about a film. Since this movie is on Prime video, though, I can easily refresh my memory by watching the film a second time as I write the review.
Deciding how to come at this movie was tricky for me. Is it primarily a look at the life of Lucille Ball, the third film directed by Aaron Sorkin, or yet another bid for Best Actress by Nicole Kidman? (Any one of those factors would have interested me. This film gives us all three.)
Kidman deserves another Best Actress Oscar. Both my husband and I thought she was absolutely robbed when the Academy didn’t acknowledge her performance in Destroyer. (True, it’s not exactly the feel good movie of the year, but she’s magnificent in it. “She would have been my choice to win!” my husband has said repeatedly. I don’t know that I would go that far, but I do think she deserved the nomination that went to Yalitza Aparicio. (And I liked Roma. I was thrilled that Marina de Tavira got nominated.) I have nothing against Aparicio, but I don’t think I can explain the nuances of my take on that year’s Best Actress race in fewer than twenty-five paragraphs, so I’ll just say this. Nicole Kidman gave a performance in Destroyer that just got better and better, and I cannot imagine any other actress in that role. I think the movie only worked because the lead was played by Nicole Kidman.
On the other hand, I can imagine a lot of other people besides Kidman in the role of Lucille Ball. In fact, until I saw the trailers for this movie, it was pretty darn hard to imagine Kidman in the role. All along I thought Kidman was a strange choice, but I was willing to withhold judgment until I saw her performance. A long time ago, someone asked me, “Can you imagine casting Nicole Kidman as Lucille Ball?” And I thought, “Yes, because Nicole Kidman’s a really good actress.” I can imagine being delighted to cast Nicole Kidman as anyone.
But I wasn’t just interested in Kidman. I’ve enjoyed watching Aaron Sorkin’s progression as a director. Obviously, he’s a great writer, but when we watched The Trial of the Chicago 7, both my husband and I thought, “Wow that was a huge improvement over Molly’s Game!” (Now we liked Molly’s Game. I liked it so much, I read the book, but The Trial of the Chicago 7 seemed more cinematic, more natural. The dialogue didn’t seem so…I don’t know how to describe it. There was an artificiality to it. (Maybe that was on purpose, and it was supposed to be like His Girl Friday or something.) This movie isn’t like either of those. (Well, it does have the documentary style device of older versions of characters narrating earlier events that Chicago 7 also used.) Honestly, this feels more like a made for TV movie. (I keep trying to decide if that’s partially because I watched it on TV, but I don’t think so.) I’m not sure what to make of it.
And finally, Lucille Ball. Who isn’t interested in I Love Lucy? I used to watch the show in reruns all the time as a child. And Lucille Ball had such a fascinating life and career. (“She used to be a serious actress you know,” my grandma would always tell me. “She was in movies before she did Lucy.” And I would say, “Yes, I know. She’s in Stage Door,” but Grandma never wanted to watch that because she couldn’t stand Katharine Hepburn. Believe it or not, I also enjoyed watching Lucille Ball in Mame. I saw that as a young child before encountering the Original Broadway Cast Recording with Angela Lansbury and the movie Auntie Mame with Rosalind Russell.)
I got really into the plot of this movie (especially its high stakes at the end). My daughter said sweetly, “Well, you’ve been on TV, so it resonates more with you.”
“Yes,” I answered sarcastically. “I was on six episodes of Jeopardy!. I basically am Lucille Ball. Our lives are identical.”
The peek-behind-the-scenes aspect of this film does appeal to me, though.
The Good:
I do like the device of the three writers of the episode narrating the week’s events for us. This suggests to the audience that the writers of the episode are also constructing the narrative of the making of the episode for us. The writer in me likes that. They show us how Lucy challenges the writing of the episode while simultaneously showing how she challenges the narrative that is being created about her behind the scenes. (They may try to shape the story, but ultimately, she gives it direction by living it. She is the story.)
I also like the casting of the writers. (There’s kind of a meta charm to it. I like the idea that Maeby from Arrested Development grows up to become Alice, like there’s a natural career progression linking Alia Shawkat and Linda Lavin.)
The parallel media scandals unfolding that week—Lucy’s potential Communism, Desi’s infidelity—I found riveting. (The idea that in one horrible moment Lucy could lose everything is extremely compelling and intense to me. The rest of my family didn’t find these crises quite as alarming as I did.) I also like the way these plotlines (as well as Lucy’s real-life pregnancy) illustrate the aptness of the film’s title, Being the Ricardos. The couples’ whole identity is caught up in the constructed identity they have made for themselves. Audiences want them to be the Ricardos. If they can’t do that (because they don’t live in a way off screen that the audience sees as in sync with their TV personas), then their entire lives fall apart.
Javier Bardem reminds me of Desi Arnaz even less than Kidman resembles Lucy, which is probably good because (like most people who just watch TV) I primarily think of Arnaz as Ricky Ricardo (who is a really funny guy). Since we’re learning the (serious) story of the real man behind the scenes, it’s probably helpful for the audience to observe who Desi actually is as a person when he’s played by an actor who doesn’t remind us of Ricky Ricardo.
Of everyone in the cast compared to their counterparts, I think Nina Arianda looks the most like Vivian Vance. (I’m not sure that matters.) (I’ve heard a lot over the years about Vivian Vance’s frustration with her character on the show. I appreciated the way this film shows some nuance in the Lucy/Vivian relationship.) I also loved Arianda’s Vance’s bickering interactions with William Frawley (a hilarious J.K. Simmons. Once again, he doesn’t look like William Frawley at all, but I’d be fine with Simmons getting a nomination for Best Supporting Actor. He’s very funny, and he gets some well-played serious moments as the story progresses.)
My daughter noted of Tony Hale, “I’ve never seen him do anything serious before. He’s a good actor!”
I appreciated the opportunity to talk to her about some of the topics the film mentions, like the Red Scare and I Love Lucy itself.
Best Scene:
One scene I really like is Lucille Ball’s one-on-one discussion with Madelyn Pugh about how comedy should work because it seems like an explanation of how Lucy works within an episode used as a metaphor for how Lucille Ball works within the greater story of this movie.
I also love the scene when Lucy calls Vivian Vance and William Frawley to the sound stage at 2:00 am. The whole point of the movie is explicitly stated in this scene.
And, of course, the group scene out in the alley (if that is the alley) just before the last big moment at the end is very gripping (not to mention the scene just after it).
Best Scene Visually:
Most effective visually is the scene in which Lucy, Desi, and the writers go over the story boards of upcoming episodes, trying to think of a way to work in the announcement of Lucy’s pregnancy. As they confer, we get to watch familiar scenes from classic episodes, which is fun. But we see, too, how valuable Ball’s and Arnaz’s contributions are to creating the show. Also (and here’s the reason I really like the scene), we see the events in Lucy Ricardo’s life all laid out, carefully charted before her on a bulletin board. But these meticulously arranged events can all be changed based on what happens in Lucy’s real life. If they work the baby into the show, the cards on the bulletin board must be rearranged. If Lucy’s career falls apart because the public believes she’s a Communist and turns on her, all the cards will be torn down.
Best Action Sequence:
I like the series of scenes in which Lucy and Desi meet, culminating in the call to her fiancé. Her way of getting his attention seems needlessly elaborate, but then their conversations grow increasingly sincere so quickly. It makes me wish I had known Lucille Ball.
The Negatives:
I don’t know if you’ve noticed this. (Maybe other people have mentioned it once or twice. I’m not sure.) Nicole Kidman looks absolutely nothing like Lucille Ball. I find it a bit baffling that Aaron Sorkin apparently didn’t want her to look like Lucille Ball. (I kept wondering, “Is this just something they’re saying now because that’s the way the movie turned out?”)
I’ve heard Kidman herself say many times that she wanted more make-up and prosthetics, but that Sorkin wouldn’t go for it. He wanted heart-felt performances, not imitations. That’s fine. Usually I prefer things that way, too (although usually the subject of a movie is not as famously recognizable as Lucille Ball). But it’s a weird departure from his last film where all of the actors did very much seem to be trying to resemble the real historical subjects as closely as possible.
Kidman doesn’t look like Lucille Ball. She doesn’t look like her at all. To me, she does sound like her. (It may not be a perfect imitation, but I think it’s pretty good. My dad, however, did not think her voice was right either.) This is kind of a big deal. I suppose it would be kind of cool (from a trivia point of view) if Kidman won her first Oscar for wearing a prosthetic nose to look like Virginia Woolf and her second Oscar for not attempting to resemble the famous woman she was portraying. (Actually it’s not that cool, as I write it out. It sounds ridiculous. “I won an Oscar for wearing a prosthetic nose, then won an Oscar for not wearing a prosthetic nose.”) (When I read this to my husband, he joked, “Next I won an Oscar for being a prosthetic nose.” With an appreciative smile, I joked, “No, her next Oscar would be for portraying a make-up artist who specialized in prosthetics.”) (I don’t think the issue is her nose in this case, though, rendering all these dumb jokes pretty pointless.)
I think it’s disingenuous to pretend that Kidman’s lack of resemblance to Ball isn’t distracting. Will it hurt her Oscar chances? I mean, it probably should. Best Actress is unusually competitive this year. There are a million people giving strong performances vying for Best Actress nominations. It’s like Actor and Actress have switched places. In fairness, something like this should probably make a difference.
In her first scene, Kidman sounds passably like Lucille Ball, but when we finally see her face, she looks exactly like Nicole Kidman. (I don’t see how this can’t matter. Typically, when people are trying to win Oscars, everyone raves, “Look at this transformation! They look identical!” I’m not entirely sure why that is such a big deal, but it must be or people wouldn’t consistently build successful Oscar campaigns around physical transformations.) I will say that as the movie goes on, Kidman does seem increasingly like Lucy because we empathize with her, and she’s the Lucy we become invested in in the moment.
I also think she looks (if not more like Lucille Ball, less not) like Lucille Ball in the scenes when she is first meeting and falling in love with Desi.
In a fair world, Kidman’s inability to look like Ball probably should matter. But the Oscars are never fair. And forget the Oscars for a minute. The more important question is, does the movie work as is? Do Kidman’s looks keep her performance from being effective for the audience, or is Being the Ricardos a movie that captivates its audience, regardless of the lead actress’s ability to conjure up Ball’s physical features? Unless you’re a die-hard Lucy fan who can’t reconcile seeing someone who doesn’t look like Ball portray her, (or you’re a die-hard fan of Debra Messing) (or you are Debra Messing), then I think Kidman’s looks do not prevent her from conveying the character’s essence. Her performance is captivating, and, despite the fact that she looks absolutely nothing like Lucille Ball, Kidman’s work is worthy of an Oscar nomination. (Her face may not make the audience think of Lucille Ball, but it does make us think of high-profile celebrity marriages in crisis.)
Two other things bother me. 1) There’s a lot in the film that I’m just accepting as I see. I don’t know enough about the life of Lucille Ball or the production history of I Love Lucy to know If I should be believing everything I see or not. 2) This movie had me on the edge of my seat (especially at the end! Everything was on the line! I was so worried and invested, even though clearly the show did go on). But I seemed to be the only one in my family who felt that way to that degree. Nobody else seemed as invested and concerned. They seemed to enjoy my concern, but they didn’t feel as concerned themselves.
Overall:
I liked Being the Ricardos. I found the story moving and increasingly gripping, and the performances all quite good, especially Kidman’s. Re-watching the film just now, I discovered that some episodes of I Love Lucy are available on Prime video. I’ll have to show them to my daughter (after we finish re-watching all of The Golden Girls which could take a while).