Neil Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 I got mine and watched the interviews and "Happy Anniversary" (but not yet Catherine Curtis) SPOILER OPINION follows..... The Peter Marshall and Nanette Fabray interviews are a bit snarky, especially Peter who was LUCKY even to have been asked. Who else was offering him acting jobs? I don't think he gives much of a performance, but I didn't like him "the Lucy Show" either. Nanette is more positive, but implies at one point that Lucy wanted N's two scenes re-shot, because she was too good? That's the implication, though she doesn't say. I think Nanette's a bit over the top, but except for the end scene the whole thing is directed that way. The concept is fine: a middle aged couple suddenly finding themselves alone with each other, splitting, making some changes and reconciling. As the cast looks great on paper, with the exception of dopey Marshall. But the script and execution: Oy veh! The opening sequence with Lucy and Art as battling spouses is unpleasant and worse than that, just not funny. The script is just a series of insults on the level of the 'before' segment of the "Cousin Ernie's Fun Farm" commercial. It's a complete waste of Lucy and Art's talents, lots of yelling and eye-rolling. At the very least, the show is historic for its use of Arnold Schwnagger which I think was his first role. If you had told me in 1974, ONE of these people would eventually be governor of California, I'd have picked Sid Gould before Arnold! And Arnold does the WORST Italian accent! I recognize the name Arthur Julian as a writer of many TV sitcoms, but he never wrote for Lucy. The writers offer nothing new here and give Lucy and Art very little to work with. The whole presentation is a little too smarmy for my taste--seems like a "Love American Style" episode, a show whose appeal I never understood. But this is the FIRST "Lucille Ball Special" and the script should have been something special. Because the characters are so broad and unappealing, the poignancy of their eventual reconciliation doesn't ring true, even though it's the best played scene and shows Lucy and Art as the charming actors they are. Two "Mame" alums: Don Porter and Doria Cook, who I did not recognize. "Mame" had been released 8 months earlier. I remember being disappointed in this in 1974, but I was also disappointed in "Lucy Gets Lucky" done the same season. 'HA and GB' has not aged well, however "LGL" has. I now think it's the best thing Lucy did in the 70s! I think the people who don't like it can't get past the weirdness of no laugh track (my initial problem with it), because for the first time in many many years Lucy is giving us classic LUCY! You have to give Lucy credit for trying to expand past her Lucy character, but HA&GB is so ham-handedly handled, it's hard to enjoy. A strong director with an appreciation for the material might have helped, but this script should have been thrown out! On to "Catherine Curtis" which I remember being pretty good, as these specials went anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 I got mine and watched the interviews and "Happy Anniversary" (but not yet Catherine Curtis) SPOILER OPINION follows..... The Peter Marshall and Nanette Fabray interviews are a bit snarky, especially Peter who was LUCKY even to have been asked. Who else was offering him acting jobs? I don't think he gives much of a performance, but I didn't like him "the Lucy Show" either. Nanette is more positive, but implies at one point that Lucy wanted N's two scenes re-shot, because she was too good? That's the implication, though she doesn't say. I think Nanette's a bit over the top, but except for the end scene the whole thing is directed that way. The concept is fine: a middle aged couple suddenly finding themselves alone with each other, splitting, making some changes and reconciling. As the cast looks great on paper, with the exception of dopey Marshall. But the script and execution: Oy veh! The opening sequence with Lucy and Art as battling spouses is unpleasant and worse than that, just not funny. The script is just a series of insults on the level of the 'before' segment of the "Cousin Ernie's Fun Farm" commercial. It's a complete waste of Lucy and Art's talents, lots of yelling and eye-rolling. At the very least, the show is historic for its use of Arnold Schwnagger which I think was his first role. If you had told me in 1974, ONE of these people would eventually be governor of California, I'd have picked Sid Gould before Arnold! And Arnold does the WORST Italian accent! I recognize the name Arthur Julian as a writer of many TV sitcoms, but he never wrote for Lucy. The writers offer nothing new here and give Lucy and Art very little to work with. The whole presentation is a little too smarmy for my taste--seems like a "Love American Style" episode, a show whose appeal I never understood. But this is the FIRST "Lucille Ball Special" and the script should have been something special. Because the characters are so broad and unappealing, the poignancy of their eventual reconciliation doesn't ring true, even though it's the best played scene and shows Lucy and Art as the charming actors they are. Two "Mame" alums: Don Porter and Doria Cook, who I did not recognize. "Mame" had been released 8 months earlier. I remember being disappointed in this in 1974, but I was also disappointed in "Lucy Gets Lucky" done the same season. 'HA and GB' has not aged well, however "LGL" has. I now think it's the best thing Lucy did in the 70s! I think the people who don't like it can't get past the weirdness of no laugh track (my initial problem with it), because for the first time in many many years Lucy is giving us classic LUCY! You have to give Lucy credit for trying to expand past her Lucy character, but HA&GB is so ham-handedly handled, it's hard to enjoy. A strong director with an appreciation for the material might have helped, but this script should have been thrown out! On to "Catherine Curtis" which I remember being pretty good, as these specials went anyway. Wow, that was some review Neil, love your insights and comments, they are usually right on the money, you just have to post more, i live for posts like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryCarter Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 I'm looking forward to your review of "What Now, Catherine Curtis?", Neil! Regarding "Happy Anniversary and Goodbye," I think this is one of the extremely rare times I don't agree with you. I really love the special. It's so unlike anything else Lucy did and I think she's terrific in it. I do agree, however, that Nanette is too over the top for a lot of it and that Peter is nothing special. Their bonus interviews too seem like they've been heavily edited to make it seem like they are saying something at least slightly positive. I knew exactly what Peter was going to say. I was hoping he would be a little more positive in this interview, but he wasn't at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucyfan101 Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 I'm looking forward to your review of "What Now, Catherine Curtis?", Neil! Me, too. Hurry back with your review, Neil! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted December 20, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 I just can't be objective about "Catherine Curtis", because I'm so full of admiration for what Lucy was trying to do. So much so that I can't really tell if "CC" works as a vehicle by on its own. One certainly can't call the material riveting. It's not bad; just not deep and insightful enough that it doesn't put a tremendous burden on its star to bring much more to the character than what is provided in the script. (I wonder if this was written with someone else in mind, shopped around and LBP stumbled on to the property). Lucy, more often than not, rises to the occasion. I've never been really wild about one-person monologues (so tricky to write and perform) , but Lucy carries hers off like a pro. You find yourself praising her acting rather than losing yourself in what's being said. Seeing these specials in retrospect exemplifies the dilemma facing her in the 70s. Unlike all of her contemporaries from film (except Hepburn) and television-series alums, Lucy was still a tremendous draw and in demand. But what to do? The easy route would have been hour-long Here's Lucy Comedy Hour specials, like the under-appreciated "Lucy Gets Lucky", but Lucy stuck her neck out presenting character studies playing against type. She ALMOST succeeds here in "CC". I say almost because the gruff-ness of her voice puts a SLIGHT limit on the versatility she's capable of (see "Critics Choice"!). As always she shines the most though when she's allowed to insert a little physical comedy. "CC" doesn't give her much opportunity but she makes the most of it. I would like to have seen her get an Emmy nom for this (and "Stone Pillow") AND she looks great, which plays into my enjoyment of her later work more than is fair.(see 'Phones President'!) I think all of these specials did well in the ratings so it's surprising there are so few of them. Am I right that there were 2 per season for two years and then nothing the third except for "CBS Salutes", followed the next year by "Phones President"? Am I mixing the two up or does Carney do an "Old MacDonald"-"here a (something) there a (something), everywhere a (something)" in both of these specials?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodMcK1 Posted December 23, 2010 Report Share Posted December 23, 2010 I love the first third of Catherine Curtis. Lucy gives us something different here and looks good with the dark-haired wig. But the video quality of this and HA & G is a bit disappointing. The recently released DVDs of "The Lucy Show" and "Here's Lucy" look SO much better and many of those shows are 10+ years older than these specials. Did MPI cheap out here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Posted December 25, 2010 Report Share Posted December 25, 2010 I love the first third of Catherine Curtis. Lucy gives us something different here and looks good with the dark-haired wig. But the video quality of this and HA & G is a bit disappointing. The recently released DVDs of "The Lucy Show" and "Here's Lucy" look SO much better and many of those shows are 10+ years older than these specials. Did MPI cheap out here? I noticed the same thing. They must've run out of money to restore these shows or something lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 26, 2010 Report Share Posted December 26, 2010 I noticed the same thing. They must've run out of money to restore these shows or something lol. Or maybe the quality just wasn't there in the beginning, specials were never going to be rerun and nobody knew they'd be rereleased decades later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annaleigh Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 Out of all the specials released so far I think this is the best release. I had my laughing points in HA&G and CC gave us a different Lucy that at that time people havent seen in awhile. Why does it seem most of these specials (Three for Two, Happy Anniversay & Goodbye, and Catherine Curtis) are centered around failing marriages? Just wondering, because you know she always thought of her and Desi's divorce as the biggest failure in her life but yet the subject is brought up in these specials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 28, 2010 Report Share Posted December 28, 2010 [quote name=DroopyDrawers ' timestamp='1293472146' post='4928] Out of all the specials released so far I think this is the best release. I had my laughing points in HA&G and CC gave us a different Lucy that at that time people havent seen in awhile. Why does it seem most of these specials (Three for Two, Happy Anniversay & Goodbye, and Catherine Curtis) are centered around failing marriages? Just wondering, because you know she always thought of her and Desi's divorce as the biggest failure in her life but yet the subject is brought up in these specials. I think it was just coincidence, besides she had done every subject there was by then. I had never even thought of the fact until you brought it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 I'm surprising myself here saying that I'm pretty much in line with Neil's comments about these two endeavors. While I'd remembered "Anniversary" much more fondly than "Catherine", boy was I wrong and time certainly has not been good to this effort. Which is not to say it didn't have it's moments: Carney was just fine and Lucy after her "metamorphasis" looked stunning but I dunno, I can't quite put my finger on it but it felt like a middle chunk or something of the script was missing -- I can't help wonder if it was originally written as an hour and a half show and got whittled down to an hour and some of the "meat" was cut out in the process. Much more impressive was "Catherine", especially the first section which was basically an extended monologue. While I normally prefer LB in front of an audience, I'm glad they didn't use one for this, it would not have been the same. She was simply marvelous, powerful and moving and it just makes me sorry we didn't see more of her in this vein in this stage of her career. I personally don't feel she had anything to "prove" at this point and I would have loved to have seen her in more tour de forces such as this one. Bravo! As for the extras, my favorite was the two-part radio interview with Mary Tyler Moore: I had no idea they had such admiration for one another! This was quite eye-opening and very entertaining. Once again, makes me hope and wish that this entire series of interview shows is eventually released on DVD for posterity. They really need to be heard again and well, for many of us, for the very first time. THe interviews while interesting, also confirm what Neil had to say about them; while Fabray makes LB come off better, I didn't think much of Marshall to begin with (he's certainly no Olivier or Burton!), he confirms my dislike of him after his disparaging remarks about Big Red. Well hey Peter, you were lucky to be cast in the first place!! If you didn't like working for her, you shouldn't have taken the part! Still, as another piece of the "post-Lucy (series)" pie, this one is 3 out of 4 stars, mainly for "Catherine", performance-wise; less so for "Anniversary", more for the chance to see it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikidiki Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 Gr8 review Joey. Never seen either and can't wait to get my DVD...........when it comes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryCarter Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 I'm surprising myself here saying that I'm pretty much in line with Neil's comments about these two endeavors. While I'd remembered "Anniversary" much more fondly than "Catherine", boy was I wrong and time certainly has not been good to this effort. Which is not to say it didn't have it's moments: Carney was just fine and Lucy after her "metamorphasis" looked stunning but I dunno, I can't quite put my finger on it but it felt like a middle chunk or something of the script was missing -- I can't help wonder if it was originally written as an hour and a half show and got whittled down to an hour and some of the "meat" was cut out in the process. Although it was written as an hour long show, when filming was done it ended up being over an hour and a half long. I believe Lucy and Gary asked CBS to let them make it a 90 minute show, but the network didn't go for it. A lot had to be cut to fit the timeslot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 Although it was written as an hour long show, when filming was done it ended up being over an hour and a half long. I believe Lucy and Gary asked CBS to let them make it a 90 minute show, but the network didn't go for it. A lot had to be cut to fit the timeslot. Well.....it shows! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 Although it was written as an hour long show, when filming was done it ended up being over an hour and a half long. I believe Lucy and Gary asked CBS to let them make it a 90 minute show, but the network didn't go for it. A lot had to be cut to fit the timeslot. So, why the hell didn't they release the 90 minute version on dvd then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 I'm surprising myself here saying that I'm pretty much in line with Neil's comments about these two endeavors. While I'd remembered "Anniversary" much more fondly than "Catherine", boy was I wrong and time certainly has not been good to this effort. Which is not to say it didn't have it's moments: Carney was just fine and Lucy after her "metamorphasis" looked stunning but I dunno, I can't quite put my finger on it but it felt like a middle chunk or something of the script was missing -- I can't help wonder if it was originally written as an hour and a half show and got whittled down to an hour and some of the "meat" was cut out in the process. Much more impressive was "Catherine", especially the first section which was basically an extended monologue. While I normally prefer LB in front of an audience, I'm glad they didn't use one for this, it would not have been the same. She was simply marvelous, powerful and moving and it just makes me sorry we didn't see more of her in this vein in this stage of her career. I personally don't feel she had anything to "prove" at this point and I would have loved to have seen her in more tour de forces such as this one. Bravo! As for the extras, my favorite was the two-part radio interview with Mary Tyler Moore: I had no idea they had such admiration for one another! This was quite eye-opening and very entertaining. Once again, makes me hope and wish that this entire series of interview shows is eventually released on DVD for posterity. They really need to be heard again and well, for many of us, for the very first time. THe interviews while interesting, also confirm what Neil had to say about them; while Fabray makes LB come off better, I didn't think much of Marshall to begin with (he's certainly no Olivier or Burton!), he confirms my dislike of him after his disparaging remarks about Big Red. Well hey Peter, you were lucky to be cast in the first place!! If you didn't like working for her, you shouldn't have taken the part! Still, as another piece of the "post-Lucy (series)" pie, this one is 3 out of 4 stars, mainly for "Catherine", performance-wise; less so for "Anniversary", more for the chance to see it again. Listen, if peter marshall had hated working with her on The Lucy show in another small part, why did he work with her again on this? He said in his book that he wanted to work with Carney and Fabray, so he took the part. His experience on The Lucy Show was that he was just starting out and throwing up backstage every five minutes, let's face it, he was not that great and hosting a game show was more suited to him, all the other performers on Hollywood Squares were funny and talented, he just had to keep them all in line by hosting. Now we KNOW why Lucy never appeared on Squares, a HIT show that was part of the National conciousness. Well, at least the star of the show Paul Lynde often referred to Lucy and many questions also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 I'm surprising myself here saying that I'm pretty much in line with Neil's comments about these two endeavors. While I'd remembered "Anniversary" much more fondly than "Catherine", boy was I wrong and time certainly has not been good to this effort. Which is not to say it didn't have it's moments: Carney was just fine and Lucy after her "metamorphasis" looked stunning but I dunno, I can't quite put my finger on it but it felt like a middle chunk or something of the script was missing -- I can't help wonder if it was originally written as an hour and a half show and got whittled down to an hour and some of the "meat" was cut out in the process. Much more impressive was "Catherine", especially the first section which was basically an extended monologue. While I normally prefer LB in front of an audience, I'm glad they didn't use one for this, it would not have been the same. She was simply marvelous, powerful and moving and it just makes me sorry we didn't see more of her in this vein in this stage of her career. I personally don't feel she had anything to "prove" at this point and I would have loved to have seen her in more tour de forces such as this one. Bravo! As for the extras, my favorite was the two-part radio interview with Mary Tyler Moore: I had no idea they had such admiration for one another! This was quite eye-opening and very entertaining. Once again, makes me hope and wish that this entire series of interview shows is eventually released on DVD for posterity. They really need to be heard again and well, for many of us, for the very first time. THe interviews while interesting, also confirm what Neil had to say about them; while Fabray makes LB come off better, I didn't think much of Marshall to begin with (he's certainly no Olivier or Burton!), he confirms my dislike of him after his disparaging remarks about Big Red. Well hey Peter, you were lucky to be cast in the first place!! If you didn't like working for her, you shouldn't have taken the part! Still, as another piece of the "post-Lucy (series)" pie, this one is 3 out of 4 stars, mainly for "Catherine", performance-wise; less so for "Anniversary", more for the chance to see it again. Great review Joe, i agree as i have copies of both specials already and yes, time changes our tastes and even our opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 So, why the hell didn't they release the 90 minute version on dvd then? Great question. Although we see a little outtakes in the bonus section, perhaps the majority of the cut footage didn't survive. Pity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Great question. Although we see a little outtakes in the bonus section, perhaps the majority of the cut footage didn't survive. Pity. Yeah, gary probably asked for the discarded film to shoot some home movies over it, cheap bastard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Yeah, gary probably asked for the discarded film to shoot some home movies over it, cheap bastard! :marionstrong: I love how you always manage to get a jab in at the "also ran" hubby #2!!! (Believe me, I was no fan of his either!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 :marionstrong: I love how you always manage to get a jab in at the "also ran" hubby #2!!! (Believe me, I was no fan of his either!) Did you ever read the book from the Lucy insider and the man who actually worked for them, HOWARD RAYFIEL? "Where the hell is Desilu" is filled with great stories and substantiates what we've always heard about that cheap talentless and classless bastard and what he did to her career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Did you ever read the book from the Lucy insider and the man who actually worked for them, HOWARD RAYFIEL? "Where the hell is Desilu" is filled with great stories and substantiates what we've always heard about that cheap talentless and classless bastard and what he did to her career. Nooooo, not to date but maybe someday but then I've heard plenty of first hand accounts of folks "in the know" to get the gist. Or as Fred once said, "I got wind of it!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Nooooo, not to date but maybe someday but then I've heard plenty of first hand accounts of folks "in the know" to get the gist. Or as Fred once said, "I got wind of it!" There were so many instances of him ripping off people with kickbacks and so on AND my favorite story though was when he offered the Streisand trailer to Lizzie Taylor and have it shipped to her home not realizing how much that would have cost to ship this gigantic trailer that needed cranes to lift it and Lizzie lived in Switzerland, so Lucy had to fix everything with ONE phone call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikidiki Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Sadly I still haven't received my copy. I'll be filing a dispute this Friday if I haven't gotten it yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikidiki Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 YES! Finally got it, even though case was cracked, at least the DVD is in tip top shape! Can't wait to watch it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.