Jump to content

Nicole Kidman as Lucille Ball in “Being the Ricardos”


Faulkner

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Yeah. Still not sure about this either. I know Kidman can 'transform' herself but all I can think of is Bewitched and how bad that was when I hear she's playing Lucille Ball. LOL. I'm trying to keep an open mind as, of course, this movie is very different than that hot garbage.

 

I feel like for movies like this they go for a 'star' instead of finding the right actor to embody the person. But who knows, she may surprise us? I like the tone of the promo but I'm just not sure. I think it was more 'highlight the trademark red hair' more than hiding Nicole's face but it could be both. I mean, it's Nicole Kidman playing Lucille Ball. Hence why they probably could have gone for someone else.

Edited by KMan101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Exactly. I'm not saying get Messing (as Faulkner said below, NK gets them attention), but get someone who more embodies the role. But I guess they're going for a different kind of movie so I'm willing to give them some leeway on the iffy casting of literally everyone. We'll see.

 

 

Yes to Cate Blanchett. She was attached at first but then replaced by Kidman. Seriously.

 

https://www.indiewire.com/2021/01/nicole-kidman-replacing-cate-blanchett-sorkin-being-the-ricardos-1234608713/

 

I forgot Lucie Arnaz was involved. I like she takes care/control of her parents image but I do question this one.

 

There was definitely some 'flack' online about Kidman taking on the role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This was the chance to cast two under-the-radar actors who could truly transform themselves and melt into their roles in the way that Halle Berry (Introducing Dorothy Dandridge), Judy Davis (Judy Garland), Adrien Brody (The Pianist), Jonathan Rhys Myers (Elvis Presley) did with the real life people they portrayed but instead, they chose to go with two stars who will have viewers trying hard to forget that it's Nicole Kidman and Javier Bardem playing Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz.

I'm not sure I would have cared for Debra Messing either (been there, done that).

I get it, people think big stars and Oscar winners are a slam dunk but why not have an open call or again, actors who are still under the radar, who won't make viewers strain during the entire movie to forget who they are IRL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Exactly! And if lesser-known actors never got a chance then they would never become big stars or Oscar winners....

I'm sure there are other examples, but the one that comes directly to mind is the casting of Vivien Leigh as Scarlett O'Hara in "Gone With the Wind". She was definitely not a big name in 1938, but she got the role anyway, even though practically all the big names in Hollywood wanted the role, and we all know the result.... 

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Nicole Kidman face-on was nowhere in that trailer! Did we even spy her face for longer than 2 secs? We saw her back, her hair, her hand... very, very odd promo. And not a good sign.

She does try to get Lucille Ball's vocal cadence, but it's not as raspy as Ball's voice was, and I can still hear a touch of Nicole's Australian.

And it's not just NK. Javier Bardem in this trailer is basically Bardem in spectacles. 

Edited by Cat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Even her cadence is off to me, so I didn't even need to see her face. I have seen some 'stills' from the film and wasn't liking what I saw there either. I did see a bit of Bardem and am skeptical of him as well. The story is not just about Lucille Ball, it's about both Ball and Desi Arnaz.

Hollywood today is not really about giving chances to anyone, let alone new actors. Making money supersedes everything, Hollywood wants the "sure thing". In the old studio system in the days of Louis B. Mayer, etc. under the old Hollywood boss hierarchy, actors were contracted to a studio, where they'd keep a so-called stable of talent in reserve for projects, including "fresh faces". That wasn't a very good system either because it wasn't very humane. Some actors would be fortunate enough to get meaningful work and breakout success, while others would practically languish waiting for their opportunity to be in a starring or even good supporting role. In the meantime, the studio practically "owned" them, which means they were tethered to that studio and had to refuse work if it emerged from elsewhere, unless an even more powerful studio boss could extract them out of their contract. Even Leigh herself would go on to have problems with depression and many have speculated much of that depression (the part that didn't have to do with personal and romantic difficulties) had to do with feeling the constraints of that studio system.

But I digress (a lot, sorry).

If nothing else, I wish the casting call would have been more "open". It's obvious to me that Kidman and Bardem had their names practically tattooed on the title roles. 

What a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • That was the original point of me sending you her 6 airdates, so now with those, and the link to the daily episode guide I've provided, that should help you more easily find the additional Ruth Buzzi scenes. I will always repeat myself when it comes to defending my data that I've taken decades to research and compile. But, as you pointed out in a recent post, I am kind, so at least I will do it with you in a kind way as opposed to the usual social media way most people do with just getting rude/nasty. That's not my style, as you correctly pointed out earlier this week, and never will be.  So, all is well! 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Ambyr Michelle continues to be *that girl.* She’s just a star, period. Elevates every scene she’s in on the sheer strength of her emotional realism and charisma. Can sell any dialogue. I wish the show veered away from the B&B-style scripting. TMG/Leslie’s tirade stood out, I suppose, but she’s getting a bit mustache-twirly. And I wish DD had more to do in that episode than stand and sob.
    • Well, that was down to CBS being weak and not being willing to just pulling the plug entirely. They didn't want to commit to cancelling the show in case they needed it for their schedule basically; plus they kept showing that they were willing to make cuts if needed to be. 
    • I'm sorry but clearly what I've said is not satisfactory to you. I have now read what you have to say, twice. As it happens, my interest at this point is looking at other mislabeled files to find this other Ruth Buzzi content. I do not see any point to each of us repeating ourselves, so I will leave it here. 
    • It seemed to be your intent. coming into a thread I started and making multiple posts saying my data was wrong. In the next paragraph you say "Of course, I was suspicious from the very first instance where what I saw & heard did not agree with what it should have.  I'm very glad to know why." That certainly didn't stop you from immediately saying the data was wrong, until I provided additional receipts. Why did you not check the daily episode guide (for instance, this one for the 1980's) I posted for the world to see for exactly this reason...to help confirm airdates: http://daytimeroyaltyonline.com/days-daily-summaries-1980-1989-t15361.html? That is what you should be checking BEFORE you make any posts in the future like this, trying to suggest something from my data is incorrect. You could have also messaged me and asked me why your dates weren't adding up with what the correct data is. I would have fast forwarded through that video you posted, spotted Roman and Hope and immediately have told you that was the 11/1/83 episode.
    • Jason, just let me say that it was not my intent to any way impugn any of your data  or research. I'm very sorry if it came out that way. Obviously the person I got these 4 November episodes from has mislabeled files, multiples, which I was certainly unaware of.  When I am editing it is all about what I see & hear. Later, I find time for greater reflection.  Of course, I was suspicious from the very first instance where what I saw & heard did not agree with what it should have.  I'm very glad to know why.  If you find you are no longer interested in the edit, that is fine. I have no ego in this. I did it only to share it.
    • I feel like Vernon and Anita need to not be hypocrites and try and take the heat off Bill in this case. It's clear that the family used him as a fixer and especially knowing he helped with Martin's situation, they need to either be quiet or support him. BTW...with Vanessa being in the hospital for food poisoning, am I the only one who thought Shanice was gonna say she's pregnant or had an STD? The only reason I say STD is because she hasn't had any memorable sex partners, but I definitely don't believe she just had food poisoning.
    • Yeah, I mean I know that the name still pertains. I just laugh at it not now being called Arizona Dust, but, I admit it simply does not have the same ring to it. Above, that is interesting that Arizona had already come up before the crisis. 
    • Anita vs. Leslie, bring it!
    • Leslie and her family are from Chicago? Anita's background also includes being a former Chi-Town native? Might they connect this and go somewhere with it?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy