There is a saying in Hollywood that basically goes: "I am an actor but what I really want to do is direct". You could argue that a lot of actors find great success working as director, but I think it can become more problematic with writers who choose to direct.
Someone like Aaron Sorkin made a big name for himself writing A Few Good Men, The American President, The West Wing, and The Social Network. His work is known for being fast-paced and quippy with a political slant and a dream for an actor to sink their teeth into.
With great success comes great power in most cases so a few years ago, Sorkin was given the chance to direct his first film that was based around one of his own scripts: Molly's Game.
The results were respectful but nothing revelatory.
Last year, we got his sophomore directorial outing: The Trial of the Chicago 7 which managed to get more extensive praise and attention but, in the end, his rather pedestrian direction got snubbed for an Oscar nod. Honestly, I was thrilled for this as the final third of that film not only royally pissed me off, but the ending made me cringe with how cliche and overbearing it was.
You can tell with his latest offering, Being the Ricardos, that he is trying hard to add a little flair to his style...
Let's just get to the point, shall we...
Aaron Sorkin needs a lot of work as a director. He might get there but he just doesn't seem to have the ability maintain any kind of consistency in tone or being able to find a way to save scenes that end up dragging.
This becomes a whole other issue when you factor in that Sorkin is directing his own material. Some could argue that his script for Trial of the Chicago 7 was pure Sorkin in the worst possible ways (preachy, overbearing) but it is almost like the script to Being the Ricardos is lacking a lot of his trademark style to its disadvantage.
The film is set during a week of I Love Lucy production in which news comes out that Lucille Ball may very well be a communist.
Sorkin also bookends the film and sprinkles moments with "interviews" of older and wiser versions of the I Love Lucy writers which truly feel unnecessary and add nothing of value to the film other than it feels like a way for Sorkin to address things from the point of view of today's society.
The film also tries to focus on the history of Ball and Desi Arnaz as a couple, such as how they met and what led them to getting I Love Lucy on the air. They also briefly address Arnaz's penchant for meeting up with call girls behind Lucy's back.
Therein lies another problem with this film. Sorkin doesn't seem to know what he even wants to focus on or find a way to make any of them overly compelling. I would say that the moments between Ball and Arnaz in their early years together may make for the film's best moments, but they often feel out of place when you think the film is supposed to be about the Communist accusations.
Besides, in the end, the Communist accusations all get cleared with the help of our good friend J. Edgar Hoover......
Wait...so...J. Edgar Hoover is now a hero?
No...just stop...
Don't even try to give that man any credit. Go back and watch Judas & The Black Messiah and you will see the true horrors of that man.
As an acting ensemble, we get truly solid performances all around from the likes of Nina Arianda as Vivian Vance, J.K. Simmons as William Frawley, Alia Shawkat as Madelyn Pugh, and Tony Hale as Jess Oppenheimer.
Javier Bardem does well with Desi Arnaz but I feel like his accent work does falter at times. In the end, he was charming enough and it is hard for an actor of Bardem's caliber to give a bad performance.
It all comes down to Nicole Kidman.
Kidman got a lot of flak when she got cast in this role once Cate Blanchett dropped out (presumably over issues with Sorkin...good on her...). There is no denying Kidman is a fantastic actress and I would say that for the most part, she actually does well as Ball.
I wouldn't say she captures Lucille Ball in any kind of revelatory way, but she does manage to find moments where she captures the tone of Ball's voice and also that of the Lucy Ricardo cadence. I can see why some would find her miscast in the role, but I will commend her for what she was able to accomplish. It was a departure for Kidman and far from her worst work. She may very well get an Oscar nod and I wouldn't oppose it even if she may not make my personal lineup.
In the end, it was a mostly enjoyable film that suffered from an inconsistent and messy tone.
RATING: 3/5
No comments:
Post a Comment