Video analysis: Miscast Mame — Angela Lansbury vs. Lucille Ball

Loved it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tISsu3bsGnw

It also has some rare clips of Dame Angela's stage performance.

Theadjack (?), but why was the 1983 revival a flop?

---

Ah, interesting, thanks. I knew it couldn't've been down to Angela's performance.

---

Updated On: 8/28/14 at 09:31 PM

Yes, the Forbidden Broadway spoof was one of their best.

If the show ran past Labor Day

No more revivals!

---

I know the title is "Miscast Mame". And Lansbury is brilliant on stage. But I hate to see Lucy raked over the coals and not respond.

Lucy's performance in some episodes of I Love Lucy was as brilliant television comedy as has ever been done. I'm thinking specifically of Vitametavegamin. If you watch the clip she sets it up beautifully, and attacks it with perfect, sublime comedy timing. No one on earth could have done it better.

That said, post I Love Lucy something seemed to happen to her. And I would agree that casting her in Mame was a terrible mistake.
Lucy

Part of the hasty decision to bring the tour in was so that when the tour resumed they could position it as "Straight From Broadway!" But that production was just fine. And had Lucy done the picture right after the original production, she would have been wonderful. Unfortunately by the time she did it, her due date in the role had long expired.

I'm a little puzzled by all the references to "by the time they made the movie" and "had Lucy done the picture right after the original production, she would have been wonderful. Unfortunately by the time she did it, her due date in the role had long expired."

The Broadway show closed in 1970 and the movie went into production in 1972. It's not like it was years and years later.

"Lucy's performance in some episodes of I Love Lucy was as brilliant television comedy as has ever been done. I'm thinking specifically of Vitametavegamin. If you watch the clip she sets it up beautifully, and attacks it with perfect, sublime comedy timing. No one on earth could have done it better. "

Lovebwy, he's not trashing Lucy as a talent. He's saying a great performance isn't about resting on one's laurels and he's also saying not everyone is right for every role.

"Performances aren't about who you are, they are about what you do." Well, acting is really about both and one other thing (not just who you are and what you do but what you want). The "who you are" first has to do with whether a role might potentially be right for you. Then it is about building the character you are in the role. Knowing who you are as that character informs "what you want." The "what you want" informs "what you do."

If you are well cast and you know who you are in the character and you know what you want and you make rich, specific choices, then you are ready to make the performance come alive with "what you do." (With a little magic and inspiration.... let's not leave out the mysteries in the process.) But it doesn't happen in a vacuum.

I thought this guy's analysis was thoughtful, and I'm especially glad he pointed out that hindsight is 20/20 and that even with Lansbury, the movie might not have worked and/or made money.

Updated On: 8/29/14 at 10:24 AM

I don't think early sixties is necessarily too old for MAME. After all, Patrick's father could have been an older man with a younger wife who made him a father in his forties or fifties. Mame might have been his older sister and was the type of woman who'd be vibrant at any age. The problem was that Lucy didn't have the voice for the songs and that her recent broken leg limited her abilities in the dance numbers. The oddly soft focus didn't make Lucy look younger, just like she existed in a different universe than all the other characters. I wonder whether the unsuccessful movie tarnished the reputation of the show and was partly responsible for the failure of the revival.

I think the comparison video makes some good points about the acting, especially in "If He Walked into My Life;" but his comments about Lansbury's movement in "It's Today" should give some credit to Onna White's choreography. It was recreated by Diana Baffa-Brill in the revival. Of course, Lansbury was capable of doing it with the necessary style, energy, and musicality.

Andrews just doesn't strike me as a Mame, and I'm not quite convinced with Lucy as Vera.

Shirley MacLaine as Mame and Lauren Bacall as Vera might have worked and had the name power they were looking for. Or, better yet, MacLaine as Mame and Anne Bancroft or Maggie Smith as Vera!

Updated On: 8/29/14 at 12:32 PM

Mame needs to be both classy and kooky. MacLaine can do both in her sleep. Classy: Terms of Endearment, Madame Sousatska, Mrs. Winterbourne, Coco Chanel, Steel Magnolias, Guarding Tess, In Her Shoes, Being There, The Turning Point

Updated On: 8/29/14 at 12:58 PM

That would have been great, but the big issue was that movie audiences would have said "Angela who and Bea who? Now if it were after Murder She Wrote and Golden Girls, it would have been box office magic!

Interesting comments, but to compare stage acting and film acting, as this guy does, with gestures is silly. If Lucy has been flapping her arms around in a film, it would have been too broad.

Lucy's biggest problem with the film isn't her poor singing (let's be real -- Angela isn't the best singer). It's that the whole film was directed SO BADLY, including her performance.

---