Rosalind's Mame will always be my favorite. Her poise and comedic background made her the ideal Mame in my mind.

I’ve only known Rosalind Russell as Mame. She’s amazing! It’s one of mu favorite movies of all time 💖

This is such a better argument than I would make... which is really just "If you get a chance to cast Angela Lansbury... You cast Angela Goddamn Lansbury!"

I’m surprised Bedknobs and Broomsticks didn’t prove Angela could carry a musical!

Isn’t it just interesting that Angela Lansbury was deemed too “unknown” for film audiences ... the three-time Oscar-nominated actress.

April 1973, when "Mame" was being filmed, Angela Lansbury opened the Academy Awards with a spectacular musical number. You can find it on KZfaq.

Angela is hands-down TOO CUTE FOR THIS PLANET 😍🌎 what did humanity ever do to deserve her? 😚💋

Thanks for confirming my thought that the film version of "Mame" was not only an obscene waste of film, but also an insult to the viewer. My eyes and ears are still bleeding decades after watching Lucille Ball in that horrific train-wreck of a movie musical. Lucille Ball was a smoked-out, arthritic, old-hag-voice who couldn't hold an on-key note for longer than 2 seconds. Be careful, this megabomb is still radioactive! Hollywood owes Angela Lansbury an apology.

"Mame" will always be Rosiland Russell for me. No one ever performed the role better. After the Russell film version, it should have simply been left alone. No remakes. She was marvelous!

My parents saw Angela Landsbury 1966 opening week 7th row center and she blew the doors off! They never forgot it!

I saw Lucy in Mame when it opened at Radio City Music Hall in 1974, and also had the pleasure of seeing the 80’s revival with Angela Lansbury,. Both ladies brought their own style to the role of Mame and I loved them both!!

The best Mame was Rosalind Russell...and she was 51-years-old when she played the role.

Lucille is a fantastic comedienne, but Angela is a great singer, an amazing actress, and a lovely lady. I love both ladies, but Angela wins here. :)

You can't blame everything on Lucy's acting or singing. There has to be discussion of directing and editing and who adapted the script from the musical to the movie.

Lucy’s “movement lacking in elegance” was intentional; for comedic effect. She was actually a beautiful dancer. She started she career as a dancer. There are a handful of “I Love Lucy” that showcase it.

Lucille was a comedy Goddess. There’s no doubt there. But Miss Angela needs a theatre named after her on Broadway! She is a musical Goddess!🥰

I actually had no problem with Lucy's comedic actions. She is the queen of comedy, doing what she does best. She failed the role for 2 reasons, neither of which she could possibly overcome: 1) Mame Dennis would have been in her 40s for most of the story. Her brother dies shortly before the story begins, leaving her a boy of 8 to care for. That would likely put her in her early 40s at the oldest. Rosalind Russell was 51 when the 1958 film was made. Angela Lansbury was 49 in 1974. Lucille Ball was 63, old enough to play Mame's mother and Patrick's grandmother. She was not a feisty middle aged woman, but someone at the twilight of her long career ready to retire. No wealthy oil tycoon was going to beat her door down in the Depression. 2) Angela Lansbury has a beatiful voice. Her "We need a Little Christmas" is a holiday classic. She has won 5 Tonies, mostly for musicals. Meanwhile, as you mentioned, Lucy was a chainsmoker. She croaked the notes and made Bea Arthur sound like Barbara Streisand. Lansbury's Mame soundtrack still sells well; no one has ever asked for Ball's soundtrack to anything without a laughtrack.

I remember when I first saw the musical [on Broadway the first time], I thought how uninspired it was compared to the movie with Rosalind Russell. Even without the singing, the opening scene with Miss Russell - making her entrance and coming down the stairs - out musicals a musical. Lansbury is an inspired actress, with one of the most incredible careers of any actor who's ever lived. Theater, film, television - and she's now starring in a play in Los Angeles. But I still prefer watching Rosalind Russell in the part. Poor Lucy was really out of her element. An inspiring lady in business and comedy television performance, but not really an actress - and certainly not a singer.

Lucy was queen of comedy in our household in the 60s. I only saw her *_I Love Lucy_* episodes when they went into reruns along with her other sitcoms. Every episode we watched cracked me and my Mom up. Having said that it was 1974 and I was in the Navy stationed in Alexandria Virginia as a Radioman. My girlfriend lived in PA. She asked me if I wanted to go to New York to see Mame starring Lucille Ball at Radio City Music Hall with her mom and a number of other people. Of course I jumped all over that invite seeing how Lucy was my favorite comedienne, with Carol Burnett being a close second. Now this is where I was either misinformed or I completely 'misheard' what I was about to see. All the way on the bus trip from PA to NY City, to Radio City right up until the lights went down in the hall, I actually thought I was getting ready to see a live play starring Lucille Ball. I was very excited and about to see Lucy in person! Now I'm waiting for the actors to come out then all of a sudden Mame the movie comes on. 'What?!' Talk about being disappointed. Anyway looking back on it the film was pretty good to me. The audience was laughing and applauding and everyone seemed to be enjoying it. I've watched it on TV a few times and still like it. Though Mame didn't do well at the box office and wasn't a hit with the critics it does not define Lucy's career. For my money she was and always will be one of entertainments funniest comics ever (as well as the *_"All Time"_* funniest female comic). When she passed I shed a few tears.

The 41st Tony awards was the first time Bea and Angela were on the stage together since "Mame".

Truly sad that Ms. Lansbury wasnt allowed to make a classic out of this musical on screen. Same thing with Julie Andrews and "My Fair Lady"

some folks loved Lucy as Mame, but Russell did it far better

... I had the OBC recording of *MAME* on 7.5 IPS 4-Track 7" Stereo Reel-To-Reel Tape, and the sound quality was *BREATHTAKING* at the time ... and would still be considered so today. Angela Lansbury's voice was the perfect combination of exquisitely subtle character vocalizations, and gutsy, all-out, gloriously lyrical singing. Heard through full size headphones, she danced so effortlessly through my imagination that I could envision her every move, and expression onstage. From her, I learned the universal difference between Talent and Skill.

An important item you're missing in your observation regarding these two actresses and the video clips you're comparing. Lucy was doing a movie on a movie set. Angela is doing broadway in a theatre. Even the clip you show with Angela and Bea is on a theatre stage. The process to create a movie film and to create a broadway musical are completely different and require different markings, sets, set ups and most importantly different acting by the actors involved.

The thing is, Angela was in many great and good movies, "Gaslight," "The Harvey Girls," and many others, including TV guest spots.

Only Roslin Russell as mame for me .

Bosom Buddies: 10:00 I didn't think this was so bad honestly. Lucy is listening, thinking and deciding on a counter punch as the song progresses....and Lucy DID make a career and broke out into comedy via RADIO with her PHYSICAL reactions--how many people could have done that???

I think it should be added here that Lucille Ball pushed to be cast in the role even after people said she was too old for the character and did not really have a good enough singing voice.

Ever since I first saw the movie musical as a kid back in the 80s, I've always thought that Lucy was grossly miscast as Mame. Honestly, I much prefer the non-musical version performed by Rosalind Russell. However, being a fan of Angela Lansbury, I probably would've preferred the musical version had she been cast instead of Lucy. I would argue that, at least in this case, it has just as much to do with person as it does performance. Lucy's gravelly voice alone was a major tune-out for me- I kept watching in hopes that it would eventually improve, but it didn't. Angela Lansbury's voice, on the other hand, has a certain magic to it- like a warm hug that lets you know that everything will be alright. The best way I can explain it is that Lucy was doing a Dinner Theatre impersonation of Mame, whereas Rosalind/Angela WAS Mame.

Am I the only one who loves the movie with Lucille Ball in it?

The big difference between the two is one was live and one was a movie. With live shows the actors hit the stage running and keep up the momentum while movies are done in bits and starts. They often do multiple takes and a committee picks their choice for the final cut.

I love this story in every incarnation. Both Ball and Lansbury did a wonderful job, even if they were slightly different. If you wanna attack a miscasting, try tackling the awful blunder made in casting Barbra Streisand as Dolly Levi over Carol Channing!!! Dont get me wrong, nobody's a bigger fan of Streisand then me, but that movie was definitely a head scratcher in her amazing career!!!

The only thing I remember about this was how soft focus Lucille Ball appeared.

Angela. Rosalind. Lucy.... Love them all! They each bring their fabulous style and sparkle! Comparison seems fruitless!!

I saw the version of Mame with Lucy first and I thought it was good. However, when I saw Rosalind Russell in "Auntie Mame", I think she was superb, to me she was Mame. I would have liked to see Angela in Mame. They could have made it a made for tv movie in the early 80s which were really popular. All three women did a good job as Mame, though in my humble opinion, Rosalind is my favorite.

I don't see a problem with Lucy's reactions in Bosom Buddies. Angela and Bea were not performing the show, just one song. I doubt they considered themselves to be "in character." But I would definitely vote for Angela's Mame over Lucy's. The part needed a strong singer. Watching Lucy sing was just not pleasant

In the comparison, it's not just Lucy's movements, the titled character required a strong singing voice. Angela sang her heart out, Lucy could barely mouth the lyrics.

The issue was the director. And frankly, I’m glad for Lucy’s performance. I liked it as a child, and I still like it. It’s Lucy, for God’s sake!

The main reason why it was insane to cast Lucy as Mame was that she couldn't sing. Lucy was a fantastic comedienne, but she was not a singer. How could anyone possibly think that she could carry a musical? Angela was great in this role, she's also a better actress.

Although I do agree that Ball was a total miscast, I can find things about the film I enjoy - like Bea Arthur. I have to confess that Bea is what has really kept me watching it all these years. Aside from Balls stagnant performance, I can't dismiss the brilliant performances of the other actors. Jane Connell is one of the finest character actresses I've ever seen, and she turns a hysterical performance as Agnes Gooch. Personally, I like the musical arrangments contained in the film. Though they don't stack up to the polish and musicianship heard on the original Broadway album, still, I can still procure a decent euphoric rise from the film version. It's hard for me to make such a harsh critique of Lucille Ball, because I have been a devoted fan for many years, but I have to call it where I see it.

I have to admit. My introduction to Mame Dennis Burnside was the Lucy movie. I had the LP and loved it. Put it on cassette and remember listening to it on my Walkman and singing the songs while I cut the grass. My aunt made me aware of "Auntie Mame." I read the play. Read the novel. Devoured the movie. Saw, "Lucy Mame" again after all this and, to this DAY, I can't imagine how I loved Lucy's version so much except that the material is so strong that, even in that glacial version, Mame shone through.

Oddly, Mame, with Lucille Ball, will always be one of my favorite movies.

RIP Angela, Lucille and Bea 🙏

I actually like the movie. yes it is flawed but Robert Preston is amazing.

I love the movie with Lucy. She did a wonderful job to me. Both ladies are wonderful entertainers . But Rosiland Russell is Auntie Mame !!

For the opening song comparison, I preferred the slower jazzy tempo of the Lucy version. For Bossom Buddy, I liked both versions. Each actress brought something different which I can appreciate.

God this is painful to watch! As a person who grew up with RR's Auntie Mame, this is a very special character to me. I was watching Johnny Carson when Ball announced that she had been cast. I thought "Huh?" "What???" I did not go to see the film and I'm glad I didn't as I'd have been scarred for life. Sorry that your Auntie Angela missed out on the roll; we missed out too.

In the earlier days of musical films, it was de rigueur that every element of the material be given top draw treatment, This is a musical and the most important element is the score. So, needless to say, Lucy's gravely baritone voice would never have been heard by the public, She would have been dubbed, of course. And that, I believe, would have made the difference between the film's failure and its success.

I just watch Rosalind Russell in Auntie Mame and pretend there's music in it and consider that to be the movie musical of Mame.

To me, it should Never been a musical! Rosalind Russell is THE AUNTIE MAME in my book!!

You obviously don't love Lucy, well I happen to love "Mame" the movie and I think Lucy did a good job. Angela Lansbury is a broadway musical legend and Lucille Ball a comic TV legend ,so naturally they are going to approach the role differently. Lucille Ball was offered the role and I believe she did the best job she could do with it !!!

9:56, I've never seen the film version, but as soon as I saw Lucy's reaction to Bea's insults, I instantly thought "that's just what she'd do on 'I Love Lucy'," -- that kind of acting only really works when you have a close-up camera holding on her face for a studio-audience's laugh(track), it sticks out like a sore-thumb in a film. And then you verified it for me. xD

Despite the best of intentions, our host gets a number of factual points wrong. He is also under the impression that a star of a musical - stage OR screen - is single-handedly responsible for her performance. As it happens both Lansbury (stage) and Ball (screen) had the same director (Gene Saks) and choreographer (Onna White). Saks was a terrific director on stage while his screen work (mostly Neil Simon adaptations) was extremely earthbound filmed stage plays. And his TV movie of BYE BYE BIRDIE makes MAME look like SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. In point of fact, the movie of MAME was produced by Robert Fryer - who did the stage version. It suffers terribly from poor artistic choices on many levels along with a seldom-stated fact: By the 1970s MAME had become terribly dated. It's sentiment and satire was something from the '20s and '30s that the novel and play managed to emulate when the play was done in '56. And the '66 musical -extremely formalistic in writing and production -was a kind of "last hurrah" for this kind of show. Yes, it was flashy and Lansbury was terrific -but there's a GOOD reason Lansbury turned down the chance to do a TV version during her MURDER, SHE WROTE run: she KNEW the show was Passed It. It's been said Ball had her eye on playing Mame since Rosalind Russell did it. Well, she got her chance -and reportedly helped finance the film which had been siting on Warner Bros. shelf for at least 6-7 years. In point of fact, NO ONE was clamoring to see MAME on the screen. The Rosalind Russell movie was definitive.

"Between forty and death!" A line that will haunt any actress who says it. I'm very impressed that someone as young as this youtuber has such a perceptive grasp of acting and the movie-making process and what constitutes diagnostically a good versus a bad musical theatrical performance. You should do something like, 'Lost Horizon' (the 1973 movie musical) and why it was such a flop.

A large part of the failure MUST BE that Russell's performance was ICONIC! Theater patrons are not necessarily movie patrons, and vice versa. The movies are a more direct comparison with a better comparison of audiences, and Russell was genius. The thousands of people who see plays and the millions who see movies are incomparable.

Lucy was made for tv. Angela was Made for the theatre , I think Angela was a better crossover than Lucy was. But they were both stars on their own.

I think a revival of the musical should be staged for television like they do on PBS's Great Performances. There are so many current performers who would make such a production absolutely brilliant.

As a person who has worked in both film and on stage, the entirety of the differences often are due to the directors. In movies, it's the director's vision being filmed. On stage, it's often more a collaborative process (if the director lets you!). I know that Lucy had so many shots of her either with diffused lenses or gauze, that the entire film seems 'distant.' I also know that she had 'acted' so much for film, she knew what worked, but she needed a good director- I don't think she got it, because she was 'LUCY' if you know what I mean. While I can appreciate Lansbury, her voice is just too ugly for Mame, but was perfect for Mrs. Lovett in Sweeney. And then there's Roz Russell. Well, who can top that?!? Maybe the could remake the movie, but who is there now who could even BEGIN to come close to that iconic character, after these three women essayed it?

I don't get how executives could say Lansbury was unknown... she had 3 Oscar nominations, had achieved huge success with Mame on Broadway and recently (at that time) she had a hit with Bedknocks & Broomsticks.

Lucille Ball would have made a wonderful Miss Gooch.

I don't care what people say... I loved Lucy in Mame. One of my favorite classic movies.

This review is a bit biased. I'd be willing to look over the age difference as well as the deep voice. Hell, Bea Arthur sounds like Morgan Freeman. The movie definitely didn't bomb, and reviews were very lukewarm. Yes she was miscast, and Lansbury could have won an Oscar if she'd been in the movie, but Lucy was also misdirected. They were going to get George Cukor (My Fair Lady) to direct, but Lucy broke her leg skiing in Snowmass, so they lost him during the delay. Instead they got Bea Arthur's then husband Gene Saks. He was a stage director but not a movie director, especially for musicals. If he hadn't done such a sloppy job technically the movie wouldn't have gotten as many bad reviews. And when you think about it, Lucy was doing her best and you can't blame her for that.

As Kate Hepburn said "I'm an actor who does comedy. Lucy is a comedienne." Lucy was also a producer and an astute businesswoman, not to mention person most responsible for elevating the television from a novelty to a must have. She's a show-business legend in the same exclusive circle as Hepburn. But she was not a singer or a dancer, as I assume she was well aware based on her many fruitless attempts to be cast in a show at the Tropicana. You watch these performances and you just hear Desi in the background chortling "oh oh Looooo-ceee!" However, you do wonder how "Bosom Buddies" would have played had she done it with Viv. Their "Friendship" is a comedy classic.

Lucy did mame in her 60's pretending to be 40 years old. (No one could pull this off like Lucy) Loved this version with Lucy! Watched it many times.

Having seen the original cast on Broadway, admitting to be an I Love Lucy fanatic, I was horrified that Angela was not given the movie. The clips that you are showing of her don’t even give one billionth of 1% of the magic of her performance that every single critic and person who saw her perform it will tell you occurred. There aren’t words to describe the amazing vivacity she brought to the show, and those horrible clips that you have do a huge disservice. However, I was hoping that Lucy would be able to step up to the plate because I love the show so well, I love every song. Her singing is ghastly, horrifying in spots, somewhat acceptable if you’re trying to be generous in other spots. Lucy inherently does not have the class or breeding to carry the patrician sophistication of Mame Dennis. It’s just not in her. Lucy tries very hard and she is successful briefly in several scenes and has few very good moments. But the truth is she can’t sing, is too old physically and visually and really does not connect with the basic character so there’s no way for her to project it. That is not her fault. Jack Warner is to blame for this because he lacks the class to know that Lucy didn’t have the goods. By all accounts she tried very very hard, had just recovered from a nasty broken leg and was the hardest working person on the set. She just didn’t have it inside and everyone seem to know it except Jack Warner until I assume it was too late. You are incorrect when you say the movie was a big bomb because it was not. It was a smash at radio city music hall when it opened and did strong business across the country initially. There were some good reviews, but also many devastatingly terrible not just reviews but attacks on Lucy. There seem to be anger towards her and, for the millions who saw Angela Lansbury play the part, it’s completely understandable. It should be noted that a lot of people of later generations are nowhere near as negative about the film and many enjoyed it. I saw it in a theater several times, and the audience always had a good time at least in parts of it and it’s unfair to write it off as a total bomb because it was not it’s just simply not true. Compared to what it could have been, it’s a disaster of epic proportion‘s. There are flaws with the movie that have nothing to do with Lucy, but I think that because everyone involved was forced to work with Lucy when they didn’t want to may have stifled the creative process to make the film a sensation. Part of the problem is casting because if Mame can’t sing, then you have to pick a Patrick who can’t sing which renders they’re tender, loving showstopping duet a big fat blubbery mass not only did they pick a Patrick that can’t sing, but he’s not much of an actor either. Lansberry would’ve been able to make up for the terrible, lead performance of this little boy. I also believe Lansberry would not have had to endure this terrible kid because they would’ve found one with talent to match hers. It’s not fair to Lucy to hang the fact that the little boy in a key role is so totally ineffective and brings the movie down a giant notch. Originally brilliant, cutting-edged sensational comedienne/actressMadeline Kahn was cast in the pivotal role of Agnes Gooch, but Lucy had her fired and made them rehire the woman who did it on Broadway in the same manner that she did on stage. However, comedy had changed a great deal, and instead of providing a lot of laughs, she was annoying, dull, like a lead albatross that could never allow her scenes a chance to gasp for air including - an endless dirge That is supposed to provide laughs that just doesn’t work. Bea Arthur is far from her best, but she was probably having a hard time playing off of Lucy, who did not bring to the scenes what was necessary. Lucy had some very good moments in the film but they were too few and far between and brief. She also looked wonderful in a few of the scenes, but, what is to lead and, ancient in others. The effervescent vivacity that is the essence of Mame character is missing 100%…… This Mame Dennis needed a Geritol infusion 24 seven.

I love mame since I was a kid at radio city in 1974

I enjoyed Lucy in Mame. guess I was the only one.

Lucy brought Broadway to the main screen and made it glorious. In fact when PBS played the two movies in a fund raiser in the 1980's they announced they got a call from the woman Patrick Denis based the book on. They said they were calling the publisher to get Patricks' number in order to confirm it. They returned stunned. They got Patricks' number and called it. The woman who answered the phone was the same woman who called in earlier. Patrick was in decline and she was caring for him in her home. They made a point of asking her favorite and she said it was Lucy's not only for the beauty but she never treated herself as elitist and removed the parts that insulted Asians and women. I agree with her. Mame done with Lucy was clearly miles ahead.

Angela Lansbury's freaking EYELASHES were on tempo. Amazing.

Interesting comparison. While I appreciate your attempt to justify your conclusions, they ultimately redound to a few simple facts: 1) You don't seem to appreciate the difference between theatre and film performance. Theatre must be big and specific, because the actor is playing to the back of the house and their actions must be seen by the naked eye from some appreciable distance away. Whereas film acting is incredibly small and intimate. The audience can see an eyelash. So any acting played at the same size as theatre would come off as cartoonishly excessive. Just as any movement as intimate as any film closeup would be lost to most of the live audience. Which brings me to my 2nd point: 2) Theatre IS live. Theatre actors can and do make adjustments immediately, depending on the audience reactions. Film actors make choices in a vacuum and must often wait months for audience feedback. Naturally, by then it's too late for adjustments. 3) You also simply seem biased in favor of Lansbury, because she created the role in the stage musical and was passed over by Ball for the film, whom you can't seem to separate from her Lucy sitcoms. The fact is, there are wonderful moments in Ball's performance that you completely ignored. The reaction shot upon the death of Beau, which is heartbreaking; the looks she gives to Patrick and Peter, which are tear-inducing; and her work during the hunt, which is hysterical throughout and during the "Man on the Moon is a Lady" sequence. So your biases are clearly showing. Different performers. Different performances. Vastly different media. And zero need to attempt to compare them. Because despite your attempt at making it seem objectively possible to do so, you only managed to prove your judgments were purely subjective and unfortunately uninformed. But I did enjoy all the great clips of these two brilliant performers. So, for that, thanks! Cheers.

I love them all, but murder she wrote will never get too old to enjoy. Mrs. Lansbury is a phenomenon.

Uh uh, Lucy was great in it. I loved her performance.

I loved Lucille Ball. However, the script watered down sharp lines from Mame on Broadway and Auntie Mame. Also, EVERY musical number had an "encore" which was misguided. Gene Sak's fault. Also, Lucy's vocals should have have been dubbed. Gypsy had dubbed vocals for Roz and they were great.

This is wonderful. I'd love to hear your take on all the Roses in various productions and films of Gypsy.

I do not completely agree with your analysis. For example, Lucy's 3 point reaction to Bea is spot on the way Many people would react. I loved the "silent stare" near the end. It made me cry. (You are not a mother.) Don't get me wrong; I love Angela Lansbury. I just think it is difficult to compare a play and a movie. Movements are done differently live vs. film. I think the movie flopped because musical movies were on the way out in 1974.

I personally think that both did an excellent job. Angela had a wonderful singing voice which was meant for Broadway, but Lucy had the comedic affect that (almost) everyone loved.

I will start off by defending Lucy in the film: the clip of "Making Merry" shows an incredible lack of direction - as well as knowledge of how to film a musical. I think Lucy was simply improvising which is why it comes off so lackluster - OR perhaps she fought the director's choices to the point that he just gave up on her and let her do her own "schtick" (Lucy was known for being dictatorial - she made Joan Crawford cry when Joan was a guest on her show). However, all I can say as far as "Mame" being a total BOMB is this: back in 1974, my friends and I were driving by the Cineramadome Theater where "Mame" was playing - and so the theater was completely decorated to look like a cloche (1920s hat). One of my friends had just seen the film - and as soon as he saw the theater he stuck his head out of the window and yelled "THAT MOVIE IS THE BIGGEST PIECE OF SH*T I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!!" - then he sat back in the car.

Lansbury was simply amazing in Mame, I agree with you on every single point

Lets make it very clear. Mame with Lucille Ball, is one of my favorite musicals of all time. PERIOD. I loved watching it on TV as a kid.

This is so good.

I like your channel. But for the record, I LOVED Lucille Ball as Mame! Mame was not an elegant dancer, so Ball having a little awkwardness was perfect for the role!

I am FAR from a Lucy fan, but you lost me at 2:22 with a dig at Lucille's mobility while showing a clip of her doing comedy ballet sketch from ILL. That was uncalled for. In real life LB started out in show business as a dancer. And during production of Mame, she was recuperating from *a broken leg* for Pete's sake. Of course she's not gonna be doing eye-high kicks. No disrespect toward Angela Lansbury or her talents. She probably would have done an excellent job in the film. And yeah, LB might not have been the *best* choice for Mame Dennis Burnside, but I don't think she deserved ALL the hate that's been thrown at her over the years.

Being a director (I worked for Hal Prince for six years in my youth) most of what you bring up has to do with directing, not just the actresses performances.

Lansbury was amazing as Mame and in everything she has done!!

Your critique is absolutely brilliant, on all counts. "Muscial Theatre Mash" is a welcome addition not only to You Tube, but also to the worldwide arena of discourse on the subject of my favorite art form. Specifically, on the subject of Lansbury vs. Lucy -- I had the pleasure of seeing Lansbury play "Mame" in Miami Beach, in 1976, with Ann Francine as Vera and Jane Connell as Gooch. I have also seen the Lucy film version several times. Lansbury triumphed over Lucy simply because Lansbury had, in her youth, a greater degree of formal theatre training than Lucy had. Lansbury's early lessons were from a prestigious drama school and from her actress mother, Moyna MacGill. Lucy took screen acting lessons "on the lot" from the mother of Ginger Rogers. To be fair, there are a couple of earlier Ball films in which Lucy showed some dramatic ability (such as "The Dark Corner" and "The Facts of Life"), but she never had much emotional range on camera. Lucy was great at playing farce and displaying anger, but woefully awkward when subtle emotions were required. (It's no surprise that Lucy's most convincing scenes in "Mame" are the "falling-off-the-wobbly-moon" sequence, in which she plays farce, and her confrontation with Patrick outside the Upson home, in which she displays anger, telling him: "...and may I say that you have become one of the most beastly, Babbitty little snits on the Eastern seaboard?" ---- ANGER, she can do. FARCE, she can do. But gentleness? Tenderness? WARMTH? Forget it. So many of her acting choices in "Mame" are wrong. Another example: During "Gooch's Song", Ball reacts to Gooch's confessions by displaying the same haughtiness that one would expect of the snobbish Mrs. Upson. My God, it was MAME who encouraged Gooch to get out there and LIVE! Shouldn't Mame have a slight glint of pride in her eye, knowing that Gooch has REALLY lived, at last? None of that subltety came through with Ball. Watching Lucy's overall performance, one gets the feeling that she never PREPARED for the role; that she never sat down, at home, with a cup of coffee, a cigarette, and the shooting script, contemplating what her interpretation of the role would be. It feels like she is just "winging it" through all of the scenes. And, by 1973, she seemed to have forgotten how to do anything but the shallow clowning that she had given her television audiences for two decades.

All other technicalities aside, I still love the Bosom Buddies scene with Ball and Arther, though I think Arther outshined ball in the scene. To this day, I think it's the best scene in the movie...

I love musicals, but this is one where I prefer the non-musical movie. Auntie Mame was a treat to watch when I was a kid. I need to watch it again.

P.S. One other thing. Interestingly, Patrick Dennis, who created Auntie Mame (he loved the original stage play but hated the musical), had the same adjective for both Angela Lansbury and Lucille Ball: "common"--which, as he wrote, "is the one thing Mame cannot be." But by the time the movie MAME was being prepared, he allowed that so many women had played it by then that it no longer mattered. As for Rosalind Russell, she was quoted as saying if she'd been in charge of casting the movie, she'd have chosen "Cher Bono" over Lucille Ball.

I have been hearing for years that Cher wants to do a repeat performance of MAME. God! I hope not!

wait. wait. wait! What ? ! I LOVED Lucy in Mame ... the song " We Need a Little Christmas " alone did it for me. This is the first time I ever heard anything negative about it ~ I thought everyone loved it I'll be smh for sometime about this. huh.

I know this is the musical version but Rosalind Russell's performance alone in the 1958 non musical version still outshines Angela and Lucy. Rosalind would have been AMAZING had she not passed on the musical version of the infamous role she originated.

I LOVE Lucille Ball in Mame. I thought she was great, and it's still one of my faves. She nailed the character and the humor.

The only things good about the movie are Miss Bea and Theadora Van Runkle's costumes.

eh, I preferred Lucille Ball. I don't know why people pick on her performance so much.

The measure of success for a movie is the box office take. Mame cost $12 million to make and grossed only $6.5 million. That says it all.

I saw Celeste Holm on the stage in 1968 in the Shubert Theater in Chicago as Mame. She was excellent. The production was excellent. When the movie came out with Lucy, I was incredibly disappointed.

I just love them both,simple.

I always thought Ann Sothern would have been an excellent choice both for the stage and screen versions. She had both the acting and singing talent to nail the role.

The same scenario happened with Julie Andrews in "My Fair Lady." Andrews had been playing the part on Broadway, but Hollywood chose Audrey Hepburn for the Eliza Doolittle role. Hollywood will almost always go with the biggest "star" for its big bucks productions. The irony with the "My Fair Lady" swap is that Julie Andrews starred in Disney's "Mary Poppins" that year, and she won the Best Actress Academy Award instead of Audrey Hepburn for "My Fair Lady." I think you mentioned that Angela Lansbury is your grandmother. I think you might be a little partial. Another interesting tidbit regarding Lucille Ball's Mame performance, notice that the camera goes to "soft focus" in her shots. This was to hide her age better. Rosalind Russell, Angela Lansbury and Lucille Ball all had entertaining, beloved and admired rolls throughout their careers.

A delightful and charming critique! It's informed, insightful and witty. I love that this is an genuine analysis of well-curated selections, clearly and cogently communicated, and not a tedious holding forth sans evidence as if I should care about some self-important wrong-headed opinion; we all know the internet is ripe with such embarrassments. Good work my friend!