MovieChat Forums > I Love Lucy (1951) Discussion > Explaining it Away

Explaining it Away

posted 5 years ago by [email protected] (1732)
8 replies | jump to latest

To their credit, the writers attempted to bring some reality and logic to even the most madcap
scripts of ILL. Sometimes they were more successful than others.

Two examples:

In the opening scene for "Lucy and Ethel Buy a Dress Shop", Ethel mentions that Hansen's
is "in the middle of the NEXT block." This line's purpose, of course, is to explain how
Lucy gets home so quickly from the shop (while keeping Ricky on the line). And it
works, as we get the sense that the store is fairly close.

In "Equal Rights", the nasty restaurant manager asks Lucy and Ethel if they'll come and
let him know when they're done, as he's "in the office...WAITING TO LOCK UP." This
flimsy line is apparently supposed to explain that his office is so far away from the
kitchen and dining area, that he cannot hear Lucy and and Ethel SCREAMING for help
(supposing a real burglar DID enter??) or all the commotion with Ricky and Fred...and
THEN the police. And there's NO explanation as to how Ricky and Fred arrived BEFORE
the cops when a holdup (!) is taking place - especially when they didn't own cars? (we
must assume they took a cab, but really...).

AND they left Little Ricky unattended? OR are we supposed to buy they bothered Mrs.
Trumbull (again that night!) at that hour to stay with the baby, and STILL got to the
restaurant ahead of the cops?! And if they DID leave Little Ricky unattended, can you
imagine Lucy's response when she either stopped off at the apartment (and saw the
baby alone) or realized this AFTER being at the police station to bail Ricky and Fred
out??? The mind does reel!

Any other examples of good/bad "explaining things away?"

[–] [email protected] (5490) 5 years ago

In "Equal Rights", I'm reminded of something else. Sure the girls were startled and frightened when it looked like two bandits were holding them at gunpoint. But if they would have had a moment to think about it, wouldn't they have wondered why a burglar would go into the restaurant's KITCHEN? They don't keep the money in there. haha It would be in the office safe. But the girls were too scared to think of that. Also, how much money could you steal from a dishwasher?

And yes, the line about the manager being in his office, he sure was hard of hearing! Come to think of it, if the guys had thought about it, they would have told the cops that the restaurant manager could identify them. Didn't the cops go to his office? Otherwise they'd have to leave the restaurant unlocked.

A lot of the "explaining it away" lines have to do with Little Ricky. Like when Lucy returns from her driving lesson. Obviously Ethel was babysitting, but she couldn't have the baby with her when Lucy gave Ethel her first driving lesson. So he went to the zoo with Mrs Trumbull.

A number of times when Lucy comes home, she asks about the baby. And he's usually napping.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 5 years ago

Yes, "Equal Rights" is really LOADED with holes, far more than even some of the more bizarre Hollywood escapades.
(although Lucy and Ethel - or ANY dishwasher, for that matter - wouldn't just think "logically" and NOT react to
two masked men pointing guns at them...especially, sadly, in today's tragic world).

Yes, the baby thing was always handled responsibly, with Lucy asking, "Who's watching the baby?" Or "How's the
baby?"

Mrs. Trumbull must've heard a lot of those fights! Aren't we to assume she's with Little Ricky in the nursery while
Lucy and Ricky duke out the opening scene of "Equal Rights?" And it's odd the way the foursome come home from
the Italian movie in "The Black Wig", but don't either pick up the baby from Mrs. Trumbull's, or relieve her of her
babysitting. In that scene, the baby's whereabouts/babysitter are just ignored, even though Ricky mentions that
his son needs to have his father have short hair, and his mother long! (how Ricky would've been shocked by the
1960's, and beyond. Plenty of men have had long hair on and off ever since!).

Year ago, on the old IMDB boards, Bewitched fans used to complain about how many Sargent episodes didn't feature
Tabitha or Adam. They'd remark "WHERE are they?" My argument was always that they could've just been with them
two minutes before the scene began! If the scene was in the living room, they could be in the kitchen, bedroom,
back yard, with Esmeralda, or even sitting on the stairs - OFF camera.

If the kids aren't necessary to a scene, we, the audience, don't need to see them!

[–] [email protected] (5490) 5 years ago

The "baby" issue probably caused a lot of headaches for the writers. While the Arnaz baby was a welcome addition, the Ricardo baby had the writers always scrambling to explain his absence.

Of course when the baby was old enough they could add the line that he was in nursery school for the day.

Another line of dialogue to explain something is in the classic Vitameatavegamin episode. It only seems logical that Lucy would have enlisted Ethel's help in convincing Ricky that she could do a commercial. But instead, Ethel is not there and Fred helps Lucy. To explain her absence, Fred tells Lucy that Ethel went to visit her mother. It does seem odd. The two women were so close that it's hard to believe that Ethel would just leave town and not tell her best friend that she was going away for a few days.

From what I've read, sadly if it was true, Vivian Vance couldn't appear in the episode because her husband had hit her. She was bruised and they couldn't hide it for the camera.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 5 years ago

Good grief!! I've never heard that story! How horrendous. Vivian Vance was already a very vulnerable woman,
in and out of therapy most of her life, due to mental health issues. Sadly, I buy the story, as I did read that
Vance's husband was extremely jealous of his wife's success, and Ball herself hinted at physical abuse between
the couple in the late '50's. Ball was never fond of him, and he was only hired for a couple of ILL jobs due to
Vance's influence.

Isn't this the ONLY ILL to feature Fred, but NOT Ethel?? I know there are a few in the first year where neither
is present, and several in the first three years where Fred is not present (Frawley had it written into his
contract that he be allowed the week of the World Series off, so any shows in production at that time either
had Fred absent, or the cast didn't work that week).

Weirdly, in "Lucy's Mother-in-Law", Fred is not seen, but has one line: "Ethel?! Where's my lunch?" I find
it hard to believe that Frawley showed up on filming night to say that one line, but if you watch that
scene carefully, it IS Frawley's voice calling off-stage (it doesn't sound recorded). Strange.

[–] [email protected] (5490) 5 years ago

Yes, the story is in one of my Lucy books. Phil Ober was jealous of his wife's success. But he should've been glad for it since he ended up with a lot of $$$ in the divorce settlement.

I can't think of any other episode that Fred was in without Ethel. I wonder if William Frawley DID come in just to say one line! He probably didn't mind because he didn't like having a lot of dialogue.

Desi Arnaz said it was a strange thing about him. Most actors want MORE lines and a bigger role. But Frawley was content to have as little a role as possible. He said that Frawley only memorized his cue and his lines which followed. He never really knew what the whole script was about.

Desi said that in the episode where Ethel is bent over wearing the back of a horse costume and Fred says, "Hi Ethel", Bill Frawley was puzzled by the stage direction. It was "pause for the laugh".

He asked what was so funny about saying, "Hi Ethel". He never bothered to read the script!

Vivian Vance tells the story of being made up for the show in her dressing room. He came in and asked her a question about an upcoming script. She said that it was the one they had been rehearsing ALL week and were performing that night!

I do think at that point in his life, Bill Frawley was way more interested in baseball and hanging out at the bar with his friends.

[–] [email protected] (1732) 5 years ago

Shooting ILL was extremely stressful, so it's no wonder Frawley - an alcoholic - wanted as little to do as
possible.

I do remember reading about that story of Vance telling Frawley about the CURRENT script they were
shooting - that night!

[–] [email protected] (5490) 5 years ago

William Frawley already had a career in the movies and it was late in his life, so a steady job with a paycheck was probably enough for him.

Another line to "explain it away"... Ethel must've loved Fred, but remember when she said that their "honeymoon was over on their honeymoon"?

In the episode where the guys watch the fights on TV, Fred runs to the store at the end of the round to get more refreshments. Ethel says that he's trained himself to do "anything in three minutes". No wonder she wasn't enamored of her husband anymore! lol

[–] [email protected] (1732) 5 years ago

Yeah, that naughty line in the TV fights ep is very risque for its era.

One thing the restored DVDS reveal, which I DIDN'T need to see, is the constant perspiration under
both arms on Frawley, and even more, on Desi. The hot lights and stress must've been enormous
if we can easily see that much SWEAT soaking their armpits. Yuck!