I am a film major in Texas and writing an essay on I Love Lucy and need the original reviews. Variety, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, anything. Must be dated 1951, please. Anyone have anything like that they could share? I only need a photocopy, remember I'm a student, can't afford the real thing. Library doesn't have it. HELP.

Some Lucy books quote the reviews in the parts covering the start of the series.

But if anybody's got anything more, post them here? 'Cause they'd be cool to read.

They don't tend to sell books about ILL in the UK :( - least none that I've been able to find yet!

I'll look some up for you and post them soon! The reviews were not that great, well, neither were the first few shows before everybody got their bearings. One Hollywood paper LOVED the show the other HATED it. Hollywood reporter and Variety.

That'd be cool if you can find them, cheers.

it's not surprising if early reveiws were bad. Back then most critics were very sneering about TV anyway - it was the low-brow cousin of the cinema, and wasn't going to last for very long! Some of the most successful shows have had lousy reviews to start off with though. Originally none of the critics seemed to get what Monty Python was about, and the early reviews for Frasier were dreadful. They said you couldn't have a show featuring jokes about intellectual issues, high-brow literature and classical music, and that it would never last! Basically, critics are daft. Fascinating part of TV history though of course.

:wave:

I LOVED the line where they said critics are failures who turn to that job to vent their hostilities, but who are they to talk, they couldn't make a go of it themselves in the business.

Originally posted by Mickey
That'd be cool if you can find them, cheers.

it's not surprising if early reveiws were bad. Back then most critics were very sneering about TV anyway - it was the low-brow cousin of the cinema, and wasn't going to last for very long! Some of the most successful shows have had lousy reviews to start off with though. Originally none of the critics seemed to get what Monty Python was about, and the early reviews for Frasier were dreadful. They said you couldn't have a show featuring jokes about intellectual issues, high-brow literature and classical music, and that it would never last! Basically, critics are daft. Fascinating part of TV history though of course.

:wave:

I've gotten into the habit of not listening to critics because all the good stuff (movies, TV shows, etc.) they say is terrible and what they praise, I normally hate.

They play 'Emperor's New Clothes' with supposedly high brow films, then knock good ones for being 'formulaic'. What, everything's supposed to be ground breaking?! I never quite forgave them for being so cruel about Cutthroat Island, one of my all time favourites. Daft, yes - but fun. Why isn't anything allowed to be just fun anymore?

Plus they still knock Queen, routinely, for no apparent reason other than they've got into the habit of doing so. Basically critics are almost all out of touch with the public, and snark on about things because they want to look intelligent.

Or is that being a little too harsh?!

Nope, i think we all agree with you on that assessment! Look at some things which were dismissed like Wizard of Oz or It's a Wonderful Life and 50 or 60 years later, they're revered!

They'd be cool to read, but I think its going to be hard digging up original ILL reviews.