Gilda Radner: It's Always Something

Like the rest of America in the 1970s and 80s, I loved Gilda Radner. Every Saturday night, there we were glued to our televisions, sometimes past our bed times, to watch SNL. Gilda was the crown jewel amongst precious gems in this wonderful show.

And, like the rest of America, I also agonized with her during her battle with cancer. But there was so much more to Gilda than just that disease. So, when I read that there was to be a movie on ABC about her life, I was undecided about whether to watch or not. I was afraid that this movie, The Gilda Radner Story: It's Always Something, would focus mainly on the end of her life rather than on the Gilda we all knew and loved. And, sadly, it turns out I was right.

While the movie did go through the natural timeline of her childhood, rise to comedic stardom first in Toronto, and arrival in New York and so on, there was always a foreshadowing present in, it seemed, every scene about the cancer that was to finally appear in her thirty-ninth year of life. We saw Gilda smoking, eating red dye number whatever, using saccharine, being bulimic and/or anorexic, drinking alcohol, etc., etc. And, of course, there were extensive references to her family's history of cancer (her father died of a brain tumor, her mother fought, and survived, breast cancer).

I mention it was her thirty-ninth year because she spent less than ten percent of her life being ill, yet it seems that eighty per cent of this movie is about what was to come at the end. I don't think Gilda would have liked that very much. I read her book and, believe me, it was NOT all about carcinogens and disease! True, she did have a difficult time dealing with her father's death when she was only a young girl. True, she did mention many of the things touched on again and again in the movie. But she also told some wonderful stories that were cut from this script! And, aside from the book, I remember many other wonderful Gilda stories.

When Gilda and Gene Wilder married (weren't we all entranced by such a wonderfully funny and loving couple?), they lived in Connecticutt. Before she became ill, I remember that she appeared on a popular late night show. Crazy person that she was, she took her entire neighborhood with her to New York for that appearance and brought them all on stage! Who has ever done such an outrageous thing? Yet that was not documented in the movie. Nor were so many other things that would have given a much truer, and lighter, picture of who Gilda Radner really was. Certainly, there could have been so many more scenes highlighting her life with Wilder, which must have been really wonderful. That was what I'd hoped the movie would be about. I mourned the absence of such scenes not only for myself, but for the benefit of the generation who does NOT remember who Gilda Radner really was.

Gilda was about living, loving, laughing, giving, and so much more. She died of cancer, but she was not about cancer.

Jamie Gertz did a fine job of portraying Gilda Radner. The actor who portrayed Gene Wilder was on the mark. Brilliantly cast, as well, were those who portrayed Bill Murray, Jane Curtain, Larraine Newman, John Belushi, and all the others who played such significant roles in Gilda's life. But I have a suggestion for all those who saw the movie and think they now know Gilda. Watch old SNL on late night TV, and rent her movies. Read her book upon which the movie is based. You will come away knowing a lot more about who the real Gilda was than if you just watch this movie.

What an excellent TV movie. For once, it's not self-pitying and depressing (though, of course, the subject matter is very sad), but it celebrates Gilda and how she chose to deal with her terminal illness with laughter. Jami Gertz did a phenomenal job in the title role, and I never realized before that she does bear quite a likeness to Gilda. Her love and marriage with Gene Wilder is also handled well, and I can't help but wonder what the real Gene Wilder thinks of the film. The movie had me in tears. I recommend it.

I'm not quite sure why they decided to take the story of a very funny and joyful comic actress and suck all the joy out of her life and story. According to this adaptation of her autobiography, Gilda was a self-destructive person with low self-esteem who never had a happy moment. In fact, she had a lot of them, which she created herself. Her romance with Gene Wilder is presented as the only bright spot in her personal life, and even that is permeated with sadness. It's as if the producers decided that since she died of cancer, her whole life had to be a premonition of it. This makes for a screenplay that has basically one level. If they had allowed the story of her life to have happy moments along with the sad ones, the ending would have been a lot more poignant. You have to have light to contrast with the dark, but here it is all the same level, strangely gloomy.

We learn nothing of the other main characters, other than that Murray can be a jerk (is this a surprise?). In one overdone scene in particular, Gilda is persistently asking him about spending Christmas together (just before they are to go on to do a...yes, you guessed it...Christmas sketch, with Murray playing Jacob and Gilda playing Mary). Murray says something along the lines of "Will you please just BACK OFF???", then turns to one of the shows producers and huffs "I swear, this is the last time..."(the last time, what? Like he has a choice in whom to appear with on the show?). Then they go on like the pros that they are, to entertain their audience, despite their personal pain. This is called juxtaposition, you see, contrasting what's going on in front of the camera with what is behind, so you get a heightened sense of irony; did you get it? The scene is just as ham-fisted as I described it. The rest of the movie is as cliched and superficial as this moment, and the lead's very good performance is wasted. We keep waiting to learn a little more about the other cast members (the actor playing Garrett Morris is almost used as a prop) and we never do. I'm not quite sure why they had to produce such a dreadful script. A lot of effort went into the casting; it's almost as if they thought that was enough. Unfortunately, it's not, and the movie is painful to sit through. Gilda (and the actress who played her) deserved better.

Three stars.

it should have been awful.

it was a dangerous premise, having mostly unknown actors portray legends, most of whom are still living. (belushi and all the other original snl cast, plus eugene levy, gene wilder, and more.)

these guys did faithful, believable renditions. (i.e. the gene wilder guy had the speech patterns down pat. and the belushi guy resisted the urge to play it loud and cartoonish.)

prepare to be disappointed by some of belushi and murray's behavior. to respect lorne michaels. to admire laraine newman.

but most of all, prepare to fall madly, deeply in love with gene wilder.

from everything i know, the storytelling was journalistically accurate, and despite the unhappy ending, it is not a sad movie.

it got a little surreal watching these impostors do recreations of classic snl sketches. i kept waiting to be offended or have my intelligence insulted or to get bored.

i loved it from beginning to end. i hope they rerun it so i can make everyone i know watch it.

Jami Gertz may not be the most noticed actress in Hollywood, but her portrayal of the talented legend, Gilda Radner, will get her noticed for sure. I already knew the whole story of Gilda since she captivated me (despite the fact that I was too young to remember her in her heyday) Who didn't Gilda captivate? The legend alone deserves a talent to play her, and that is exactly what it got. In this honest and touching story of Ms. Radner's life, Jami Gertz looks, sounds and acts not only like Gilda, but like the characters that Gilda portrayed on Saturday Night Live's classic early years. As well as Jami Gertz, the rest of the cast portray the other actors in such a way that you don't have to guess who it's supposed to be, it's obvious. There is no "Is that supposed to be Bill Murray?" instead there's, "Oh, look it's Bill Murray!" Gene Wilder is also portrayed perfectly, I found it almost eerie seeing this movie, because it was as if we were really watching them. However, like most Hollywood movies about peoples' lives there are some parts that are "stylized" for effect such as flashbacks, dreams etc... to add to the drama. The difference is in this case it is done well and even enhances the story telling rather than make it look silly. Besides the phenomenal acting, the other excellent aspect of this movie is that it captures the feeling of Gilda herself- despite tragedy, it is uplifting, funny and triumphant, the three things I always thought about her before this movie was ever made.