Archie

Having read Dyan Cannon's book first, I was not as taken aback as many of the reviewers appear to be. The series is very much from Dyan's point of view and from her emotional stance. It portrays how she felt in various situations with Cary before and during their relationship. It's her story, not Cary's. Go into it with that understanding and you will enjoy the story for what it is. From his overcoming some traumatic situations in his youth, to using them to build a new character he could embody to protect himself, he learned how to cope with the expectations people had of him as an actor. He was not quite as successful though with coping with relationships, feeling very much like he always had to come on guard and leave before he could be abandoned. Bittersweet story that viewers may not appreciate if they have not read her book.

On screen he seemed like the perfect man and had a perfect life. Nothing could be further from the truth. He had a terrible childhood. He made a successful career but he understandably had his demons. He was a good man whose childhood affected him his whole life. Only when he became a father did he really find peace and happiness. He didn't feel like he had to make the most money or need any public adoration. He was comfortable being a father even though it came very late in life for him. I always liked him as an actor whether it was a romantic comedy or a dramatic thriller but I really came to respect him as a person.

The characterisations here are definitively subpar. No one looks or sounds like the people they portray, except for Laura Aikman, who looks quite a bit like and acts very much like her part. Therein lies the rub. Far too much effort to get that right that everything else fell by the wayside. The title is a misnomer, to say the least. It's not about Archie, it's not about Cary. It's about Dyan. It should have been called "Dyan, Me, Me, Me and the 6 years I spent with that guy to whom I've served up a narcissistic manipulation pie with a light sprinkle of powdered truth".

He said it best, everything is a confrontation to her. And every confrontation in this lifetime movie of the week is a character assassination for every acquaintance she makes. Everything that goes wrong is always someone else's fault. He does drugs, he sold the dog, he's overbearing and controlling, his mother is a beach, his biz partner is a time stealer. Despite all her obvious flaws, the production makes everyone else out to be the bad guy and poor misunderstood her. Every scene is manicured and curated to paint everyone else in a bad light, and even when you think that maybe there's a bit of balance here, it quickly turns to self-victimizing pandering, expecting the audience to be too stupid to see it.

An excellent study into the true character of a bitter ex-lover, but very little in the way of the person for whom we were duped into thinking it was about. It might think it's subtle, but it's not.

Isaac's portrayal is really good. I would never have guessed someone could nail the part. But don't say it is true if it isn't. His brother died before he was born. Made it look like Mae West movie was his first and so on. Stick to the facts so we all won't doubt the movie.

Any huge fan of Cary Grant will enjoy this and I did get entertained. The implied part of his Randolph Scott relationship is movie time crap. Jennifer Grant always claimed he wasn't gay. She knew him better than anyone. Read her book Good Stuff.

Also, what an inappropriate song to play when portraying New York. Movie looked so timely but failed there.

Look up the only photo I could find of his father, he was spot on.

Cary/Archie would be disappointed and disgusted.

Decent and moving show, generally very well acted, but marred by a number of surprisingly sloppy factual errors that don't gel with the assertions made at the start that it was a well researched drama - in particular Grant gave up his career as soon as Jennifer was born, the brother who died did so before Archie was born. Easy to fact check these and other basic timeline issues that call into question veracity of the piece otherwise.

Shame because the acting was good by Isaac's, Aikman and Waters, and Isaac's captured Grant's voice exceptionally, although the make up of older Grant seemed less effective.

Generally moving and it revealed the man's achievements and complexities.