Put a Brown Wig on Lindsay Lohan and You Don't Get Elizabeth Taylor, You Get: 'Liz & Dick'

There's nothing remotely reminiscent of Elizabeth Taylor in Lindsay Lohan, even in full make-up.

Liz & Dick

Director: Lloyd Kramer
Cast: Lindsay Lohan, Grant Bowler
Distributor: Entertainment One
Rated: Not Rated
Release date: 2013-05-14

Putting a brown wig on Lindsay Lohan and calling her Elizabeth “Liz” Taylor is the equivalent of putting lipstick on a pig. And it would be easy to blame her for the ill-conceived, and shoddily constructed, made for TV mess Liz & Dick. But this “biopic” is plagued with problems other than the once overblown and now non-existent talent of its leading lady. Liz & Dick fails on multiple fronts: poorly-written dialogue, zero character development and a fractured plot to name a few. Should viewers expect more from a Lifetime creation? This is the network known for its melodramatic programming.

There's nothing remotely reminiscent of Elizabeth Taylor in Lindsay Lohan, even in full make-up. Taylor was poised and polished and unquestionably one of the most beautiful women in the world. Lohan’s Taylor has a face puffy from Restylane injections, her freckles are heavily spackled with concealer and her red locks are tucked into poorly-groomed wigs. It’s not just the looks that Lohan lacks. Taylor was strong but could play vulnerable. She had an innate sexuality and could be blatantly seductive or more demure depending on the role she was playing. Lohan simply comes across as trashy.

Physically, Taylor was voluptuous, and she grew more zaftig as she aged. Burton commented on her weight gain as did the press, but Lohan’s lean frame never appears to change as her character matures. The real Taylor even gained over 20 pounds for her role in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? . There was no evidence of this or the other dramatic transformations she made for her Oscar-winning role in the brief re-enactment of one the film’s scenes in Liz & Dick. Even though the couple’s rocky romance spanned a quarter of a century, not a line is added to her face. The only thing that alters Lohan’s appearance is a variety of bad wigs and tackier outfits.

There had to be more to Elizabeth Taylor than this chain-smoking, heavy drinking and tantrum throwing version. Taylor was a woman who loved and warmly accepted her homosexual co-stars such as Montgomery Clift and Rock Hudson. Taylor also managed to give an Oscar nominated performance in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof even though one of the great loves of her life, Mike Todd, died tragically during filming. She suffered from scoliosis as a child and survived a nearly fatal bout of pneumonia. There was so much depth to this icon, yet in this film she rolls around half naked in hotel suites, lounges on a private yacht and travels to exotic locations occasionally with some random children in tow.

Grant Bowler, from New Zealand, has the advantage of being an unknown. Who knows if he can actually act since he’s weighed down by horrible dialogue, poor direction and Lohan. There's no inkling of the real Richard "Dick" Burton’s talent, making it hard to believe the man was considered to be one of the greatest stage and film actors of his generation. Bowler comes off as petty, jealous, desperate, insecure and egotistical. This small-screen incarnation of Burton resents Taylor’s success, in particular her two Academy Awards, even though Burton was nominated for seven Academy Awards along with three British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) nominations and one statue for his performance in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf. He was also nominated for three Tony Awards. He did most of his best film work while involved with Taylor.

The movie makes it seem as if all of Taylor’s career choices were made so she that could act as a hall monitor, making sure that the philandering Richard Burton didn’t dip his wick into another actress. Liz & Dick didn’t show Burton calling directors and demanding roles and taking salary cuts so they wouldn’t have to be separated by work. She must have called in many favors, bullied and threatened producers and utilized her clout in the industry to insure that they made a total of 11 films together. Then again, their antics off set were sure to have guaranteed modest box office receipts, if not more, depending on the project.

Liz & Dick focuses a great deal on the amount of press that Taylor and Burton received due to their blatant affair during the filming of Cleopatra. They were married with children at the time. This is where having a tabloid darling like Lohan blurs the lines between the character she is portraying and her own personal life. It’s hard to express how Burton and Taylor’s relationship was followed by the press and the public. Most stars’ publicity was carefully controlled by studio publicists. The toll this must have taken on the relationship and how it affected both Burton and Taylor’s public personas was touched upon briefly. But it's hard to imagine when the actress playing the title character is a tabloid darling. Lohan’s personal life overshadows Taylor’s, which is not ideal.

It isn’t just the acting that makes Liz & Dick no better than the worst daytime soap. All of the visual elements of the movies; art direction, cinematography and set design would be completely unsalvageable if it weren’t for some lovely shots of “foreign locations”. There are times when the backdrop is as believable as Mr. Rogers Neighborhood of Make-Believe. What was supposed to be a tribute to one of Hollywood’s most famous (and infamous) couples is just one of Lohan’s latest tribulations.

The special features consist of interviews with Lohan and Bowler as well as the director, writer, executive producer and costume designer.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.