For me the shadow of Joan Crawford looms large over this re-telling of James M Cain's novel, her Oscar-winning performance in Michael Curtiz's 1946 film noir re-established her career from "has-been" status. Kate Winslet's an Oscar winner too but these are still large shoes to fill and I wasn't completely convinced she did so after 5 hour-long episodes of Hollywood Golden Age recreation-specialist Todd Haynes recent production. She does her American accent well and certainly enters whole-heartedly into the part as the constantly striving Mildred, abandoned by her husband with two young children to bring up who'll stop and stoop at nothing to do the best for her kids, even if one of those kids turns out be the devil's daughter in terms of selfishness, disrespect and outright cruelty and vindictiveness. Somehow though, Winslet just fails to really trawl the depths of despair and desperation her character warrants plus is it just me or does she appear a bit too young for the part, indeed she seems to age very little as the drama proceeds.One also suspects the action unfolds a bit slower on the screen than it did in the original pulp-fiction novel. This production is over three times the length of the original movie and it does feel like it sometimes. I did appreciate that director Haynes stayed true to the book's original ending although it made me look a little foolish to my wife, to whom I'd confidently promised a big dramatic finish like I'd seen in the old movie.As you'd expect with this director, the period of 30's LA is reproduced beautifully both inside and outside and he gets good quality acting from the actors supporting Winslet. I would say though that the replacement of young Veda by older Veda is a bit sudden with little resemblance between the two actors. Of the two of them, I was more impressed by the younger version, the actress in question may not thank me for saying this but to my way of thinking, she has a naturally sardonic, even cruel visage. I also liked the actor playing husband number one and three while Guy Pierce revels in the flashy role of Monty Berragan, the penniless dandy living on old glories and a fading charm.In conclusion then, despite the question mark in my mind over Winslet's casting, this was still a compulsive soap-opera come thriller helped by stylish direction, impressive production values and good ensemble acting.

I thought this was a decent miniseries. I thought Kate Winslet was great in her role, and most likely would have taken home the Emmy if this had been better written. My biggest complaint about the story - and perhaps this is true in the original novel, I don't know - is that it's never explained as to what happened in Veda's upbringing to make her such a manipulative spoiled bitch. She grows up in the 30s, when most people were lucky if they had regular meals let alone a place to live, yet she's vicious and hateful because her mother works in a restaurant. It's not because of her sister's death because she was like that before her sister's death. Also, I don't understand why everyone falls all over Evan Rachel Wood's performance in this. Really? I thought she was mediocre at best. She chews up the scenery in this miniseries - sooooooooo overacted. The scene where Kate Winslet's character finds her daughter with her husband naked? Evan Rachel Wood's movement and performance reminded me of a soap opera. Truthfully, my opinion is that this miniseries would have been much better with a different - and better - actress playing Veda.

This movie, recently presented in separate airings, was highly addictive. At first you think how can a movie based around a woman who makes great pies be that good but, IT REALLY WAS! My husband was hooked as soon as he saw the first episode I had recorded. It was PERFECTLY cast and all the performances were awesome! The setting based in the 1930's was absolutely gorgeous as was the music from back then. It made you wish you could go back in time, before technology, when things were so much simpler! The main theme of the story is universal to this day. This is one of those that if you are just channel surfing and you see it on, you just keep watching it over and over again. There is some nudity; but that aside, this is a a must see!

I have not read the book, but I have read that this adaptation was quite faithful to the book. The classic movie was not; it was made as a melodramatic murder mystery with Joan Crawford as a Grand Dame Mildred. Thus, the movie was great entertainment, but as a life lesson, as a cautionary life story, it was nonsense. This version was far superior as a story the average person could identify with. Great sets, clothing, cars, even minor period detail. I'm glad I saw it and I would recommend it to others, but...It does really drag in places. I appreciate what I learned about opening a restaurant, but such detail only slowed down a story which was mainly about other things. While the camera lingers on Veda, and lingers, and lingers, little attention is given to explaining Mildred's developing financial problems. Emotional explosions may go on too long.I'm glad that this miniseries was made. I wouldn't have wanted it made any differently, but quite a few people will find it tedious.