Powered by i.TV
May 22, 2013

Review: Kate Winslet Takes on the Melodramatic Tale of 'Mildred Pierce'

by Maureen Ryan, posted Mar 23rd 2011 1:15PM
'Mildred Pierce' (9PM ET Sunday, HBO) is one of those projects that may well polarize critics, or perhaps aspects of the miniseries will provoke wildly different responses in individual viewers, as they did with me.

Stacked up on one side of the scale are excellent performances from the likes of Kate Winslet, Melissa Leo, Guy Pearce and Evan Rachel Wood. But on the other side of the scale are some serious problems with direction and characterization, all of which made me long for the visual verve and brittle clarity of the 1945 Joan Crawford movie of the same name.

I came away from HBO's five-part series with a great deal of respect for Winslet's impassioned performance, but so many other aspects of 'Mildred Pierce' worked against Winslet's naturalistic style that parts of the miniseries ended up being, frankly, a slog.

The biggest problem in the first two episodes of 'Mildred Pierce' (both of which air Sunday) is the character of Mildred's older daughter, Veda, whose is played in early episodes by Morgan Turner. The character is so affected, condescending and unlikable that she makes you question not only Mildred's sacrifices on behalf of Veda but also Mildred's sanity.

How can she not recognize that she raised a monster who has inherited all her family's class snobberies but none of her mother's work ethic or compassion? What makes Mildred so blind to her child's faults? We get hints of answers but, as written by Todd Haynes and Jon Raymond and gratingly played by Turner, the character is so one-dimensionally dreadful that you can't quite buy any of those rationales.

Turner is given dated dialogue that sounds true to James M. Cain's original novel, but Veda's lines would be difficult for any actor to convincingly sell, so I can't necessarily blame the young actress for having trouble making the character anything but a shrill caricature.

Young Veda's predictable obnoxiousness isn't the only problem in the early going; there's also the fact that Winslet and Turner appear to be in two different projects. Winslet's warmth, sensuality and emotional truthfulness place her in a nuanced reality not unlike our own, while Turner's performance could come from a Lifetime movie about a bratty child who gives her suffering mother a hard time.

Cain's book allows you to understand Mildred's psychology more acutely, and his prose is such a cool, elegant pleasure that it allows the reader to forgive almost any overwrought plot development (and there are a few). But if reading Cain's spare, taut prose is like flying down a highway in a classic roadster, Todd Haynes' directing style is like being on a train that slowly chugs along, making every single stop. Even if you like the scenery, at some point you want the damned thing to move faster.

In the second half of 'Mildred Pierce,' when the sly and silky Wood takes over the role of Veda, it's easier to enjoy the sheer melodramatic richness of the miniseries, which also features delicious performances from Leo as Mildred's best friend, Pearce as a society swell, Hope Davis as a rich matron, Brían F. O'Byrne as Mildred's husband, Mare Winningham as her co-worker and James LeGros as her lawyer.

There is a certain operatic quality to the toxic relationship between Veda and Mildred, but Wood and Winslet are much more evenly matched than Winslet and Turner, and the two actresses share some crackling scenes together. Veda's still a monster, but at least in the second half of 'Mildred Pierce,' her spoiled wickedness is more soapily enjoyable, and the psychological excavation of the mother-daughter relationship is rarely subtle but at least it's melodramatically juicy.

Still, Haynes' stilted, formal directing style will not be for everyone. Haynes is in full-on Douglas Sirk mode here, repeatedly shooting through car windows and other glass barriers that sometimes obscure the actor's faces in annoying ways. There were quite a few lingering, almost static shots that made me wonder if Haynes' true calling should have been as a Vogue or Vanity Fair photographer: He loves to compose intricate, richly appointed visual scenes that the viewer is just supposed to stare at, I guess. Maybe people with advanced film degrees can appreciate the finer points of his occasionally turgid, deeply referential style, but there were times I simply found it self-indulgent.

Despite all the flaws, Winslet does an impressive job of humanizing Mildred, a willfully deluded woman who makes a series of increasingly poor choices and pays heavily for those mistakes. Though this 'Mildred Pierce' won't make anyone forget Joan Crawford's iconic eyebrows and impressive shoulder pads, there are some performances and scenes that may make the miniseries worthwhile for fans of the impressive lead cast that HBO has assembled.


Follow @MoRyan on Twitter.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

4 Comments

Filter by:
Danielle Rush

Before I saw the miniseries, I saw the 1945 movie for the umpteenth time. And as much as I continued to love the Crawford movie, I saw a major flaw in it . . . namely the murder mystery created to "punish" Veda. Not only did the murder of Monty Beragon bogged the movie's pacing during those first 15 to 20 minutes, it didn't really do anything, except give a shallow satisfaction for viewers who wanted Veda to be punished. They failed to realize that despite Veda's arrest, Crawford's Mildred remained obsessed with her daughter. In the end, the attempt to add the mystery noir was a waste of time.

Thankfully, Todd Haynes avoided that crap and paid more attention to how Mildred's character enabled Veda's behavior. Mind you, I thought Part One was a bit too slow . . . especially the sequence that featured Mildred's job hunt. But overall, I was more than satisfied with the production and especially Kate Winslet's performance. She really deserves a few awards. And not once did I think of Joan Crawford when I saw the miniseries.

May 26 2011 at 12:32 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
robhllnd2

I totally agree with Maureen Ryan's review but I will watch the rest of the drawn out movie.

March 27 2011 at 11:20 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
sydneycmotley

I saw episodes 1 and 2, so the question is...how did I get through them? Joan Crawford's "Mildred Pierce" is iconic, and why on earth would the Hollywood types make a miniseries out of such an outstanding movie is beyond me. Boring and overly melodramatic is the kindest thing I can say about this star vehicle/vanity piece.

Though Kate Winslet is a serviceable actress, she is not a Joan Crawford nor a Meryl Streep. I knew from the beginning, when I heard this film was being made into a miniseries, that it would be challenging at best. I didn't know that it would be completely disappointing. There is no reason to watch rest of the miniseries because it doesn't grab you, it doesn't cause you to become emotionally invested in the characters. Also, when writers, directors and others stray away from what made original works spectacular, it looses all of the depth of emotion and appeal.

Sometimes an idea should remain just that, an idea and Mildred Pierce as a miniseries is a glaring example of that concept.

March 27 2011 at 10:23 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to sydneycmotley's comment
Craig Ranapia

"Joan Crawford's "Mildred Pierce" is iconic, and why on earth would the Hollywood types make a miniseries out of such an outstanding movie is beyond me."

Because "they" didn't? If anything, isn't Maureen's complaint that the mini-series is TOO faithful to James M. Cain's novel. For heaven's sake, I like the film a lot but it's no more the last word on Mildred Pierce than the 1995 Pride and Prejudice mini-series is the only Jane Austen adaptation you'll ever need.

March 28 2011 at 6:44 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mysticzip5

Oh, and very easy to kiss the asses of the other more notable actors. Its almost laughable. I have seen both eps one and two. Mildred's character actually chastises young Veda for her choice of language. She is trying to exist above her station. That is the point. Unfortunately, the point missed its mark with this woman. Mo just doesnt seem to get it.

March 23 2011 at 3:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mysticzip5

Its almost like pick on someone your own size. 4 paragraphs tearing a part a child actress? A little much? Aside from the fact that everyone else has raved about the 11 year old's performance. Then again, would I more likely agree with LIz Smith or who is this author again??

March 23 2011 at 3:35 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to mysticzip5's comment
Brent

Funny, I didn't read "4 paragraphs tearing a part a child actress." In fact I didn't read one paragraph "tearing a part a child actress." What I did read was criticism of the part that the child actress was given to play. Even when Mo Ryan stated that, "Turner's performance could come from a Lifetime movie about a bratty child who gives her suffering mother a hard time," it seems to me to be less of a criticism of Turner as an actress than a criticism of the way that the part has been written and directed.

March 24 2011 at 6:08 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Follow Us

From Our Partners