Kate Winslet in Joan Crawford Drag: 'Mildred Pierce' Trailer Drops, Video

by Tracy E. Gilchrist
09/13/2010

http://www.shewired.com/Article.cfm?ID=25736

This version of Mildred Pierce is being done my the director Todd Haynes, who did the homage to '50's melodramas in his film "Far from Heaven", so he apparently likes to do period piece films. I thought it was very well done, so hopefully he'll do the same with this remake. However, the difference is that he is filming the NOVEL Mildred Pierce, not the film version. The film Mildred Pierce had marked differences from the novel. The ending was completely changed, the murder added to make it a noir and a mystery. The novel MP is much more of a soap opera and dealt more with a woman trying to struggle and survive during the Depression. The film deleted all references to the Great Depression because they figured audiences at that time wouldn't want to see a film that forced them to relive those unhappy days.

Mildred Pierce the novel was set in L.A., as I believe all of James M. Cain's novels were. The location was an integral part of the story. So if you're making a film based on the novel, it would be ridiculous not to set it in L.A. I mean, if you want to follow that kind of logic, let's do a remake of Gone with the Wind, but because we can film it much cheaper up in Vancouver, let's change the location and make it Gone with the Wind Goes Canadian. Or how about A Tree Grows in Brooklyn filmed in Louisiana? May as well just change it to A Tree Grows in Shreveport, right? With that kind of reasoning, all of the films that were shot in the old days in Hollywood should have been set in L.A. Hollywood may not have always been able to make their stories look like where they were supposed to be set, but they did try and succeeded very well sometimes.

Who knows, film companies are so mobile now, they may do some scenes in L.A. eventually. I'm willing to give a remake a chance when they're trying something new and different, such as the Coen Brothers remaking True Grit. Again, they're basing it more on the original novel rather than the old film.

Frankly, I don't get it! First I agree with the comments regarding the fact that Los Angeles is highly integrated into the plot and the "feel" of the story of Mildred Pierce. Whether the Movie is made in NYC, Chicago or Cairo...Los Angeles as a City has its own unique context; which lends itself to the texture of film noir. I grew up in New York City but I lived in Los Angeles and I know from experience that although they are both "big cities"...they have a completely different "rhythm and style".

Los Angeles with its constant sunshine and glamour has a unique "undertone" of desperation! Imagine, being in an environment that is sunny and energetic and yet...there is a gaudiness, a peculiar sleaziness associated with living on the margins. If you read James Ellroy; he is, in my opinion, the only present day Writer who is able to capture the essence of living a life of despair in Los Angeles. The stories written by Raymond Chandler, James Cain and James Ellroy are to a great extent stories about life in the City of the Angels. Similarly, every City or small town has its unique social setting and characters. Can you tell a story about Las Vegas in Iowa...can you tell a story about New Orleans in Chicago!

Mildred Pierce is a story about many things including life in Los Angeles at a particular point in time. Finally, the issues related to the art of film in Black & White vs. Color; with specific regard to the Film Noir style introduces a topic that would take pages to discuss...the headline being that they are two unrelated means of expression!

Bottomline; although I would probably watch the HBO version...you really can not copy the Mona Lisa...neither should we assume that it should be "redrawn" in a modern style to allow a new generation to understand its meaning...certain works of art are unique to when they were created...the original Mildred Pierce is one example of my theory!

Comotte

I see the palm trees imported for the scenes in the background, so it appears they are trying to preserve the So Cal setting and at least try to make it look like So Cal. Thank goodness they're not just randomly changing the story to make it set in upstate New York. Agreed that Glendale looks nothing like it did in the '30's, but there are isolated streets that still have the old time look in L.A. -- Old Town Orange, for instance, and even some streets in Old Town Pasadena could be fixed up to look completely dated.

Eastwood's "Changeling" used a combination of filming around selected spots in So Cal, an old Universal backlot, and LOTS of CGI. Still, it was mainly filmed around the L.A. area and looked amazingly real. But perhaps they'll do a good job with the re-creation back in New York. Be interesting to see how it turns out.

A: Have you been to Glendale, CA? In no way, shape or form does it look anything like the way it did in the 1930's. That look is harder and harder to find anywhere in strip-malled, freeway-riven Southern California.

The exteriors, many of which were shot in my hometown of Peekskill, NY, look as credibly 1930s precisely because the production chose to find a location that could double for long-ago Glendale and Los Angeles. Here, judge for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhSEJw3J0h0&feature=player_embedded

B: MILDRED PIERCE isn't really Film Noir.

C: What you should be complaining about is that color and the modern styles and techniques are antithetical to telling a story like this. One of the things that makes the original film work as well as it does, and that makes it as memorable as it is is that it was made in a very traditional way, by people who lived through the era it portrays only a few years earlier. Re-creating earlier eras has become such a self-conscious exercise these days that the battle's usually already lost before the camera's ever turn.

Kate Winslet Wears Costumes of the Forties in Her New HBO Mini Series, “Mildred Pierce”

“Mildred Pierce” was one of the iconic films of the mid 1940’s: taken from a James M. Cain pulp novel, it starred Joan Crawford, who won an Oscar for playing Mildred Pierce, a New York divorcee who is middle aged, and must take a waitressing job to support her family. Eventually, she breaks into the restaurant business, but has big conflicts with her daughter – and there’s big big drama in the family. Of course, Crawford rocked those dramatic big shouldered blouses and jackets of the forties, and looked – well, middle aged. And she was, at the time. The movie utterly revived her career.

Now Oscar winner Kate Winslet is taking on the role, in a forthcoming HBO mini series she’s now shooting on the streets of New York right now. And she, too, is going for the forties frump, the big shouldered look – it’s crazy what these clothes can do to the way a woman looks. Kate is only 34, but the movie will make her appear older – as she has to be mom to actress Evan Rachel Wood, playing her daughter. The director is Todd Haynes, who’s made very stylish period films, and it also stars the amazing Guy Pearce and Melissa Leo. Will the frumpy printed tea dress return as a trend? We’ve seen Prada do it in the past, so who knows?? Interesting that Kate Winslet would chose to follow her Oscar with an HBO mini series, as opposed to a film. That tells you something about the state of movies today.

And WHY are they filming it in New York??? The novel was set in Glendale, CA, and the Crawford movie was all filmed in Southern Cal. What's the point of changing it to a New York setting? I think it might be a good attempt at a remake as the casting seems well done, but the refusal to honor the original locale seems not very promising.

I agree too. My Mom who grew up with these movies cannot understand my admiration for Jack Carson. To her, he's just an "extra" in the story. I just love the fact he is great in light comedy and can also deliver powerful dramatic performances when needed. A real underrated talent.
Eve Arden is just fun, she's so glib.

I originally thought a remake of Mildred Pierce was a great idea since kids today are reticent to watch "old b&w movies" and it's a great story of a strong, independent woman. Making it a "period piece" is a mistake, it'll be just as much of a turn off for the younger set and shows lack of creativity.
Kind of reminds me of the disaster Psycho remake.

A shame there just isn't an original thought in Hollywood these days.