Saturday, November 29, 2025

I Finally Got Around to Seeing Candy This Week - And You Should See Love & Death (Or Really Anything Else) Instead

 

Way back in April of 2023 I ended up watching HBO Max's Love & Death. At the time I was trying to get ahead of potential Emmy contenders for the 2022-2023 season (I didn't know that the labor stoppage that was about to occur was going to last as long as it did) and the fact that it was a David E. Kelley limited series for HBO seemed like a sign it would be.

I loved the show and while I didn't put it on my ten best list for 2023 I still preferred it far more than many of the series that did get nominated for Best Limited Series such as Fleishman is in Trouble and Obi Wan-Kenobi. The end of year awards in 2024 would rectify this partially with the Golden Globe and Critics Choice nominated  both the series the best performers for awards even though there were still no wins.

I was reluctant to do so initially because, as I wrote at the time:

Hulu’s Candy, with Jessica Biel in the title role, had been one of many limited series that had received early Emmy buzz from the streaming service. Dopesick and The Dropout were the ones I ended up following, I refused to watch Pam and Tommy and I’ve only recently starting to look at Under the Banner in Heaven.  Indeed Elizabeth Olsen who plays Montgomery here learned about Biel’s adaptation two months before Love and Death started told her that HBO Max was planning its own adaptation. Biel thanked her and continued to make her version.

Now during the strike of 2023 I did start something I do occasionally and watch streaming series that have aired one and occasionally two or three years back and review them for my blog. I did so with Under the Bridge earlier this year. And while I was waiting for the end-of-year nominations from the Golden Globe and Critics Choice Awards to come out so I could start making informed decisions about which new dramas, comedies and limited series' on streaming to review for my blog in the weeks and months to come (as well as the recurring favorites I want to get back to) I found myself with some free time this week.  At the same time I saw an article about Hulu's most critically acclaimed shows. I decided I'd pick a streaming series I'd miss from that service in previous years, watch it and review it for my blog.

I considered more recent shows such as Say Nothing and the most recent season of Nine Perfect Strangers (and I may get back to both later on) but I decided to do Candy for a couple of reasons. First it was only five episodes compared to the seven or eight of some of the others and second, because it gave me an opportunity to do something I've never done in all my years of TV criticism: compare and contrast two versions of the same story. I found the idea appealing.

Well having seen both my initial glib reaction would be: if you only see one streaming limited series about Candy Montgomery's affair, murder and the trial that followed see Love & Death. But even though that's completely accurate it's worth going into more detail and making clear what Kelley's version of the story nails in every respect to make it sing and the version that Jessica Biel adapted does with the exact same narrative than, even though it's two episodes shorter then the one we got on HBO Max, it actually seems a lot longer and far less fun.

Warning: Spoilers for Candy and Love & Death follow.

First of all there's tone. As is the case with every limited series that he's done during the past decade Kelley takes his lead character and the subject seriously. He treats Candace Montgomery as a figure of empathy and compassion at the start, makes her affair with Allan seem planned and everything that follows reasonably, deals with the murder and its aftermath and the psychological havoc it wreaks on everyone from Candy to her husband and especially to her attorney Don with the seriousness it deserves.

Candy almost from the start plays like the Lifetime Movie version of the exact same story and it actually gets more tonally off the further in you get. This is true, I should add when it comes to the depiction of sex and profanity which Kelley didn't shy away from in his version. Every sex scene is the series is done with dim lighting and we usually come around in the aftermath of the sex when we see it.  There's very little profanity that could have been heard on a cable network at the time. And that's before you consider the dialogue which almost sounds like Biel and her writers only experience with the 1980s Texas was seeing movies made  during that period. 

We also have a ridiculous amount of long pauses with ominous music that don't seem to have anything to do with the subject and characters repeatedly saying things that would be out of place in a 1990s rom-com. Kelley treated all the characters with respect and dignity from the start. The first time Candy goes to see Don in his legal office he's doing push-up shirtless and the next time its in a tanning bed. When she talks to him about an interview he seems so clueless you get to feeling Saul Goodman would wonder where he got his law degree.

Then there's the difference in how both Love & Death and Candy tell their stories.  Kelley follows a linear path, beginning with the Montgomery household at the start, her decision to have an affair with Allan (which has a different context then in Candy) then moves to its progression and end in the second episode, then moves to the events of the murder in the third and its aftermath. The leadup to the case and to the trial itself takes up the final three episodes of the series and we see the entire two the same way. There are some flash forwards but by and large Kelley keeps to this pattern.

Candy begins on the night before the murder and has the murder occur in the first episode. We then spend the next two episodes flashing back both to the Montgomery household and the Gore household spending time with Candy and Betty pretty much equally in each episode. This is not necessarily a flaw except the writers excessively use captions to tell us how much time has passed after every commercial break and even while the episodes are still airing. During the first episode we see four different captions in the space of fifteen minutes telling us how many hours have passed. 24 was subtler with its ticking clock than Candy is.  By the time we get to the fourth episode the writers are reminding us it's the day Betty died, the day after she died as if they have as little faith in the intellect of the audience as they do in their characters.

This also undercuts any arc the characters can have during the course of the series. In Love and Death Olsen portrayed Candy at the start with a  kind of ethereal beauty and an open stare. The perm and the glasses that she becomes known for at the time of the media circus only happen by the trial and by that point she is so medicated and withdrawn from reality that we don't recognize her from the spirited woman we saw at the start. It gave Olsen a great ability to show enormous range.

Biel by contrast has her wig and perm from the start of the series and is wearing in the flashback. Any sign of the ethereal nature we got from Olsen's version is never present and because of the start at the murder Biel plays Candy as if she were aware of the crime she's committed. That would be acceptable except there are no difference between Biel's version in the past then there are in the present. She always seems harsh and unpleasant, with none of the wondering we frequently see in Olsen.

Biel, frankly, looks like she's trying the 'glam down' approach that so many actresses have done in films in order to earn nominations and awards rather than be a natural actress. Considering how superb a performer she can be in other roles (most notably the first season of The Sinner) this is a bizarre choice for her as an actress and it's not subtle at all. But compared to the other actors in this cast she might as well be Meryl Streep.

Hard as it is not to compare the cast of Candy unfavorably to their counterparts in Love & Death I can't help but thing the major problem is the script. That's particularly true with all the male roles. Paolo Schreiber is at least as a good an actor as Jesse Plemons (who received an Emmy nomination for his work as Allan Gore) but where as Plemons' managed to play his opaqueness into a kind of sympathy Schreiber seems clueless from the start. He keeps telling everybody he calls in the pilot "This is Allan Gore" to the point you almost wonder if he's forgotten his own name half the time.

Patrick Fugit's role as Pat Montgomery was not particularly memorable compared to his fellow actors but he played with a solid straight forwardness. By contrast from the start Timothy Simons seems completely miscast as if he think this is a comedy and he's basically just playing another version of Jonah. There are times he manages to get the kindly father right but the way he's shown as a clueless idiot around his wife, it almost seems like the writers are saying: "She has to have an affair! Her husband's a moron!" Even in the aftermath of the murder when we all know what happened Simons's seems ridiculous out of touch saying he needs to protect his family from an intruder, finding out about her affair and buying her a card and flowers and at the end of the episode trying to swing an axe forty-one times and after being exhausted going back to bed and snuggling with his wife.

But the worst betrayal is the character of Don Crowder. In Love & Death Kelley went to great pains to put Don's character front and center, showed just how seriously he took his case and the toll it took on him. Tom Pelphrey was magnificent from start to finish and by making the trial the center it did wonders for it. Raul Esparza is a superb actor but from the start the show undercuts him by having only glimpses of the trial during the first few episodes giving Don very little to do in the first three episode and by the time he shows up for a full appearance in the penultimate episode he genuinely seems as clueless as everyone else. When he learns his client is guilty he seems to be salivated about the idea of a trial rather than nervous about what's to come. The trial seems almost less important than the crime and that's barely talked about.

The only actress who comes off better in Candy then in Love & Death is Melanie Lynskey's work as Betty. She's just as shrill at times as Lily Rabe but its clear the writers have more compassion for her. When they try to show her as the other side of the coin as Candy they mostly succeed. (Lynskey did receive a Supporting Actress nomination from both the Critics Choice and the Astras for her work.) Yet even then much of the time Lynskey is working against the script which never makes her sympathetic at home in the second episode and shows her as something of a fool in the third.

And if you're looking for so many of the other memorable characters who appeared throughout Love & Death you won't find them in Candy and when they appear, it's basically as stick figures. Much of the action in Love & Death had a lot to do with the struggle over the change in leadership over the church: Jackie, whose divorce led her to leave the parish and Reverend Ron, whose lack of authority it is implied led to a gap in both Candy's life and the town.  Elizabeth Marvel and Keir Gilchrist respectively gave a lot of force in their roles. In Candy both the characters and the role of the church in the community is minimized to theater for the wives and husbands and much of it plays out like farce rather than drama.

And that's true across the board. The children, particularly Candy's daughter had a real presence in Love & Death; here they're given nothing. Bruce McGill was magnificent as an autocratic judge in Love & Death; here he's not even really there. Don's wife was shown to see how much the trial cost him, here she only shows up at church. And considering that the writers have the time and energy to give Jason Ritter and Justin Timberlake (Lynskey and Biel's husbands) cameos as the dumbest and most sexist deputies possible this seems like a case of missing the forest for the trees.

By the time we get to the trial which takes 2 episodes Love & Death and only one in Candy it's clear what the purpose of Biel's story is as opposed to Kelley. Kelley wants to tell a detailed nuanced story in which he explains the full version of the saga of Wylie, the circumstances which led to the murder and all of the repercussions afterwards. Biel clearly believes that Candy Montgomery was guilty of what happened and the only reason she got away with it was because the town of Wylie was full of yokels who were shined on by a flashy attorney.

And as if to drive the point home in the climatic summation Betty is in the courtroom for Candy's testimony making it very clear that she (and by extension the writers) thinks that not only is lying but that's she's also a whore. The townspeople basically take on the role of a Greek chorus of idiots who completely believe everything Candy and Crowder are telling them. That was not the case in the version Kelley told and he made it clear in his version. He also makes Crowder seem like a showboat attorney who is a publicity hound who doesn't care about anything. This isn't the case in Love & Death where Pelphrey's Crowder cares very much about Candy and we see the burden of it.

Just as tellingly the only bit of the cross-examination we see is when the D.A. asks if Montgomery had another affair at the end of this. There was a lot more to the cross-examination but the point of Biel is clear: she was a loose woman who is a completely unreliable narrator. In Kelley's version he goes in a linear fashion and by showing the circumstances of the crime makes it clear that he's more interested in telling Candy's story. Biel doesn't really care about how things played out in real life; she has her own version to tell and it's where Candy doesn't just get away with murder, she's clueless at the end.

And that's telling when it comes to the epilogue. In Kelley's version he goes into great detail about what happened to everybody in the aftermath of the trial and shows the entire  story for all of the major players. In Biel's version, not only does she only tell three bits of it she omits a lot. She acknowledges that Allan got remarried not long after the trial, but omits the fact there was a divorce a few years later. Biel points out Crowder ran for governor of Texas afterwards and omits not only that he lost but that he committed suicide – by implication because he couldn't let go of the baggage of the case.

Worst of all she acknowledges that Candy did divorce Pat changed her name and now works as a mental health counselor but in her mind it’s a toxic joke: Candy not only got away with murder but its another sign that an insane woman is guiding the sane.

Hell even the sense of setting is off. Kelley's went to a great deal of trouble to put the music and choices of television in context. Here all we get is a recording of David Soul and the entire town seems more interested in discussing what's going on during Dallas as well as other 1970s TV shows thrown in as reference.

I know why Kelley was drawn to the story of Candy Montgomery: he saw the chance to tell a true life story of a woman who was trapped in the world that had few options for her, saw her try to reach out and was forced into a series of choices no one should make. He used Love & Death to fill out that narrative and with his usual touchstones made it sing and tell a deep and measured limited series like he usually does.

In Candy I think Biel saw the exact same story and thought of a chance to talk about the worst aspects of American society in a cookie cutter version. We see her contempt for the small town and its values in every scene of the episode, particularly when it comes to the town focusing around the church. She sees the models of middle America basically just being hypocrisy for the worst kinds of adultery. She sees all the people in the town as uneducated yokels where the men are all ignorant and the women high-strung and whoring around. And she clearly sees Candy Montgomery's trial as just another metaphor for how flawed the jury system and how people can be fooled by flashy lawyers. There isn't a single person in Candy that Biel has any respect for except Betty and critically it's only after she's dead and can serve as a voice for the narrator that she has any purpose.

Godard famously once said that the best way to criticize a movie is to make another movie. We see a version of this with Love & Death which was still being filmed by the time Candy debuted on Hulu in May of 2022. I'm pretty sure that Kelley didn't see this version until after he finished making Love & Death and if he did he no doubt is gracious enough to keep his opinions to himself. I'm not bound by those parameters and I'll be blunt.

I have seen some bad limited series over my career watching television, some are just pretentions (the most recent season of True Detective fits that parameter) some have no real quality (The Regime is the most recent example of this) and some are badly done to begin with (Under the Bridge) Candy, however, is laughably ludicrously awful and a complete waste of all the talent assembled in front of the screen. This isn't just a case of it paling in comparison to Love & Death, on its own merits Candy utterly and completely stinks. It would rise to the level of camp were I not certain that Biel and her writings were approaching the subject with at least some seriousness. It's the kind of show that actually gets worse with each new episode. I would have abandoned it had I not made a commitment to get through the whole thing and were it not merely five relatively short episodes. By the time I got to the last one I was almost walking out of the room during much of it because it was so unwatchable.

I have been lucky that I've seen so few missteps in my career of criticism for television and I'm definitely fortunate to have seen Love & Death without watching Candy.  Not just because the former was a near masterpiece and this is so terrible but because of the contrast. Love & Death was one of those shows that made me glad I'd subscribed to HBO Max. Candy is the kind of product that makes you want to cancel streaming subscriptions altogether.

In the words of Roger Ebert, I hated, hated, hated, hated Candy. If you haven't seen Love & Death yet, it will be playing on Netflix this month and I urge you to seek it out. I'm grateful that Lynskey and Simons moved on to projects more worthy of them and the same goes for Jason Ritter.  As for Jessica Biel, she didn't do anything for the next three years and only this past spring has she done another project: The Better Sister. I may look at it down the road but only because I want to see how Janel Moloney and Matthew Modine look.

I'm not even going to rate Candy mainly because I don't think zero stars would be too many to dignify it with. All I'll say is if you turn on Hulu and your algorithm shows it immediately type in something that doesn't start with C.  You're welcome.

No comments:

Post a Comment