A Escada

We enjoyed the mini-series, however it could be hard to follow in places. Why? We've noticed a trend in productions, they just can't be linear, they just have to jump back and forth in time. A little is okay and sometimes you need to do that to flush out the details of the movie, but most movies have so much of it, it feels like the show is just jumping around constantly. And this was no exception. Before her death, just before her death, after her death, the original trial, the 2017 statement, back to the 2011 retrial, then 2017, then just before her death. We were getting sea-sick. I just wish they wouldn't do this in movies all the time, it is so hard on the viewer.

I didn't care for Michael Peterson at all during the actual documentary and didn't care for him in the HBO version but I think Colin Firth's portrayal of him is uncanny! I don't see how any woman could have been attracted to him. I do feel sorry for the people in his life, being so exposed the way they are, particularly given that they weren't given much of a choice to be in the original documentary. It's fairly evident to me that all MP really cared about was/is himself and perhaps he wasn't aware of how the media attention/social media would impact those he allegedly cares about. To me, there was way too much blood for a fall and I tend to think of him as a guilty man.

Good performance by Firth. The "constantly back and forth narrative" was pointless and even irritating. A lot of scenes had no meaning whatsoever. It should have been 4 episodes, there's way too many pointless minutes.

I feel like this show was good until someone in post-production decided to turn it into a time-travel show. Same issue with other shows being put out these days that end up as background watching. I think one of the cardinal rules for film/TV is to not have flashbacks unless you are exposing an essential piece of information. It would have been more entertaining if the information was presented in chronological order. Maybe since this is what seems to work with docuseries they think it will work with other story telling.

The acting is good. The writing is good. Technically it is good. I just feel that it falls apart in the edit. Mind you, the edited scenes by themselves are well-edited. But who wants to see a dramatic scene thrown in at a random point of the timeline where it doesn't belong?... and this whole show ends up feeling like that. So overall, it's just kind of confusing where you're at at any given point, so you tune out.

From creator Antonio Campos, HBO's "The Staircase" is an 8-part fictionalized dramatization of real life events based on the tendentious, transparently biased and manipulatively edited MaHa mockumentary from Jean-Xavier de Lestrade -- used by Michael Peterson to promote his fabricated fable featuring his wife, Kathleen, as a reckless woman who got too drunk, fell down the stairs and caused her own death.

Though initially a flat and, at times, fitful recounting of the basic facts covered in MaHa's docuseries, HBO's movie eventually manages to include some revealing and riveting moments behind the scenes of Michael's make-believe world.

While Lestrade left the dead victim on the cutting room floor, Campos' version brings Kathleen to life, examining some of the very real horrors she was facing at work and at home -- and in place of MaHa's one-big-happy fake family, HBO has scenes that hint at the dysfunctional dynamic that was truly at work in Michael's bat-infested mansion.

Of course, also included, much to Monsieur Lestrade's chagrin I'm certain, are scenes highlighting the questionable, curiously close relationships between Michael and MaHa's production team -- most notably, his long-term romantic involvement with Sophie Brunet, the main editor of Michael's movie.

HBO's new drama is good television, but for those who prefer non-fiction -- Michael's murderous machinations were laid bare, years ago, in the definitive book on the Peterson case: Written in Blood by Diane Fanning.