User reviews

The show has some great things going for it - beautiful setting and cinematography, great rendition of an older Sam Spade by Clive Owen, some interesting supporting characters (and their respective actors). Most importantly it has a achieved a great mix between its Southern France atmosphere and its noir story roots.

What isn't so good is the convoluted plot - new agents and sides are introduced constantly, throughout all the episodes. I guess as a way to add more mystery rather than create it with a more tight and better written plot. To the point where it leads to quite unsatisfactory ending where too many sides rush to battle it in the smallest of places in an already too small for them French village. It's already ridiculous, and even another sloppy deus ex machina is needed for the story to reach some conclusion.

I still give it a 7/10 rating, because its premise and main characters were satisfying and still carry greater potential for further seasons. But only with better writing than this, because current season is enjoyable only if you turn a blind eye for all the unnecessary plot convolutions, and enjoy the good parts instead.

Monsieur Spade started off intriguing, with complex characters and an air of mystery befitting a Neo-noir detective drama. Clive Owen brought a gritty gravitas to the iconic role of Sam Spade, while the show explored his retirement in 1960s France with promising plot twists. However, it ultimately rushed the conclusion in a disappointing final episode full of tedious exposition dumping. The show failed to stick the landing after a strong setup, leaving an unsatisfying payoff for both the overarching mystery around a mysterious child as well as Spade's personal character arc. While the performances remained compelling throughout, the writing let down both the talented cast and the audience by the end.

Rating: 5.75 out of 10.

"Monsieur Spade," with Clive Owen leading as the venerable Sam Spade, started on a promising note, captivating my attention through the first three episodes. The series initially presented a fresh take on the iconic detective, now residing in the picturesque South of France, a setting ripe with potential for intriguing mysteries. Owen's portrayal of Spade is commendable, adding depth and gravitas to a character steeped in literary history.

However, as the series progressed into its latter half, it faltered. The narrative, rather than building on its early promise, became increasingly convoluted. The complexity added to the plot did not translate into a deeper or more enriching viewing experience. Instead, it veered towards tedium, detracting from the series' initial allure. Despite Owen's strong performance, the storyline's unfolding felt like a missed opportunity to revitalize and deepen the Sam Spade legend for a new audience. Ultimately, "Monsieur Spade" leaves a mixed impression, shining in moments but dimmed by its narrative choices.

I have strong contradictory feelings about this show. It starts off strong but it fizzles out terribly bad by the end.

Let me begin by saying that I am a big fan of both Owen and noir, so I walked in pretty pumped up. The first few episodes start strong: gorgeous cinematography, solid acting, a few well drawn out characters and all the cues from a proper noir old schooler (saxophone notes, cigarrette smoke, driving through a rainy night, etc). Love it so far!

But boy oh boy, does the plot get convoluted by the end! New, seemly random characters enter the scene out of the blue for no particular reason while adding absolutely nothing to the story (the CIA priest? The French intelligence officer? The algerian investigator? WTF is their purpose?!). On the other hand, the original characters' arcs pretty much slur on going nowhere (Jean Pierre? Teresa? Patrice?). Amidst all this, a text-book McGuffin (the algerian boy) is introduced to keep everybody running around aimlessly, driving the plot's attention away from what should be the center of gravity: Spade himself!

And, at last, the finale: the most bizarre and clumsy 20 minutes I have seen on TV in a long time: a buffonery of a shootout, followed by a Poirotesque whodunit scene that serves absolutely no other purpose than to explain to the perplexed audience WTF is going on and why, all of a sudden, all of the show's characters have all somehow landed at the same ending scene at the same precise moment. Ridiculous.

I know that this review has turned out more negative than I had intended. It is just my frustration showing: this show started off really great, ultimately missing its potential as episodes went by. Still, I would recommend it to noir aficionados - just accept that it'll roll downhill midway through.

PS: Owen makes a fantastic Spade. The entire show rests over his acting shoulders.

Just before watching this miniseries about a middle-aged Sam Spade living in France, I read an article about it's co-writer/creator/director Scott Frank and his success as a script doctor who could find a script's weaknesses and set them write. Unfortunately, Monsieur Spade needed Scott Frank the script doctor rather than Scott Frank the writer.

In Monsieur Spade, a middle-aged Sam Spade lives in France and stuff happens. But very little of it happens in episode one, which could be described as a slow boil, but is probably more accurately a low simmer with the heat turned up in the last 5 minutes. It's really rather dull, and takes its time for no good reason.

But then things pick up. A lot starts happening, people die, people threaten, Spade investigates and wisecracks, and it's all pretty good. True, there are odd bits, like the character of Jean-Pierre, who ultimately serves no purpose in the plot and isn't interesting in his own right. But for the most part it's entertaining.

And then in the final episode it goes totally off the rails in double-crosses and murders and schemes that don't make much sense, and then there's this endless discussion that more-or-less explains what happened in the most awkward and tedious way possible, and none of it holds together or offers any narrative satisfaction, and there are so many loose ends.

Come on, Scott Frank, the New Yorker painted you as having unerring instincts. WHERE DID THOSE INSTINCTS GO?

Overall, I actually did enjoy this. I like Clive Owen's Spade, even if he's no Bogie, and I liked the repartee, even if there's nothing nearly as memorable as almost every line of Maltese Falcon. The acting of the supporting cast is excellent, and the story does keep you interested before it falls apart.

Is it worth watching? Maybe. Just be forewarned.

I wanted Clive Owen to channel Bogart without imitating him. I wanted to feel both post WWII France as well as one struggling in Algeria and SE Asia. I wanted that France to be intense and atmosheric. I wanted characters that I cared about. I wanted film noir in color.

I got everything I wanted and this is everything I hoped it would be.

I think too that all this may play against the ultimate popularity of this series. Some will see Owen as half of Bogart, lacking depth, perhaps, and missing the slow burn that Bogie brought to the screen. Others, sadly, may have never seen Humphrey Bogart as Sam Spade and wonder why they aren't seeing a more recognizable Clive Owen.

Either way you look at it, if you watched episode one this clearly interests you, and good, bad, or indifferent we all owe it to modern noir to see it through if we ever want to see anyone continue to pursue the genre. And yes, I loved Perry Mason also, and watched every episode of an all too short run.

It's 1955 rural France. Sam Spade (Clive Owen) is searching for Philippe Saint Andre, the father of his charge, a girl named Teresa. He's been hired by Teresa's late mother who is his former lover and had stolen a large sum of money. He faces many obstacles with the disappeared Philippe. He places Teresa with the nuns at a local orphanage. It's 8 years later and Teresa is turning 18. She is set to receive the large sum from a trust and her thieving father is rumored to have returned. One night, Sam finds the girls locked in their room, Teresa missing, and the nuns brutally murdered.

The story is a bit of a mess. It starts great but ends muddled. I don't like the McGuffin boy. He is really just an object rather than a living breathing character. The girl is a much better subject. It is almost a comedy when they get to the final sit-down and calling out all the characters. I really like Clive Owen doing his Sam Spade. It's impossible to get away from Bogie but this is a fun interpretation. Stay for Clive.

This is so beautifully shot it's surprising to watch. Even the first scene, as Spade looks at a house uphill and the cameraman shoots him from below, so we're also looking up at Spade...is a surreal experience. The location does help, but oh, this is pretty to watch. Usually, period pieces from eras OTHER than the 60s or 70s are better done, but this one is as it should be; again, it probably helps that it's set in France. I don't even like France, and I've been there several times, but this makes me want to give it another go, but to a rural locale next time. In one episode, we are so drawn in to the character development and plot arcs that, by far, the only annoying issue here is the weekly episode release. Owen gives a good performance, but it's an ensemble piece and they are ALL phenomenal - this impresses me bc I knew none of them, came for him, stayed for them. Though there is a nude scene that I will be re-watching a FEW times. Thank you to the writers, producer, director, cameramen, crew: the pool scene is a gift to the world.

As to the noir mystery element, I've read this style of literature and watched these types of films for decades - and just wow. Please, money-people in the studios: more of THIS.

The first five episodes of this series wasn't bad and the story seemed destined to keep us in suspense. However, like any other series in the age of binge watching this one abruptly ends in the dumbest way. You know it's bad when everything is wrapped up in the last ten minutes. Clive Owen is really good as the witty, wisecracking, hard-nosed Sam Spade, but he is the story so allow him to be the story. The cast in the film are pretty good. The show is shot in France and the scenery is beautiful. You could say the scenery is also a character. Monsieur Spade is good, but needs more Sam Spade.cdm.

A show that had a lot of potential, even got off to a solid start, but the ending is hilariously bad.

At the beginning, we follow the elderly Sam Spade who has retired in France in a small rural town. Through a series of flashbacks, we find out how it happened.

The characters are generally not bad, but as the plot progressed, the writers couldn't resist without inserting modern clichés that are getting on everyone's nerves a little bit and starting to cause a complete counter effect.

One of the main villains, supposedly a monk who may or may not be, is hilarious. Ok, you don't like church, we get it, we see it in almost every new movie or series anyway, and it's already getting boring. When you see someone from the church on film, it is immediately clear that this person is almost certainly a villain. It's all become hilariously predictable.

The series had an excellent potential to give us a touch of good old entertainment and a good crime story with a bit of spy intrigue. Instead, we got another sermon, and this is especially evident in the last episode.

Speaking of the last episode, it's also the worst episode of the series, and it should be the exact opposite. The dialogues are terrible, and the sequence of events is catastrophically bad, and the direction is confusing, in some parts you can't see anything, and the action is hilarious. Yes, the action is completely unconvincing and laughable.

The addition of new characters at the last minute, who are there only to serve the scriptwriters to complete the plot and to satisfy the wishes of the producers, ruined the overall impression of the series even more. Not to mention how hilariously unrealistic it was. The resolution of everything in the end comes as a comedic effect because that's exactly what it is, a comedy.

The conversations between the characters at the end are so hilarious that they create the impression of a parody.

It's a pity, the show had potential, and it started solidly, the actors are not bad at all, but the script was worse from episode to episode, and the same with the direction. In the last episode, the main character, Samuel Spade, was reduced to a secondary character.

The last episode is so bad, that it completely destroyed the little that was good.

Unfortunately, this turned out to be a complete waste of time.

You need to know I really love all things Spade.

That means I will always enjoy Bogey's hunt for his partner's killers and invest time in the Golden Era's radio series no matter who is taking on Sam.

Monsieur Spade to the obvious disappointment of some does not try to recreate any past rendition of Spade so toss aside those hopes and go watch that movie again or listen to the recordings.

Others complain that this does not have the feel of film noir. They are correct because this is not meant to take viewers into those dark myteriou days.

Now that I have taken care of explaining Monsieur Spade's critics let me tell you that the creators of this project are true to Hammett!! They have imagined Spade's progression in life and offered us a drama with the twists and turns mystery novel enthusiasts will want more of.

The solid script is brought to life through solid direction that allows France to be Spade's new home for intrigue. Clive Owen offers us a solid performance that does not try to be Bogart but instead gives us Spade.

I am hoping that viewers enjoy it as much as I have so that we get another season!

Not so long ago, Owen was "the next big thing" in Hollywood and, in fact, appears twice in my IMDb list of BEST ALL-TIME films. Now, in 2024, he is back again as the "re-imagining" of the greatest detective of all time, transplanted through both time and space to, of all places, France in the 1960s. With a credit roll of Executive Producers that reads like an award list at the Academy. What to make of this? First, every star has the right to remake themselves if they wish. And Owen wished. Second, if the makeover ends up being one of the most surreal series ever to hit streaming media -- makes Perry Mason, a certified ratings hit, look like a documentary in comparison -- so much the better. Ironic indeed that France has earned an international reputation in their own media for preferring the unusual, the road less traveled. Monsieur Spade is all that, and more. It is literally its own innate strangeness that makes it entertaining. Not the plot. And not Owen's accent. In the immortal words of Monty Python, this really is something completely different. And, like French wine, an acquired taste. ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167 Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))

The backstory is co-writers Frank and Fontana (neighbors in L. A.) had the idea of a retired Sam Spade (epitomized by Humphrey Bogart in Maltese Falcon) riding out the wave in the south of France, with ensuing complications. Clive Owen - a fellow fan of Hammett/Bogart/film noir - heard about the project and offered his services in the lead role. Which, to my mind, is where things went awry.

Owen is a fabulous actor, but I think he's miscast as Spade. What made Bogart's portrayal compelling- and timeless - is the undertone of menace/violence lying just beneath the surface of his Spade, liable to strike at any moment. There's something unhinged and reckless about him, and Bogart carries that cynicism and simmering malevolence through every scene.

Owen, conversely - try as he might to deliver the tough-guy lines - seems more like an attractive nice-guy retiree who finds himself in the middle of mayhem that he doesn't quite know what to do about. The tough-guy personna doesn't fit him, and rings false in scene after scene. And while the noir-ish wise guy lines must have been creative fun for Frank and Fontana to write (I'm picturing them sitting across a kitchen table), they sound off-key when delivered by Owen, who's simply not believable as a cynical, hard-boiled survivor of mean streets. Similarly, many of the 'colorful' characters (bar owner/chanteuse; police captain, etc) seem stereotyped and artificial.

Having said that, it's certainly watchable, with passable plot twists and nice scenery. But overall it's less than the sum of its parts, with a miscast Owen the unsolvable problem.

As a decades long fan of.the written mysteries of Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler, Ross Macdonald, and Michael Connelly I am very particular about how they are translated into films or TV shows. Even more so if the result is derivative and speculative beyond what the author actually wrote, as this show is. The key for me is a combination of period and environmental authenticity, tone, psychological and social atmosphere, turns of phrases, character depictions and social norms that reflect the times the events happened. It is a fictional representation of history after all.

I was skeptical about this show when I read about it a few weeks ago. How could they pull this off in a believable way? After watching the first episode I think they may well have done it! I'm in now for the full ride unless something awful happens with the writing, acting, and production values I relate above. Real pros are behind this and they have my full attention and imagination in their hands. I will hang on for what looks like a terrific ride!

I've watched the first episode. I want to love this. But the only way this works for me is if I put Humprhey Bogart's voice over Clive Owen's every time he speaks. Bogart was world weary and beaten in a lot of ways, cynical and worn. But there was some indefinable spark and a nuance in his delivery that let you know he was alive, ticking, mind running full tilt and very clever plus he was quite funny, and nobody was really going to get the better of him. I just don't feel any of this from Clive. They wrote this show with Bogart dialogue but Owen doesn't have that type of delivery. I'll try episode 2. Now that the big kill has happened, maybe a fire will be lit within Owen.

UPDATE: Episode 2 now under my belt. Much much better. Maybe it will take time for the series to get its rhythm. I enjoyed this episode. I thought Owen was good and I'm beginning to have a little faith. I think the local French policeman is my favorite character. He has the best lines and delivery. I find the woman who owns the cafe/bar to be boring and her husband much the same. But something is going to happen there. I look forward to 3.

UPDATE: Thru eppisode 4. Ugh. Theresa acts like a 35 year old tired tart. That makes no sense at all. She was pretty darn young when she entered that nunnery. Why is she acting like she's been on the street?

The thing that disturbs me is how hard it is to follow. Thru episode 4, I get that we are emeshed in the after effects of not just WWII but also the French/Algeria war, of which I know nothing but I'm pleased to try to learn. And this maybe Mahdi kid? This feels so contrived. In fact, so much feels contrived. I think Owen has gotten the swing of it and is doing well. After all, he didn't write the pretty silly dialogue they are making him say.

But the father of the husband of his pretty bar-owning partner - who cares? And her part, omg. Poor actress. I did like that many townspeople shoot the Nazi member and husband of whoevver Spade was married to that is now dead. Okay. We get it. The French suffered terribly through all the world wars and Algeria and they do not play.

Could this be any more confusing? The "monk" killer - an unknown. Jean Pierre if that is his name. Who cares. The husband of whoever she is. Who cares. And the American priest who is? Really?

I am invested in Spade and the french policeman. Oh, I kind of like the maybe CIA agents who are pretending to be mother and son. What a huge mess this is. A slow, ponderous, confusing mess. Maybe they should have done a tv movie as 2 hours might be all this script could support and be bearable.

If you expect to see Bogart in Owen, you won't. As much as I love Bogard as Sam, this is something else entirely and the way Owen plays the character is fine with me.

This being said, Dashiel Hammett (if you read his novels) tends to have a slow plot so this series being described as slow by some reviewers is spot on - because it is supposed to be. It evokes the spirit of Hammett, reimagining his world, and is doing so really well.

I don't mind the subtitles (why is that even an issue?!) but, unfortunatelly, since this series is not aimed at general audience, it will get a low rating and fade into oblivion.

This series had lots of interesting twists and turns, some decent dialogue, along with occasional funny moments, and scenery that just makes you drool, but... despite the strong presence of Clive Owen in a solid performance, some interesting side characters and lovely period details, the whole series floundered badly in the final episode. A truly bizarre and totally unbelievable wrap-up that made no sense even after the silly monologue by the 'Canadian UN' character, played badly by Alfre Woodard. I had high hopes things would eventually come together in the end but all that happened is a gathering a la Agatha Christie in the living room with each person described in a preaching tone. A really silly piece of writing and way to end this otherwise fairly decent production that felt and looked like the period it portrays. Lots of wasted talent and too many characters that were in this mix of the good, the bad and the useless. Still have no idea what that crazed monk was doing and on whose behalf he acted. I really was shocked at how improbable the last episode supposedly 'resolved' the many strands of this show. A disappointing end.

Given my love for the film, I approached this series with skepticism. Trying to revive the role that Bogie just dominated (thus propelling the film to the Cinematic Mount Olympus (unlike the 1931 and 1936 versions)) and, in turn, propelled him to leading man stardom (damn good thing that George Raft turned down the role), seemed a highly dubious proposition.

The first episode was unnecessarily sluggish but I labored onwards, nonetheless. The tale and pacing improved in subsequent episodes but, even though he is a fine actor, I could not help but virtually overlay the image of Bogie upon Clive Owen - harmony was never achieved. This level of scrutiny was unfair to Monsieur Owen but my inner cinematic purist refused to slacken.

I kept watching, for the production itself was very good (actors, sets, clothing, cars, etc) and the story became more intricate.

And then came the finale, which I just finished viewing. The production suddenly became the equivalent of an old Citroen or Peugeot - the engine seized just before the finish line, leaving the viewers stranded. Such a cheap, ludicrous and buffoonish ending. A new character appeared just in the nick of time to shred any appreciation that the viewers had developed for the production up until that point. As my Dad used to say, "people don't speak like that in real life." A befuddling choice by the Writers/Director/Producers.

So obviously I would suggest avoiding this series. Go watch some "Poirot" episodes (David Suchet - magnifique!) instead. In case you haven't seen them, check out some of Bogie's second fiddle "heavy" roles he played in the 30's (e.g. "The Roaring Twenties" with Jimmy Cagney and "Bullets or Ballots" with Edward G. Robinson).

I recommend this show with one reservation...we haven't seen all the episodes to this point. We have no way of knowing how this will wrap up.

The second point I'll make is that if you don't know who Sam Spade is, and/or have never seen the Maltese Falcon with Humphrey Bogart, this may not be the show for you.

It isn't the Noir style of that long ago film, but as a well written "next chapter" of Spade's life and attempted retirement, it's very, very good.

It starts slowly, but develops a rhythm (as opposed to speed) that paints a three dimensional portrait of the French town and its inhabitants.

Clive Owen delivers a performance that instead of aping Bogey's lands on the mark of Dashiel Hammett's original books. With his craggy face reminiscent of Bogart (or Robert Mitchum) he blends into the time period perfectly.

As the character studies become more detailed, and the plot comes together, the performances of all the supporting actors begin to really fire up. Unfortunately in the third episode there are inconsistencies with some of the minor characters.

Interesting side note: although they are two VERY different films, I was struck by the striking similarities to the plot of Denzel Washington's Equalizer 3. Strange.

The reviewers who are frustrated with the subtitles, it's a minor adjustment that is worth adapting to. But having said that, episode three is ridiculous, where almost half the episode is subtitled. And for those who say it's slow ("Like, it's so slow, I'd def skip this") again, read Hammett. But, as much as I don't enjoy admitting I'm wrong, that third episode isn't just slow, it's convoluted; and the ending is the worst sort of cheat.

I'm hoping the future episodes regain what was, a surprisingly excellent show.

Through three episodes it seems like the people behind this series made a genuine effort to give hardboiled pulp icon Sam Spade his due in a twisty, noirish thriller. There's no impish 'genre deconstruction' and Spade hasn't been turned into a punchline in his own show. That's actually refreshing and laudable in 2024, sadly.

Unfortunately the series hasn't quite worked so far. The pacing is a bit too deliberate - the show meanders through flashbacks and side characters without much sense of urgency.

It's also undercut by several strange creative choices.

The first was to set it in France. As a result Spade is simultaneously and incongrously a streetwise hardcase who knows the seedy side of local life and a fish out of water in a place and culture he doesn't fully understand.

The second was to make him abrasive to everyone. Noir detectives from prior iterations of Spade to Philip Marlowe to J. J. Gittes were cynical and sardonic but their default interpersonal mode was smooth and charismatic. When they clapped back on someone or made a (controlled) show of anger it was usually a calculated gambit. This Spade seemingly can't distinguish the situational utility of different approaches. He's just a jerk to everybody; he comes off as a pugnacious idiot who has to "win" every verbal exchange regardless of the context. As a result it's impossible to warm to his character. It's also impossible to discern why anyone would help him, which the other characters that he regularly denigrates are all too willing to do.

The third was to make Spade old and financially set for life. He's mourning the death of his French wife who left him a beautiful estate; he's basically running out the clock as an idle country gentleman. He has no financial reason to get involved in an investigation. He does anyway, perhaps out of boredom and/or a sense of obligation to the people involved. These are fine and comprehensible motives except they don't jibe with Spade's characterization as weary, jaded and nihilistic. He could have been a cynical hustler whose only initial interest was financial until the case reinvigorated a latent morality (J. J. Gittes); he could have been an altruistic sleuth for whom money was tertiary to justice and an intellectual challenge (Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot.) Here Spade is neither and both. It doesn't work.

If all you want is to see beautiful rural images of France, this is the show for you. But if you want a script that makes sense, then steer clear. The show has no idea of what it wants to be: sometimes it's a pastiche of noir film, sometimes it's a talky who-done-it, sometimes it's a romance, sometimes it's a spy thriller, but most of all, its parts are far less than any whole. Nothing works well, thanks to the hackneyed script. The dialogue is so trite it sounds as though it comes from a high school student told to read Dashiell Hammett and then give it a go. But it's no go. Worst of all, the ending is unpleasantly ridiculous, probably because given all the confusing plot threads and red herrings and weird turns, there was no way this could end well.

Finally, Clive Owen is a very good actor but clearly he was told here to pretend that every line he delivers must sound exactly like every other line. That's not the way it was played in the best noir movies of the past, when actors were allowed to act. Here it feels like Owen is in some kind of actor's prison, and if he raises an uncalled for eyebrow or flashes an occasional facial expression, he'd be shot by one of the many strange dark fellows who wonder in and out of this perhaps well-intentioned but total mess.

A solid 7.5 program. Not perfect, but not.

If you are able to enjoy the journey as well as the conclusion then you'll get far more out of this than many of the reviewers on here.

Clive Owen - an instant watch for me since his early days with Chancer at the turn of the 90s.

Set design, music, writing - all in - a good general quality vehicle for Clive Owen who is spot on for the part as the elder Spade.

This is a love letter written/directed by people that have a genuine love of the Dashiell books and not just a job. So many bad adaptions so nice to have a good one.

The beginning of Episode 3 is fantastic, a true show of what this show is about - hard boiled posturing... in France.

All the child actors throughout are great - due to it being full of euro-actors and not bad us child actors.

In many respects, the show remains faithful to its source noir roots, for better and for worse. The show is excellently atmospheric, from the circa early 1960's French music and jazz to the portrayal of France struggling with the loss of Algeria. The dialogue snaps wonderfully; it's a real pleasure to watch Clive Owen who plays Sam Spade make with the one-liners. As is typical for noir, the plot is purposefully confusing with red herrings scattered everywhere. Most of the plot lines come together, more or less, with a ridiculous finish that seems as contrived as if it's from a parody movie like Neil Simon's "Murder by Death."

But the show also deliberately moves in unexpected directions, also for better and for worse. The last place you would expect to see the archetypical tough guy American detective is in a small town in France. It works, mostly. The casting choices are generally good, especially Clive Owen as Sam Spade and Cara Bossom as the genuinely beautiful young woman for whom Spade acts as a sort of guardian. The French actors are well cast. And yet some of the peripheral casting choices are deliberately strange, particularly a deep-voiced British actress who does an odd parody of a middle-aged vamp, and the Black actress who pulls all the pieces together at the end. She's terrific in her small role but considering the time period, she's miscast. Both characters distractingly take the viewer out of the time period.

This may have worked better as a shorter series. It's really good only when Clive Owen as Spade is interacting with the locals, and some of the sub-plots where he's absent are filler. I think that the red herring approach works better in a 90-minute film than it does in a six-hour series. But I enjoyed it for sure, and I would definitely watch a second season.