I’m 5 episodes deep in Ratched as we speak.
Stylistically it’s very deliberately paying homage / directly imitating Hitchcock’s technicolour melodramas. The near constant orchestra accompaniment, coloured lighting, raw Northern California coastline... somebody’s been overdosing on Vertigo.
And as well as looking fab, I kind of admire the stylistic conceit. In the novel, Ratchet represents the square past, contrasting with MacMurphy - a beatnik antihero... just as Milos Foreman’s film and it’s unadorned naturalism is stylistically so at odds with Hitchcock’s deliberate theatricality.
My main issue is with Ratched herself. While I love Sarah Paulson, and this has been lovingly created for her, she’s too old for the timeline. This series is set in 1947, and though the age of book-Ratched and the setting of the novel are both somewhat open to interpretation, for her to be 45 in the tv show, she’d be 61 in the year the novel is released. At any rate Sarah Paulson is already a couple of years older than Louise Fletcher was in the film, and film-Ratched is, I’d argue, canonical.
The tv show Ratched does come across as a younger woman. Uncertain of herself. Not yet any explanation of her unmarried/spinster life before she went to war as a nurse. If she had been in her late thirties or older it would surely be a big part of her backstory.
And it’s the backstory that I think is the mistake. This Ratched is traumatised from childhood, and has a casual relationship with covering up / facilitating murder. She’s a cold and scary woman, and so is the Ratched of cuckoos nest... but in a different way. That Ratched is terrifying precisely because she isn’t psychotic or unhinged. Her awfulness is in the mundane, officious, petty exertion of power that exists in middle managers everywhere. Ratched in Cuckoo’s Nest isn’t a psychopath or a criminal mastermind: she’s just a bully given unlimited rein to ruin people’s lives by the state. That’s the point. And this show misses that point by a mile.