I'm so glad I was not dissuaded by the brutality and raw portrayals that set the scene for this series. Once the moral and physical decay is established this story soars on the courage and ingenuity of our heroine using all her wit and intelligence to survive in a world controlled by the baser nature of men. Masterfully played by Romola Garai, we quickly become invested in this woman who becomes an angel for those who are trapped by and in their lives. Chris O'Dowd, Amanda Hale, Mark Gatiss, Shirley Henderson and Gillian Anderson are just some of the stellar supporting cast. The production brilliantly captures the mood through its costumes and sets. The original work was a novel by Michel Faber which Lucinda Coxon skillfully adapts to the small screen. A dark and disturbing portrayal of the vices and decay of Victorian London, Chris O'Dowd put it best, "It is a wonderful love story which is almost entirely bereft of love". I give this series an 8 (great) out of 10. {Victorian Drama}
20 Reviews
Fantastic
ReganRebecca4 February 2017
I have to admit, one of the only reasons I watched this is because I'm a huge fan of Romola Garai, but after the first episode I was completely hooked. It's well worth watching even if you don't care at all for any of the actors because everything about it is superb.
The Crimson Petal and the White is based on a neo-Victorian novel by the stupendous writer Michel Faber. The wonderful thing about neo-Victorian works is that they can revisit the Victorian age without being constrained by all the things that the Victorians liked to keep under wraps, like frank sexual talk. This comes in handy in The Crimson Petal and the White which is focused a great deal on sex and sexuality.
The main character is Sugar (Romola Garai, fantastic as always), a prostitute who has been working in the trade since she hit puberty (or maybe even before). Sugar has a deep distaste for men (she's working on a fantasy novel in which she tortures, maims, and kills her clients), but is well renowned because of her willingness to do anything (sexually speaking). She attracts the attention of William Rackham (Chris O'Dowd), a bumbling entrepreneur trapped in an unhappy marriage who is actually attracted to Sugar's mind as well as her body as she is self-educated and extremely literate and they both are well read. The more time Sugar and Rackham spend together the more they become obsessed with one another which leads to Sugar becoming more involved in Rackham's business and Rackham becoming concerned with keeping Sugar to himself.
There is a lot more to the plot than that, but it's a wonderful tale. The aspects of Sugar and Rackham's personalities are set down early, and as the story unfolds we see these aspects play out. Sugar, who is tough minded and hard, is also incredibly smart, has the capacity to grow and change and also to love. Rackham is weak and selfish and these aspects are exposed as he faces difficult decision after difficult decision.
The cast is excellent (special shoutout here to Chris O'Down whom I had previously only seen acting in comedies. He handles the darker material with ease putting to rest that lie about comedians not being able to handle anything but comedy). Beautifully shot and excellent costumes as you would expect from a BBC drama.
The Crimson Petal and the White is based on a neo-Victorian novel by the stupendous writer Michel Faber. The wonderful thing about neo-Victorian works is that they can revisit the Victorian age without being constrained by all the things that the Victorians liked to keep under wraps, like frank sexual talk. This comes in handy in The Crimson Petal and the White which is focused a great deal on sex and sexuality.
The main character is Sugar (Romola Garai, fantastic as always), a prostitute who has been working in the trade since she hit puberty (or maybe even before). Sugar has a deep distaste for men (she's working on a fantasy novel in which she tortures, maims, and kills her clients), but is well renowned because of her willingness to do anything (sexually speaking). She attracts the attention of William Rackham (Chris O'Dowd), a bumbling entrepreneur trapped in an unhappy marriage who is actually attracted to Sugar's mind as well as her body as she is self-educated and extremely literate and they both are well read. The more time Sugar and Rackham spend together the more they become obsessed with one another which leads to Sugar becoming more involved in Rackham's business and Rackham becoming concerned with keeping Sugar to himself.
There is a lot more to the plot than that, but it's a wonderful tale. The aspects of Sugar and Rackham's personalities are set down early, and as the story unfolds we see these aspects play out. Sugar, who is tough minded and hard, is also incredibly smart, has the capacity to grow and change and also to love. Rackham is weak and selfish and these aspects are exposed as he faces difficult decision after difficult decision.
The cast is excellent (special shoutout here to Chris O'Down whom I had previously only seen acting in comedies. He handles the darker material with ease putting to rest that lie about comedians not being able to handle anything but comedy). Beautifully shot and excellent costumes as you would expect from a BBC drama.
Only for gothic fans?
zdarov9 June 2019
I wanted to love this; I did like some of the scenery, the acting, already liked some of the actors, encountered a couple others that I like now too. But I decided to rate and write a review because watching it added nothing to my internal life, in fact I feel it detracted a little bit. But maybe this is the Gothic novel genre, and some people love that. It left me feeling cranky and I sort of wish I hadn't watched it!
Magnificent
jeanwinchester13 April 2011
I rarely write reviews. However...within two episodes, the BBC licence this year has been worth paying. And with gratitude. Quite fond of a Victorian drama, everything about this series is magnificent. The detail–underarm hair on women, the ugly charm of London in the nineteenth century, the wide open shots of the streets simply for a scene where one woman walks across the road–offering a tantalising view that the viewer could actually be there, the lighting, the makeup, the production, the acting, the direction... I did not recognise Gillian Anderson at all and had to refer to my paper. How far she has come. Chris O'Dowd I thought was an odd choice to begin with–but how he fitted in. Robert Sterne has to be congratulated. It is without a shadow of a doubt that the next two episodes will not disappoint. I must rush out and buy the book. First class.
Amazing
TheLittleSongbird22 May 2011
I love a good period drama, and The Crimson Petal and the White is exactly that. The book is a masterpiece, full of rich, memorable characters and a very interesting story line that draws you in from the word go, and this series lives up to it very, very well. Not only as an adaptation, but on its own terms, and it is addictive and easy to get into. I am not going to say which is better, the book or the series, I love them both equally.
Where The Crimson Petal and the White scores especially is in its setting and how it looks. The whole series is beautifully photographed, and the scenery and costumes are astounding. Not only that, the lighting and colours look so rich and vibrant in colour. The Crimson Petal and the White also succeeds in conveying a major asset that most period dramas have but some just lack, atmosphere. The atmosphere is so strong and authentic often that you don't feel you're watching a series, you feel as though you are being transported in time and reliving that moment for yourself.
I am also fond of good music in pretty much anything, being an aspiring singer and growing up into a musical family. The music for The Crimson Petal and the White is exquisite. Sometimes it is beautiful. Sometimes it is poignant. And sometimes it is haunting and intense when it needs to be. All these fit wonderfully with every scene, and are thankfully done in a subtle way in alternative to being done in an over-bearing and overly bombastic manner.
There is also a lot of depth in this series. Not that the book didn't, quite the contrary, but here the characters especially have the richness and perhaps even complexity of those in a Dickens dramatisation, in particular Amanda Hale's character. In fact for me, characterisation wise, The Crimson Petal and the White is the most in-depth series I have seen in the past year or so.
The Crimson Petal and the White benefits from really strong writing. It is very intelligent and literate with a dark quality to it too and never jars from the scene it appears in or in the characters it helps shape. The story helped by the atmosphere is hugely compelling, with subplots and the like developed very nicely without feeling too underdeveloped or padded out. The length and pacing should be credited, The Crimson Petal and the White considering how mammoth the book is, doesn't feel to me like it was too short, too rushed, too long or too meandering, instead it is perfect.
The direction also helps, it is very stylish and elegant, very like the camera work and settings for the series. The acting is superb, my favourite being Amanda Hale who gives real credibility to her increasingly tormented character instead of making her fall in caricature. Gillian Anderson is almost unrecognisable and is very good, she always is very good, but the thing about Anderson is that the more I see of her the more she impresses me. And this is pretty much the same with Romola Garai, I liked her very much in Atonement and Emma but I loved her here as she plays for my money her most interesting character to date. The biggest surprise though, and in a good way, is Chris O'Dowd, when I think of O'Dowd his style of acting(cheeky and spontaneous boyish charm) is very different to what is seen here, and overall he does do a really good job.
Overall, an amazing series. 10/10 Bethany Cox
Where The Crimson Petal and the White scores especially is in its setting and how it looks. The whole series is beautifully photographed, and the scenery and costumes are astounding. Not only that, the lighting and colours look so rich and vibrant in colour. The Crimson Petal and the White also succeeds in conveying a major asset that most period dramas have but some just lack, atmosphere. The atmosphere is so strong and authentic often that you don't feel you're watching a series, you feel as though you are being transported in time and reliving that moment for yourself.
I am also fond of good music in pretty much anything, being an aspiring singer and growing up into a musical family. The music for The Crimson Petal and the White is exquisite. Sometimes it is beautiful. Sometimes it is poignant. And sometimes it is haunting and intense when it needs to be. All these fit wonderfully with every scene, and are thankfully done in a subtle way in alternative to being done in an over-bearing and overly bombastic manner.
There is also a lot of depth in this series. Not that the book didn't, quite the contrary, but here the characters especially have the richness and perhaps even complexity of those in a Dickens dramatisation, in particular Amanda Hale's character. In fact for me, characterisation wise, The Crimson Petal and the White is the most in-depth series I have seen in the past year or so.
The Crimson Petal and the White benefits from really strong writing. It is very intelligent and literate with a dark quality to it too and never jars from the scene it appears in or in the characters it helps shape. The story helped by the atmosphere is hugely compelling, with subplots and the like developed very nicely without feeling too underdeveloped or padded out. The length and pacing should be credited, The Crimson Petal and the White considering how mammoth the book is, doesn't feel to me like it was too short, too rushed, too long or too meandering, instead it is perfect.
The direction also helps, it is very stylish and elegant, very like the camera work and settings for the series. The acting is superb, my favourite being Amanda Hale who gives real credibility to her increasingly tormented character instead of making her fall in caricature. Gillian Anderson is almost unrecognisable and is very good, she always is very good, but the thing about Anderson is that the more I see of her the more she impresses me. And this is pretty much the same with Romola Garai, I liked her very much in Atonement and Emma but I loved her here as she plays for my money her most interesting character to date. The biggest surprise though, and in a good way, is Chris O'Dowd, when I think of O'Dowd his style of acting(cheeky and spontaneous boyish charm) is very different to what is seen here, and overall he does do a really good job.
Overall, an amazing series. 10/10 Bethany Cox
A masterpiece brought lovingly to our screens
markgorman2 May 2011
I love Michel Faber's writing and it's a toss up between this and Under The Skin for his greatest work. The two could be no more different; Under the Skin is a taught contemporary sci fi horror set in Scotland and this; an 800 page monstrous take on Dickensian Victorian London.
Both are really great books and consequently both run the risk of taking a good pasting when put on screen.
There has been many year's of talk that TCPATW would be Hollywood-made and for a while rumour had it that Kirsten Dunst was to be the heroine, Sugar. However it fell eventually to the BBC to make this near epic adaptation. I say near epic because big and bold as it was I think it had even greater potential.
The previews did not make great reading; the panel on Newsnight Review, with the honourable exception of Maureen Lipman, annihilated it so I approached fearing the worst.
I needn't have worried.
The, at times, over tricksy focus pulling in the camera work was a bit heavy handed but this was overcome on balance because otherwise it was excellent (moody, creepy, almost surreal in places and beautifully emphasised by a particularly odd (in a good way) score written by newcomer CristobalTapai de Veer).
The set and costumes are astounding and the acting of the entire cast, but Particularly Chris O'Dowd (the IT team) and Romola Garai were of BAFTA winning standards, and had to be to pull it off.
In particular O'Dowd's tortured portrayal of sappy rich boy William Rackham is magnificent. It's as if he can't decide how to play the role, but that's just how Faber wrote it. In the end he comes across as merely a weak sap who is only in it for himself. Perhaps he cannot help it as we frequently see when he is led astray by his particularly vulgar "friends".
Romola Garai, by contrast, is nailed to the tracks in the conviction of her character, as the upwardly mobile Sugar; pulling herself out of the stench thanks to the interest of Rackham who gradually exalts her social profile in a London where status was everything (and boy did she have status in the underworld, starting off as the top prostitute in London). Her gritty but sometimes tender performance is the beating heart of the book and this ultimately excellent adaptation.
It's still on iplayer but I'd wait for the DVD and splash out.
For me it would play out better as an epic four hour movie rather than a four part TV series.
Wonderful. Bring on the BAFTAs. (And the Emmys).
Both are really great books and consequently both run the risk of taking a good pasting when put on screen.
There has been many year's of talk that TCPATW would be Hollywood-made and for a while rumour had it that Kirsten Dunst was to be the heroine, Sugar. However it fell eventually to the BBC to make this near epic adaptation. I say near epic because big and bold as it was I think it had even greater potential.
The previews did not make great reading; the panel on Newsnight Review, with the honourable exception of Maureen Lipman, annihilated it so I approached fearing the worst.
I needn't have worried.
The, at times, over tricksy focus pulling in the camera work was a bit heavy handed but this was overcome on balance because otherwise it was excellent (moody, creepy, almost surreal in places and beautifully emphasised by a particularly odd (in a good way) score written by newcomer CristobalTapai de Veer).
The set and costumes are astounding and the acting of the entire cast, but Particularly Chris O'Dowd (the IT team) and Romola Garai were of BAFTA winning standards, and had to be to pull it off.
In particular O'Dowd's tortured portrayal of sappy rich boy William Rackham is magnificent. It's as if he can't decide how to play the role, but that's just how Faber wrote it. In the end he comes across as merely a weak sap who is only in it for himself. Perhaps he cannot help it as we frequently see when he is led astray by his particularly vulgar "friends".
Romola Garai, by contrast, is nailed to the tracks in the conviction of her character, as the upwardly mobile Sugar; pulling herself out of the stench thanks to the interest of Rackham who gradually exalts her social profile in a London where status was everything (and boy did she have status in the underworld, starting off as the top prostitute in London). Her gritty but sometimes tender performance is the beating heart of the book and this ultimately excellent adaptation.
It's still on iplayer but I'd wait for the DVD and splash out.
For me it would play out better as an epic four hour movie rather than a four part TV series.
Wonderful. Bring on the BAFTAs. (And the Emmys).
... okay, yet was hoped-expected to have been better
bjarias3 January 2023
... a production uneven through four parts... the acting overall is fairly consistently good, it's the very thinly written story that is the weak element... the first couple parts are decent, then attempting to stretch things out for another two episodes the cracks show, as there's just not enough material to get four segments out of it... suffice saying, a good two hour movie would have been exceptionally better
... believability's suspect, there's just lots here that isn't... starting with Garai's character Sugar, just not making a lot of sense... a good hearted hooker looking like she does, never being 'discovered' very unlikely, and the ending with her and the child is just absurd, as well as the wife just-walking-off
... Garai really deserving another better-longer series like 'The Hour' (still her best TV work)... TCPATW not showcasing her abilities in best light.
... believability's suspect, there's just lots here that isn't... starting with Garai's character Sugar, just not making a lot of sense... a good hearted hooker looking like she does, never being 'discovered' very unlikely, and the ending with her and the child is just absurd, as well as the wife just-walking-off
... Garai really deserving another better-longer series like 'The Hour' (still her best TV work)... TCPATW not showcasing her abilities in best light.
A gripping and atmospheric Victorian drama
jane_concannon21 April 2011
As a fan of Victorian-era drama, this 4-part adaptation of a Michel Faber book of the same name is right up my street. It is the story of a London prostitute called Sugar (played by Romola Garai) who takes the fancy of a well-to-do merchant Mr Rackham (Chris O'Dowd) and how their relationship develops. What starts of as a purely sexual thing, soon become much more than that and Sugar becomes increasingly involved in Mr Rackham's home and business life. The whole production is fantastic - from the stylistic direction right down to the set design, costumes, music and acting. Romola Garia and Chris O'Dowd particularly stand out, as does Amanda Hale as the mentally disturbed wife. I have just finished watching the 3rd episode and did not want it to end, it was that gripping. I can't wait to read the book and only hope it is half as good as this series. I will definitely buy this when it comes out on DVD and watch it again. All in all, highly recommended!
Addictive
Mag-1321 April 2011
Addictive, and not in a bad way. Sooo rich in character and setting. You feel dirty when you see the homeless old men, hopeless, skinny children, and the mentally gone, all whose skin is the same color as the coal smoke filth of London. You smell the urine in the streets as you follow Sugar from her whorehouse to the market. The whores you meet are vacant, empty souls eaten by diseases and beaten to pulp by cowardly customers.
There isn't anyone good in this story, but they're all marvelous.
Sugar plots imaginary revenge against her johns, and it's such a pleasure to see that she has some power, if only in her mind, over her miserable world.
There isn't anyone good in this story, but they're all marvelous.
Sugar plots imaginary revenge against her johns, and it's such a pleasure to see that she has some power, if only in her mind, over her miserable world.
Astounding!!
cjcer6 October 2012
After the first time I watched this magnificent period drama, I was totally hooked. I have since watched it 2 more times (in a row), I found it so compelling. The sets, costumes, everything about this is the epitome of classic Vitorian life. I closely formed a bond with Sugar, and felt for the way William treated her. It's a classic of good overcoming bad. I adored it and cannot wait for the DVD! The change made by Sugars love and affection for poor little Sophie was commendable, and the mental illness suffered by Agnes, was so believable as she slowly went out of her mind, and the gentleness shown by Sugar with her was heartfelt. The cast, directer, set producer, period costumer are all at their very best!
I
Headturner17 June 2021
The Crimson Petal and the White
Angelus22 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
William Rackham is considered by his Father to be pathetic and everything he does is useless, until he meets a prostitute named Sugar, Sugar gives William confidence, while William offers a new life for Sugar.
I have not been fond of old period dramas and British telly is full of period dramas, but when I saw the advert for this show, I was dazzled by the character Sugar, this show seemed to have a dark quality to it that drew me in. So, I watched it and I have to say, I was blown away by the cast, script and overall production values that the BBC have put in making this show, especially after they cancelled one of my favourites, 'Survivors'.
The audience receives a brief but powerful insight into the world of Victorian England, the elitist behaviour that divides a country, I have not read the novel, but I am a firm believer that a novel is usually much better than a live production, so I will read the novel.
Keep on producing quality dramas!
I have not been fond of old period dramas and British telly is full of period dramas, but when I saw the advert for this show, I was dazzled by the character Sugar, this show seemed to have a dark quality to it that drew me in. So, I watched it and I have to say, I was blown away by the cast, script and overall production values that the BBC have put in making this show, especially after they cancelled one of my favourites, 'Survivors'.
The audience receives a brief but powerful insight into the world of Victorian England, the elitist behaviour that divides a country, I have not read the novel, but I am a firm believer that a novel is usually much better than a live production, so I will read the novel.
Keep on producing quality dramas!
The Angel in the House?
PippinInOz4 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I have just finished watching the final episode today and - like another reviewer (jane) I did not want it to end.
This has so much to recommend it. Although I am an avid appreciator of 'period drama' some of it, let's face it, is not brilliant is it? Yeah, okay it's watchable, but this, THIS is just fantastic, because:
1. It has all the allusions to 18th Century 'tales' of 'fallen women in the big dirty London City' like Daniel Defoe's 'Moll Flanders' for example, but then adds something else, something new.
2. The something 'new' is an in your face representation of 1870s London. What a relief to see it how I imagined it to be. As a working class London girl who was lucky enough to study London Victorian life from a working class perspective it was exhilarating - and terrifying - to see what appears to me an accurate vision of the time and place. If you want servile happy poor folk who are 'everso grateful' to their betters, then go get a Disney version. This one goes for it. You can almost smell it - and it ain't nice, it ain't pretty. From the attempts by the prostitutes to prevent getting pregnant, the attempts to 'get rid of' unwanted pregnancies to the completely unsexy images of rich men f**cking in an alley way.
3. All of the acting is superb. Let us all thank God that the Americans never got hold of this for a film version. When Agnes thinks she sees her 'Angel' loitering in the street below the window, it is a play on the Victorian ideal of womanhood 'the angel in the house' - William Rackham's idealisation - and separation - of the two women in his life says so much that needed to be said about this often idealised time in history. The Angel in the House, particularly after Sugar moves into the home as Governess, means the Prostitute became the Angel in the House, if but briefly.
4. The one weak link for me was the character of Emmeline Fox played by Shirley Henderson. I am now reading the book and wonder why this character was made so two dimensional when her character really could have been sooooo much more. But hey......different texts, so if you haven't read the book, you won't care.
5. When the body of Agnes is plucked out of the Thames, there are nods and winks to the Pre Raphaelite painting of 'Ophelia' - the woman driven mad by her lover who drowns herself. Art that was by Victorian males, judged by Victorian males and modelled by at least one prostitute. Also, a comment on the strange ideas of womanhood during this period - but by extension, the strange ideas right now. Yeah, it has changed, but has it changed as much as we like to believe? In this way it becomes a meditation on the past and the present.
Highly recommended to everyone who loves a good yarn. Even more so to anyone who wants a warts and all depiction of the past. Romola Garai and Chis O'Dowd are just wonderful and should win at least a couple of awards for their efforts here. .....but everyone is good, special stars for Gillian Anderson as the collector of religious pictures who proves beyond any doubt she can play anything the director throws at her. Lovely performance.
Also recommend the book upon which this is based. First rate.
This has so much to recommend it. Although I am an avid appreciator of 'period drama' some of it, let's face it, is not brilliant is it? Yeah, okay it's watchable, but this, THIS is just fantastic, because:
1. It has all the allusions to 18th Century 'tales' of 'fallen women in the big dirty London City' like Daniel Defoe's 'Moll Flanders' for example, but then adds something else, something new.
2. The something 'new' is an in your face representation of 1870s London. What a relief to see it how I imagined it to be. As a working class London girl who was lucky enough to study London Victorian life from a working class perspective it was exhilarating - and terrifying - to see what appears to me an accurate vision of the time and place. If you want servile happy poor folk who are 'everso grateful' to their betters, then go get a Disney version. This one goes for it. You can almost smell it - and it ain't nice, it ain't pretty. From the attempts by the prostitutes to prevent getting pregnant, the attempts to 'get rid of' unwanted pregnancies to the completely unsexy images of rich men f**cking in an alley way.
3. All of the acting is superb. Let us all thank God that the Americans never got hold of this for a film version. When Agnes thinks she sees her 'Angel' loitering in the street below the window, it is a play on the Victorian ideal of womanhood 'the angel in the house' - William Rackham's idealisation - and separation - of the two women in his life says so much that needed to be said about this often idealised time in history. The Angel in the House, particularly after Sugar moves into the home as Governess, means the Prostitute became the Angel in the House, if but briefly.
4. The one weak link for me was the character of Emmeline Fox played by Shirley Henderson. I am now reading the book and wonder why this character was made so two dimensional when her character really could have been sooooo much more. But hey......different texts, so if you haven't read the book, you won't care.
5. When the body of Agnes is plucked out of the Thames, there are nods and winks to the Pre Raphaelite painting of 'Ophelia' - the woman driven mad by her lover who drowns herself. Art that was by Victorian males, judged by Victorian males and modelled by at least one prostitute. Also, a comment on the strange ideas of womanhood during this period - but by extension, the strange ideas right now. Yeah, it has changed, but has it changed as much as we like to believe? In this way it becomes a meditation on the past and the present.
Highly recommended to everyone who loves a good yarn. Even more so to anyone who wants a warts and all depiction of the past. Romola Garai and Chis O'Dowd are just wonderful and should win at least a couple of awards for their efforts here. .....but everyone is good, special stars for Gillian Anderson as the collector of religious pictures who proves beyond any doubt she can play anything the director throws at her. Lovely performance.
Also recommend the book upon which this is based. First rate.
Fantastic
spacecadet-686783 September 2020
I love period dramas...
d-league-garrison24 October 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I really loved this one up to a point. The acting, music, lighting, all are very well done... Could not have been better.
What, in my opinion, could've been better, were the loose ends being tied up. What happened to Sugar and Sophie? To William? Why did they allow William to be so short sighted when it came to having a "male" heir when it was Sugar that literally saved his business and was running it 90% of the time? How could he have not have known Sugar was pregnant with his child when she was pregnant?
Even with class differences back then, there is the obvious and in this, some issues could have been overcome even then. The show missed the mark by a long way for me.
I realized at the end, the story was told in reverse but that still didn't make up for leaving so much untold. I'm this regard it was disappointing. I didn't read the book so I watched with fresh eyes. Maybe this was what left me disappointed in the end. Who's to say. I still gave it a 8/10 because it was great in most all other regards and is worth a watch for anyone who loves period pieces.
What, in my opinion, could've been better, were the loose ends being tied up. What happened to Sugar and Sophie? To William? Why did they allow William to be so short sighted when it came to having a "male" heir when it was Sugar that literally saved his business and was running it 90% of the time? How could he have not have known Sugar was pregnant with his child when she was pregnant?
Even with class differences back then, there is the obvious and in this, some issues could have been overcome even then. The show missed the mark by a long way for me.
I realized at the end, the story was told in reverse but that still didn't make up for leaving so much untold. I'm this regard it was disappointing. I didn't read the book so I watched with fresh eyes. Maybe this was what left me disappointed in the end. Who's to say. I still gave it a 8/10 because it was great in most all other regards and is worth a watch for anyone who loves period pieces.
This is awesome!
SmileyMcGrouchpantsJrEsqIII31 December 2022
This is a very thrilling, challenging work. Reading (or having read) the society novels of Thackeray, Tolstoy, and Proust, et. Al., might put you in the position to better appreciate this film, a four-hour plunge right down the middle in the guise of a television show adapted from a novel. The truths are as tough as the lack of resorting to easy despair -- check out the look of disappointment on the maid's face early on when she's remonstrated by the master of the house for not coming to the door "the first, but the second time I knocked" and the way she looks at Sugar and carries herself towards the door before she opens it exits it and closes it after waking Sugar and bringing her her morning cup of tea (right? I'm an American) -- clearly she approves. This is a very good movie, and the opening has scenes, shots abs mise en scène out of David Lynch or Ken Russell, to haunt you through the rest of the production, which it does; dream or nightmare, these people are bound by clothes, rooms, and locales in general, which keep them propped up as much as they oppress them. It's a staggering piece of work, for something just thrown up on television, to be honest -- it goes to show what the BBC can do, and what HBO only tries. Romola Garai has reason to be proud for the rest of her life of this movie, and so does that maid. I really liked her.
Pretty bad.
jmariani-5979927 January 2022
What a dark, depressing and somewhat voyeuristic-feeling series. I'm not sure why so many people gave this such good ratings, unless they like shows that try too hard to be edgy. Unconvincing female lead doesn't help, and there's not a single likable character to be had. If I'm going to watch a depressing series, there ought to at least be a great pay off somewhere along the line. Never was.
Bunkum
YohjiArmstrong25 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Ah, THE CRIMSON PETAL AND THE WHITE, what a load of rot. The story concerns the brilliant Victorian prostitute Sugar (Romola Garai) who becomes mistress to (her sugar-daddy?) William Rackham (Chris O'Dowd).
Romola Garai mugs her pretty little heart out but remains fundamentally unconvincing as a bewitching prostitute. Chris O'Dowd apparently doesn't know how to shave or how to do any accent but his native Irish. Lots of other people turn up but they are even more boring than the two leads. Special mention must be made of Mark Gatiss who continues to play the same part in every TV drama he's in.
The plot is post-Victorian. Which is to say that it is purest Victorian melodrama but with extra shagging. Being post-Victorian also means that the male characters are all weirdos, wussbags or fools. The women in contrast are wise or mysterious or victimised. Even the prostitutes turn out to be remarkably well read.
Much has been made of the seedy atmosphere, sets and costuming. I disagree. This underworld is treated in a voyeuristic manner- most notably in the first episode where a single shot takes in grotesquely fat and urinating prostitutes in the nuddy. The over-use of skinny kids, beaten prossies and lunatics makes it appear that there are no normal people in London and robs the series of any reality. Without the solid sense of reality it was impossible to take anything seriously. Give me Charlie Dickens anyday.
Romola Garai mugs her pretty little heart out but remains fundamentally unconvincing as a bewitching prostitute. Chris O'Dowd apparently doesn't know how to shave or how to do any accent but his native Irish. Lots of other people turn up but they are even more boring than the two leads. Special mention must be made of Mark Gatiss who continues to play the same part in every TV drama he's in.
The plot is post-Victorian. Which is to say that it is purest Victorian melodrama but with extra shagging. Being post-Victorian also means that the male characters are all weirdos, wussbags or fools. The women in contrast are wise or mysterious or victimised. Even the prostitutes turn out to be remarkably well read.
Much has been made of the seedy atmosphere, sets and costuming. I disagree. This underworld is treated in a voyeuristic manner- most notably in the first episode where a single shot takes in grotesquely fat and urinating prostitutes in the nuddy. The over-use of skinny kids, beaten prossies and lunatics makes it appear that there are no normal people in London and robs the series of any reality. Without the solid sense of reality it was impossible to take anything seriously. Give me Charlie Dickens anyday.
Very disappointing
jjsoltis3 July 2021
Can't even touch the novel
unchartedimages11 June 2018
This mini-series shows none of the richness of these characters, and the pace is all wrong. I realize that there's only so much a TV show can do, but maybe it shouldn't even have been made if it does so little justice to what is an incredible novel.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
