Tipping the Velvet

I think Andrew Davies did an admirable job of taking a magnificent book which emulated the pace and styling of a Victorian novel and turning it into a moving and entertaining film. I'm glad I read (twice) the book first which is usually the case for me. I know that one must view a novel and a film as different media and judge them accordingly. But, still, it's often hard to read the original material after a film gives away the best parts.

I realize that Davies is a very good adapter, but I wish the producers had chosen a woman to write the screenplay. Davies, as he admits in the commentary that accompanies the film on DVD, wanted particularly to emphasis the more scatological bits in the book. I certainly enjoyed those, on film as in the book. But Davies missed a half-dozen moments that are so excruciatingly, painfully tender which he could have incorporated if his sensibility were more feminine.

I also would take issue with his use of the book's primary symbol, the rose.

As the screenplay was plotted by Davies, the denouement was inevitable and appropriate. But I really think that author Waters' final nod to the rose symbol was much more interesting. And I preferred way the novel let Nan "come of age" than the way Davies chose.

One quick comment about the four actors who essay the primary roles. They are all wonderfully talented -- well, except for the singing and dancing, perhaps -- and, moreover, their physical presences are so much what the mind's eye sees when reading the novel before seeing the film. I thought they were all terrific.

I recommend that any lesbian and anyone who loves good fiction, add BOTH the book and the DVD of TIPPING THE VELVET to their bookshelves.

I never knew this DVD existed, had I not been checking out lesbian films in Amazon.com. On description alone, I purchased it. That was 3 weeks ago. I have watched the DVD almost every night. My 17 yr. old. step-daughter, every time she catches me says, "Not again?" I say, automatically, "Sorry, kid, yes, again." It's not just the theme, it's everything. The time and place, the screen writing, the music, the acting, the tone, the lighting, the challenge of pushing the envelope. (I doubt very much we would see a production such as this here in the United States.) For me, this is absolutely the best lesbian presentation I have seen. It is so satisfying on every level. I, too, had my heart broken by my first love...and eventually found my life partner, so I related very much to the story to some degree. I applaud and thank everyone involved in this presentation. And of course, accolades to the author.

I am getting obsessed by it, playing the DVD over and over. And it is not because of the lesbian love story, nor because of the physical relationship neither. It's about the tenderness and care with which the whole thing is done. You obviously can notice that in the script itself, even in the rawer moments there's certain hope. But also in the music (the melodies are so sweet), the photography (all this wine like and golden tones for indoor scenes), the so fine decoration and set design (theatres and back stages), those little sounds added (hoses running, opera voices ..), those visual metaphors (burning fondue for Kitty's jealousy, empty oyster shells swirling in the waves as Nan meets life ..) …etc..

To me the most beautiful concept is the protagonist personal and sentimental growth, how she becomes an adult by finding love and life. About this, an outstanding detail is Nan's expression and tone of voice. There's one scene in first episode: Kitty and Nan are in Nan's room at Nan's parents, Nan takes the rose Kitty gave to her in the theatre from a drawer and says: 'Remember when you gave me this?' .. The tone in which the sentence is said is so wonderful, it express so much thrill, admiration, delight and most of all innocence. This is what the first episode is about, Nan and her innocence and childhood lost… something left in the sea waves of her home town shore where she was an oyster. But in the second and third episodes she looses this purity in her voice, as she's becoming an adult in all senses. She sounds stronger and more secure... the oyster opens.

This leads me to talk about Rachael's awesome work, all these details are not only shown in her voice but in her acting. And what is more, she not only acts great all the way long but also she sings lovely! The rest of the actresses are wonderful too .. Anna Chancellor's Diana still scares me ;) What to say about magnetic Kitty (whoah Keeley!) and also Jhodi May builds a so very nice good home-loving girl. The actors are quite good too, including baby Cyril ;-)

Another good feature to point out is the rhythm of the episodes development. We can see Kitty and Nan's debut on stage at the same time that all their previous rehearsals, and also Nan's cooking and cleaning at Flo's at the same time that she recovers emotionally from wandering the streets. All this action together prevents the episodes from slow down and from loosing the attention.

But of course this story is a tale, in which the protagonist suffers but at the end wins, there is no point in looking for resemblances with real life as life is much more complicated than a tale. She even triumphs at speaking in the socialist rally saving Flo's brother from stage fright. And I think choosing one girl instead of the other pretended to be a happy end … personally I would definitively have chosen the other, no doubt at all ;-D

I've found a soundtrack at amazon.co.uk but it doesn't include the songs the girls sing at stage .. anyone know where to find them?

Thanks for reading

This wonderful 3 part BBC production is one of the sweetest love stories that I have seen in a while. The actresses display a very high level of talent, especially Rachael Stirling as Nan Astley. She is funny, seductive and cute. The love making scenes and the close up kisses are very erotic regardless of one's sexual preference.

The characters are well defined and very believable. I guess this is a by-product of a good adaptation from a well written novel.

A truly remarkable well paced drama that picks up speed quickly after a couple of boring (but necessary) scenes in the beginning.

My vote: 9/10

I'm glad I read the Sarah Waters novel first, since I had my own pictures of the characters in my head at the time. The ones cast for this production, however, were not at all disappointing - in fact, after I got used to Rachael Stirling as Nan, I think Nina Gold did a damn fine job in the casting department. (Can Keeley Hawes be more delicious?!)

The BBC has done it again: this is a wonderful production of a very good book, and they have done it up in style. If you can get your hands on this (VHS, DVD) be sure to get the 181-minute version (the uncensored one.) It is a marvelous journey, albeit a bit rocky at times, that you won't regret taking.