Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

Jerome Robbins: Something to Dance About-- documentary in the American Masters series


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#31 Natalia

Natalia

    Rubies Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,403 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 04:33 AM

..... (Two credit rolls, Natalia? Where's the second one? ....


Yup, Jack. We got ALL the contributors before the show, then again after the show. Not so long ago, there were only 1 or 2 contributors mentioned, e.g., "Great Performances is made possible by a generous grant from the Fanne Fox Foundation and from Viewers Like You." Those 3-4 four seconds have turned into a cast-of-thousands with several top contributors names then '10,000 others' shown rolling, all before the show begins. THEN at the end of the show, after the credits roll, the Contributors' names roll again.

It's like the Playbill at the Kennedy Center -- names of even the $25 contributors are now printed....causing almost 50% of the Playbill to be nothing but Contributors. Next they'll be listing everyone who paid the $17 for Indoor Parking? :o

#32 atm711

atm711

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,430 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 04:39 AM

Makarova was in red. Which ballet was that?



atm711 -- it WAS extraordinary to see the original film of Interplay. Having just seen the full ballet performed by ABTII in sleek contemporary costumes, I am astonished by how different this ballet now "looks" -- on the surface at least.


Bart, by this time you know it was 'other dances'. What amazes me about these brief dances is how Robbins absorbed Makarova's innate movements. I have a clip of Kirkland in the same work and whenever I look at it--all I can see is Makarova's persona. Something is missing and it's Makarova. (I feel the same way when a ballerina other than Fonteyn is dancing Ashton--Margot is missing) Ashton had many years to observe and absorb Fonteyn---but what Robbins did was magic (as they say).

Those sleek new costumes you describe for 'Interplay" would take me a while to get used to---after all these years I still can't get used to the white costumes in 'Concerto Barocco'.

#33 bart

bart

    Diamonds Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,320 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 04:56 AM

atm711, I confess to a preference for sleekness in general. Maybe that's because Balanchine was being forced to cut back on the costume budget at the time I started attending NYCB. The costuming in Dances at a Gathering is pretty much as far as I can travel comfortably -- without having to repress the urge to get out the scissors. :o

About the video clips. I was astonished, yesterday, when actually timing a few of them, at how very, very brief they are. Somehow they seem longer in the context of the film. I wondered whether this was because I had seen so many of these works on stage, which meant that many other images and impressions rushed in to fill out the experience.

It's like those little samples they offer at ice cream shops. Or trying to imagine a longer text by looking intently at tiny fragments of a Dead Sea Scroll.

#34 Mme. Hermine

Mme. Hermine

    Emeralds Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,776 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 05:25 AM

It will be shown again in the NY area Saturday at 2:30 p.m. and Sunday at 12:15 on Channel 13.

#35 Quiggin

Quiggin

    Gold Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 10:59 AM

About the video clips. I was astonished, yesterday, when actually timing a few of them, at how very, very brief they are.


I'm also surprised how little of the real stuff, the primary materials--as opposed to talking heads--documentary filmakers will give us, as if they're afraid of offending the audience by including something intense and sustained. I wanted to see more of Fancy Free, with the original bodies and gauge how much has worn away and how much infill--good and bad--has occured over the years.

Overall though it was pretty balanced. I liked seeing Harold Lang (the Pal Joey one) singing and dancing and the footage of Ethel Merman rehearsing in Gypsy (and I realized that Gypsy has a fairly substantial conceptual debt to Pal Joey). Seeing what Joe Duell was like performing and the clip of Imogene Coca winking and smirking in the broadest manner were also highpoints. And I agree with dirac and printcess that finking and naming names of friends and associates on Jerome Robbins part was an optional course, not one of necessity--even given all of the pressures of the time. He would lost out on Hollywood, had Broadway (maybe slightly fewer shows) and had his heart's desire, New York City Ballet. Lincoln Kirstein would have vouched for him there. And what a scoundrel, to use Lillian Hellman's term, the seemingly benign Ed Sullivan was. I had forgotten that.

#36 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,713 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:19 AM

Lincoln Kirstein would have vouched for him there.


Balanchine, too, I think. He might not have understood some of the nuances of the domestic politics involved, and I imagine he thought the blacklistees were getting their just desserts.

I still think the ballet excerpts were mostly well handled and chosen, and as EricMontreal22 says they come off better than some of the Broadway clips, which were somewhat disappointing.

--we learned no new insights at all, many of his more interesting and less successful shows like Billion Dollar Baby were hardly even mentioned (O would love to know where the footage of the Max Sennett ballet in High Button Shoes was from!) and virtually no new footage.


Probably they figured that only buffs would be interested in the more obscure shows. That clip from High Button Shoes was marvelous, though, and I hadn’t seen it before.

I take your point about talking heads, Quiggin, but in the case of someone like Robbins where a few of those talking heads may not be around for too much longer – Ruthanna Boris, who was interviewed, is already gone, and I’m glad she was included -- I appreciate seeing them and hearing from them firsthand, even if not all of them are saying much that’s new.

#37 Quiggin

Quiggin

    Gold Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 12:07 PM

I appreciate seeing them and hearing from them firsthand, even if not all of them are saying much that’s new.


I agree, dirac, that the talking heads were for the most part well worth including--it was the best Peter Martins interview I've seen, with the complain complain story and the comment that with Balanchine it was an intellectual delight and bodily hell whereas with Robbins it was the opposite (or some equivalent, I'm badly paraphrasing this I know). But the historical apologist took up time that could have been better used for extended clips of original performances.

#38 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,713 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 12:19 PM

I agree, dirac, that the talking heads were for the most part well worth including--it was the best Peter Martins interview I've seen, with the complain complain story and the comment that with Balanchine it was an intellectual delight and bodily hell whereas with Robbins it was the opposite (or some equivalent, I'm badly paraphrasing this I know).


No, you got it it just right. I too was impressed with Martins – his remarks weren’t just amusing but pinpointed key differences between the two men and their approach to their work. (The recent “Ballet Russes” documentary was, to my mind, more like what you’re describing – the dance segments were very, very brief and the talking heads were omnipresent. Really spoiled my pleasure in the film.) It's always best to work in as much primary source material as possible, I agree.

#39 4mrdncr

4mrdncr

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 670 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 06:06 PM

It's always best to work in as much primary source material as possible, I agree.



If you have (or can get) access to those primary sources, AND PAY FOR the permissions, releases, or rights to use such sources as documents, photos, prints, films, home videos, or the talent (dancers,choreographers, stars depicted). And if it's a document/photo/print shown within a video or film clip, then you have double or triple the work to secure those rights. Oh yeah, did i mention the E&O (errors & ommissions) insurance you have to get too, in case you spell a name wrong, or signify the wrong document's or film clip's importance?

PS. The days of single sponsors (or only 3) for the majority of programs on PBS have been gone for decades.

#40 Ray

Ray

    Gold Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 997 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 07:39 PM

I wonder if the falling-in-the-pit story is true. It certainly fulfills the collective revenge fantasy of dancers who've been told to shut up and dance!

#41 EricMontreal22

EricMontreal22

    Senior Member

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 20 February 2009 - 08:41 PM

That great Falling in the Pit story is in every Robbins book I've read so I have little doubt of it being true! LOL. It's pretty great--in a Summer show I did right after high school--a revival of Pajama Game actually--a similar thing happened to our egomaniacal director. He actually was MUCH nicer after his accident.

Speaking of Pajama Game that always made me wonder--Robbins co directed it with Abbott but because of time commitments hired a fairly fresh and untested Bob Fosse to do the actual choreography. The big dance numbers were of course Hernando's Hideway, Once-a-Year-Day, Steam Heat and (not in the film) Gladys and Hines' Dream/Nightmare ballet "I'll Never Be Jealous Again" (which is also cut from most revivals but I love). Fosse restaged the big ones for the movie version--but Sondheim discussed how blown away he was by Robbins' staging of Once Was a Man. I wonder if anyone knows which numbers Robbins staged and which Fosse did? It would have been neat to hear a bit more about Robbins hiring him as well.

#42 sandik

sandik

    Rubies Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,740 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 12:25 PM

Sandik, I don't recall have heard or followed any of the HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) hearings. I don't believe they were broadcast or televised; a number were rather secret. It was the confessions that were filmed.


And they were harrowing enough, I've always thought. The gods know the second-hand reporting of the actual hearings is pretty grim.

Thanks to Jack Reed for the credits on The Cage. I thought it was a nice, substantial excerpt, and I'm really grateful for it.

I thought it was quite interesting to insert the Ed Murrow "Person to Person" interview footage. It's fascinating to compare the "casual conversation" style from the 1950s with contemporary interviews. And it reminded me of the interview with Liberace from the recent film about Murrow -- I think everyone in the theater cringed when Murrow asked Liberace if he'd met a "special" woman yet...

#43 Jack Reed

Jack Reed

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,535 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 03:50 PM

I'm not sure it's accurate to generalize from Murrow's example to the style of other interviewers of his time. On the other hand, the smoking both of them did in it was more likely to be seen then than now...

#44 ViolinConcerto

ViolinConcerto

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 09:13 PM

I wonder if the falling-in-the-pit story is true. It certainly fulfills the collective revenge fantasy of dancers who've been told to shut up and dance!


I've heard it from theater people, including people who were close to Zero Mostel.

Someone mentioned televised hearings -- it was not the HUAC hearings, it was some of the Army-McCarthy hearings that were televised.

#45 abatt

abatt

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,806 posts

Posted 23 February 2009 - 08:38 AM

I really enjoyed this documentary. It was fascinating, and the footage of former dancers was wonderful. One interesting point that never occurred to me before related to the Dance at the Gym in WSS. The version that Robbins himself staged for NYCB clearly demonstrates that the dancers from the Shark group and the Jets group are competing for stage space, and are taking the stage away from one another during the scene. This point doesn't come through in the film. Now I understand why.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):