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)

New BBC Fonteyn movie "Margot"


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#46 Alexandra

Alexandra

    Board Founder

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,258 posts

Posted 24 August 2009 - 06:33 AM

I can't view it either (it says Unavailable in Your Area), but just from the one shot of "Fonteyn" taking a modest curtain call, it's awful. And reading the accompanying promo is worse. Do they distort political and diplomatic history as badly as they distort balletl history?

#47 carbro

carbro

    Late Board Registrar

  • Rest in Peace
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,361 posts

Posted 24 August 2009 - 07:23 AM

:off topic:

Boo, it won't let me watch, says 'not available in your area'.


I can't view it either (it says Unavailable in Your Area), ...


So this is how it feels to live in China. So much for the "worldwide web". :mad:

#48 richard53dog

richard53dog

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts

Posted 24 August 2009 - 08:38 AM

:mad:

:off topic:

Boo, it won't let me watch, says 'not available in your area'.


I can't view it either (it says Unavailable in Your Area), ...


So this is how it feels to live in China. So much for the "worldwide web". :mad:


I've run into this before with links to BBC. As it was explained to me the links only "work" from areas (UK, etc)
that contribute to the liscensing fees the BBC receives. So like so many other things in the world today, it boils down to dollars and cents...er.. in this case pounds and pence.

Actually, I have to admit that it makes "cents" :wink: to me.

#49 GWTW

GWTW

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts

Posted 25 August 2009 - 12:02 AM

richard, the BBC does receive license fees from the US by way of BBC America and from other countries by way of BBC Prime, so the explanation you received isn't that sound.
'Margot' sounds awful, but I Helena Bonham-Carter as Enid Blyton :off topic: sounds terrific!!

#50 Mashinka

Mashinka

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,196 posts

Posted 25 September 2009 - 07:14 AM

Apologies for the source, but as this piece is written by Meredith Daneman, Fonteyn's biographer, I consider it worth reading. Personally I'm not very taken by the tone of this article. Anyone want to comment?

http://www.dailymail...man-legend.html

#51 innopac

innopac

    Gold Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 784 posts

Posted 26 November 2009 - 12:09 PM

What concerns me is that this will become the new historical truth.

"Were Margot Fonteyn and Nureyev really lovers? A riveting TV drama brings ballet's most passionate pairing back to life."
Daily Mail

Did ballet make Margot Fonteyn 'really unhappy'? Telegraph



#52 Mme. Hermine

Mme. Hermine

    Emeralds Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,755 posts

Posted 28 November 2009 - 11:49 AM

well don't know how long they'll be visible but here are 3 short fragments:







#53 carbro

carbro

    Late Board Registrar

  • Rest in Peace
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,361 posts

Posted 28 November 2009 - 01:29 PM

Thanks, Mme. Hermine. It isn't much (and the third is even less). If I were in UK, I'd be watching. I might not like it (or I might :) ), but I'd watch.

#54 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,466 posts

Posted 28 November 2009 - 02:31 PM

...But don't fret about missing it.

Too bad; look at this cast:

Margot also stars Sir Derek Jacobi as choreographer Sir Frederick Ashton; Penelope Wilton as Margot's mother BQ; Lindsay Duncan as Ninette de Valois, founder of The Royal Ballet...

Those three are worth watching in anything, no matter how bad it is.


Yes - within reason, and if they're committed to the material.

I agree with you about that Daily Mail article, Mashinka. I defended Daneman's book when it first came out, but the tone she takes here is borderline offensive:

They still think it would be worth it to be her, even though they know she led a relentlessly exhausting, romantically disappointing, politically idiotic, childless life, and had died in near poverty before they were born.


Yes indeed, some barren old woman without a fat bank account. What was the point? :)

#55 4mrdncr

4mrdncr

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 670 posts

Posted 28 November 2009 - 07:23 PM

I, too, didn't really care for Daneman's article, a little hagiographic/gushy to begin (both about Margot and actor's abilities) and then not near the end. I'm also having a very hard time viewing the clips and stills from this new film. Maybe it's because I'm so aware of how they can cut to hide things, but no matter how tight the angle on the actors, their upper bodies simply do not ever move like a dancer's. People worry about whether an actor can dance on pointe?! I wonder whether their upper body's plastique, line, etc.etc. match the real dancers. And, that rarely, if ever, happens. But then again, it's only MHO, and I'm probably more critical than the general audience viewing this.

#56 vipa

vipa

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 28 November 2009 - 07:41 PM

I, too, didn't really care for Daneman's article, a little hagiographic/gushy to begin (both about Margot and actor's abilities) and then not near the end. I'm also having a very hard time viewing the clips and stills from this new film. Maybe it's because I'm so aware of how they can cut to hide things, but no matter how tight the angle on the actors, their upper bodies simply do not ever move like a dancer's. People worry about whether an actor can dance on pointe?! I wonder whether their upper body's plastique, line, etc.etc. match the real dancers. And, that rarely, if ever, happens. But then again, it's only MHO, and I'm probably more critical than the general audience viewing this.


Thank you for stating that so well. I so agree. At the same time I think that the audience for the film might be ballet goers. Even casual ballet goers would see that something is amiss even if they couldn't verbalize it.

#57 leonid17

leonid17

    Platinum Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 29 November 2009 - 10:40 AM

Apologies for the source, but as this piece is written by Meredith Daneman, Fonteyn's biographer, I consider it worth reading. Personally I'm not very taken by the tone of this article. Anyone want to comment?

http://www.dailymail...man-legend.html


Mashinka, I wanted to return to your invitation to comment on this article(which I had at first chosen not to read given your above comment) and take in the subsequent two articles that have been discussed.

I have only today read this article which for me is an arrogance when you consider what the subject purports to be and how much the author talks about herself and her life events as if equating status with Dame Margot Fonteyn.

This article is both vulgar in content and writing style.

I had the good fortune to follow Dame Margot's career in London from September 1961 until her last performance.

I am also appalled at the style and tone of the recent Daily Mail and Telegraph articles concerning both Dame Margot Fonteyn and Rudolph Nureyev wherein the portrayals of these great artists of the dance have been re-invented by those who have had little contact with either of them and yet express opinions which cannot be substantiated.

Here in all three articles we find tabloid journalism when the status of the subjects, deserve an analysis of existing texts of their lives and especially testament made by colleagues
who knew them really well.

So far in books by various authors, there is a distinct problem in the use of oral history as regrettably, witnesses, too frequently begin to establish themselves as historical figures
with their contributions.

In the case of the subjects of this new film as presented in both the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph, there is a failure in journalism. The personality and facts of their lives get smothered in the welter of promoting the film as revealing something shocking or tawdry. Nor, do we find substantive evidence for the least savoury
comments made which innopac referred to, " What concerns me is that this will become the new historical truth."

Both Dame Margot and Rudolf Nureyev had had big hearts and a generosity of spirit. The vast majority of us will remember them for this and their relationships with hundreds of people whose names will neither appear in any book or newspaper article nor most probably any film, but who loved them.

#58 LiLing

LiLing

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 205 posts

Posted 29 November 2009 - 12:33 PM

On the issue of using non dancers:
Never mind how they move, just standing in the still Duff is clearly not a dancer. Those un muscled turned in legs and the dead back foot, good grief! :speechless-smiley-003:

#59 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,466 posts

Posted 29 November 2009 - 03:06 PM

I, too, didn't really care for Daneman's article, a little hagiographic/gushy to begin (both about Margot and actor's abilities) and then not near the end. I'm also having a very hard time viewing the clips and stills from this new film. Maybe it's because I'm so aware of how they can cut to hide things, but no matter how tight the angle on the actors, their upper bodies simply do not ever move like a dancer's. People worry about whether an actor can dance on pointe?! I wonder whether their upper body's plastique, line, etc.etc. match the real dancers. And, that rarely, if ever, happens. But then again, it's only MHO, and I'm probably more critical than the general audience viewing this.


Daneman was apparently an advisor for the movie and some of it seems to be based on her book, so it's understandable that there was a bit of gush. I don't think the general audience will find the differences as jarring as dancers and regular balletgoers, if the filmmakers have been canny enough. Unfortunately, there's no getting around the fact that you can't have truly effective dance sequences with body doubles.

I have only today read this article which for me is an arrogance when you consider what the subject purports to be and how much the author talks about herself and her life events as if equating status with Dame Margot Fonteyn.


I didn't care for Daneman's tone, but she is the author of what will probably stand as the standard biography and it's natural for her to be sought out as an authority. Whatever you think of the book overall, Daneman's research was considerable.

#60 canbelto

canbelto

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,900 posts

Posted 29 November 2009 - 04:24 PM

Both Dame Margot and Rudolf Nureyev had had big hearts and a generosity of spirit. The vast majority of us will remember them for this and their relationships with hundreds of people whose names will neither appear in any book or newspaper article nor most probably any film, but who loved them.


I'm not defending tabloid trash or unsubstantiated gossip, but I think interest in the personal relationship between these two great dancers is natural. They were not just performers, they were people, and their personal relationship was important to both of them. To suggest that their private lives be completely off limits by biographers and filmmakers is kind of unrealistic.


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):