canbelto

Veronica and Zenaida are about 5'8" although Veronica is not as statuesque offstage as she appears onstage. Offstage she seems more like a runway model -- tall and thin. Julie Kent is in the 5'5"-5'6" range, Vishneva maybe slightly shorter.

What about Sylvie Guillem? She was pretty tall and danced Manon a lot.

Just a note: Singin in the Rain is finally being released on blu-ray. I already pre-ordered my copy. Really an eternally fresh and funny movie.

Am I mistaken or weren't Baryshnikov and Makarova briefly married while both of them were at the Kirov?

Wow wonderful to hear your report! Glad to hear you are having such a great time!

I don't think that was how they dressed. I have a hard time believing Grigorovich attempted to research medieval Saracen attire. My point is that yes many of these ballets and operas have elements that are offensive today but directors still have choices on how "far to go" with the camp and stereotypes. For example in a production of Madama Butterfly the director can choose to emphasize how foolish and gullible Butterfly is and make her a laughingstock or he can show a very naive and loving (and thus sympathetic) girl. Are all Asian women like Butterrfly? Of course not, but that doesn't mean a production of Butterfly can't still give the character dignity. I simply think Grigorovich went way too far.

The way I see it, Raymonda's plot is already very weak. It does add a bit of intrigue if Abderakhman poses more of a threat not just physically, but psychologically. That's why the original 1898 Raymonda works -- Jean de Brienne is only a vision in the first act. In other words, he's sort of this Knight in White Shining Armor that Raymonda idealizes. And Abderakhman is a mime role but he's a flesh-and-blood man, and Raymonda is definitely curious. Or intrigued. I agree maybe it was an unfortunate choice to make Alexandrova visibly making faces of disgust the entire time. I have to pull out the 1980s video with Semenyaka -- I have it but have never watched it.

The entire storyline of Raymonda has some inherently un-PC aspects to it -- Christian = good, Muslim = bad, Muslim men are a threat to European women, etc. That's built into the storyline and nothing can be done about it, short of not performing the ballet. That being said, I still felt as if Grigorovich went way over the top in his depiction of Abderakhman. The costume, the brownface, the wild gestures and crazy kookypants dancing. Also, maybe I'm reading the story wrong but isn't Raymonda supposed to be sort of intrigued by this exotic foreigner? In the Bolshoi production she's 100% disgusted all the time. And I would be too, if Abderakhman is as crazy as he is in the Grigorovich production. Ugh, I just didn't like it, especially considering the former USSR/present day Russia's large Muslim population, some of which became world-famous ballet dancers. To me, it's as offensive as blackface.

I saw the HD transmission and I don't think I'm being overly PC when I say I was HORRIFIED by what Grigorovich has done to the character of Abderakhman. This version makes him more clownish, more ridiculous, more offensive, than any other version I've seen. Every offensive stereotype is thrown in, and Abderakhman doesn't even get to dance any classical steps -- he comes onstage doing aerial carthweels, and for the rest of the time spazzes out. No other word for the "choreography" Grigorovich gives him. I understand that Raymonda is an old-fashioned ballet and that Abderakhman is the villain, but seeing so many racial stereotypes all concentrated in one character made me cringe. I've seen the 1898 reconstruction and the character is not nearly so cartoonish. I'm also really surprised Grigorovich would make these artistic choices, since Russia/USSR was/is ethnically and religiously diverse, with many many famous dancers of Muslim heritage.

Actually I think Julie's O/O hasnt changed much. I saw her maybe almost 10 years ago in Swan Lake and I didn't know much about dance then but I remember both her Odette and Odile being somewhat "low wattage" even then. She wasn't bad as Odile but she was low key. She stopped at around 26 fouettes then too. Later I saw Nina and was like "oh wow so this is what it's supposed to look like." Julie's a lovely lyrical dancer but she's never been "demented" or go for broke.

Another thing about Alexandrova is that although there is no footage of her dancing, the pictures and descriptions of Pierina Legnani (the original Raymonda) would lead me to believe that she was a similar dancer as Alexandrova. Of course Legnani was probably shorter, but she was kind of "sturdy" looking as well, with a block-like torso, broad shoulders, and "strong" legs. Not aesthetically the most pleasing even in her day, I suspect, but she must have been an excellent terre a terre dancer, considering the kind of choreography Petipa designed for her. With regards to the production values, I agree that there's a certain Soviet "look" to it that is very dated. Colors are that combo of gray/beige/pastel, there's really no attempt to make the guys' costumes look nice at all, flapping sets. I THINK that that particular aesthetic was probably a result of wanting ballets to be more accessible to people waiting in the bread lines. Hell, since the Olympics are coming up, I've been looking at old footage of Soviet gymnasts, and I notice that their leotards/makeup have that same look. Very beige and dull, girls wore very little makeup and hair was pulled in a rather child-like pony-tail. It's strange that the poverty aesthetic added to the Soviet gymnasts' appeal in the West. A lot of the commentators I've noticed made comments about how "child-like" and "doll-like" the girls looked, even if some of them were older than you'd expect. It's very different from the gymnasts of today, who compete, it seems, with the world's supply of eye-shadow, glitter, bronzer, and hairspray.

I think it's more like Alexandrova's body shape. She is tall with a block like torso and shoulders and arms that don't really have that soft tapered look so prized by balletomanes. She's an excellent dancer but her look is somewhat stern. Strangely I think it might be her relatively tall but compact body shape that allows her to excel in the terre a terre parts of the role. She also has a very good jump. A lot of the Cuban ballerinas I've also noticed to have this shape and they are great terre a terre dancers.

I really hope the NYCB releases some of the archival footage of LeClercq because from what I've seen, she was an incredible dancer. Her final movement of Western Symphony would drop jaws today.

I felt there was a lovely energy and freshness to Osipova's Juliet. Has she mastered "stage running" or potion wretching or dying? No, but in time she will. But I loved the sincerity to her approach and I thought she and Hallberg were magic together.

This is really funny -- I saw Gutierrez's La Sonnambula video and this was my impression of her voice: It really is a beautiful voice, but the top register is problematic.

I went to this afternoon's performance as well, and in my opinion it didn't have the magic of last night's performance. Reichlen doesn't have Maria K.'s comic timing or voluptuous persona -- her Titania is strangely reserved. The lovers were better this afternoon -- Sterling Hyltin and Rebecca Krohn both standouts as Hermia and Helena. The second act divertissement pdd had Megan Fairchild and Sebastian Marcovici and I agree they were somewhat miscast. Garcia as Oberon I found to be a pleasant surprise, and Adam Hendrickson was terrific as Puck.

I just saw tonight's MNSD. I'd add: STOP DOING WHATEVER YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW and buy a ticket for this revival. It's the best I've seen the NYCB dance this in years. Absolutely amazing work, from Maria K. to Tiler Peck to the SAB students. Magical.

I agree with all the plaudits for the Vishneva/Gomes/Osipova/Matthews cast. Diana and Marcelo have this incredibly intense chemistry that is palpable. Vishneva is perfect at conveying the passion behind the shy country girl in the first two acts, and the conflicted, mature woman of the last act. Marcelo is so handsome and intense, you can imagine girls losing their heads over him. Together they really fill out some of the weakness of the choreography (the swoony lifts get very repetitive).

Yes Osipova's dress was rather glam for a peasant girl -- it was sleevelss, very shiny, as if made of fine satin. Like Giselle had recently made a trip to Bloomingdale's. I too thought it clashed with the other peasant girls' outfits, but her Giselle was so amazing that this Diva Moment was okay. She has very short hair too, so she must have been wearing a wig, since it stayed in place during the Mad Scene.

I saw all three Giselle casts -- Alina Cojocaru, Diana Vishneva, and Natalia Osipova. Cojocaru's performance was a disappointment. She was simply unable to dance many of the steps in Giselle. Even her characterization didn't have the affecting details that it did last year. Natalia Osipova's Giselle was a technical marvel. If her feet ever touched the ground in Act Two, I never saw it. Vishneva's Giselle was technically still extremely solid, but it was the deepest interpretation of the three, I thought. The way she became completely unhinged in the Mad Scene was unforgettable. When she started swinging around Albrecht's sword she really looked like she wanted to kill someone. In Act Two, she is so haunting -- ghostly and spooky, really no longer of this world. When Albrecht carried her back to her grave I loved how she dropped her arms and closed her eyes, and actually looked like a corpse. It's an unorthodox but totally gut-wrenching characterization.

Leo has a boyish face and persona that really works against him when he does those heavy duty biopics. I agree that J Edgar was a mistake. I think he's best when he's playing "ordinary guys" who are trying to do the right thing -- he conveys a kind of goodness and decency that really worked, for example, to make The Departed a much better film than it should have been. Same thing with Inception.

Also, Natalia Osipova talked about not being "allowed" to do the Spessivtseva diagonal by her coaches at the Bolshoi in an interview with ballet.co.uk. I can't locate the interview right now but I found that a weird statement.

I'll stick up for the 1997 Titanic film too. I think it's still more watchable and entertaining than 99% of the "big screen epics" that are made, and the di Caprio and Winslet are both in their own way enchanting. Both have moved onto more "serious" work but there's a freshness and directness with which they act the film that is very endearing. Their chemistry is very strong, and it carries the film even through the cheesiest bits. I understand that neither di Caprio nor Winslet like to discuss Titanic because of their distaste for James Cameron, but still, it's some of their best work. Kind of off topic but I think it's nice that di Caprio and Winslet have remained friends and even worked together in another film.

Ashley Bouder did it:

I got this book downloaded to my new iPad. It's valuable for its first hand accounts of how some legendary dancers actually danced. Volynsky is also obviously culturally erudite. He's an intelligent writer. At the same time I can't actually say I took much joy from reading him. His overuse of some metaphors (plantlike being perhaps the worst) is irritating. And every writer has a voice. Volynskys voice is prudish, snobby, and a bit creepy. His account of reducing Tamara Karsavina to tears because of his anti-Fokine rants made me cringe. The fact that he recalls it without the slightest bit of remorse says a lot about his character.