canbelto

One thing that struck me about Pavlova was how contemporary her figure looks. Her style of dancing may have been very different, but it seems as if she had a "modern" ballerina's look -- long, slender legs, long arms, beautifully arched feet. I think the way she all of a sudden drops her torso is striking, as is the kind of ruffling, shaking movement she makes towards the end of the solo, and if she were writhing in pain before she succumbed to death.

It's hard to judge the Pavlova film, as the speeds are all messed up and it's not really synchronized to the music, but it's unmistakably a great portrayal. Otherwise, Plisetskaya is the standard for me.

That's great news! Although I'd love to see Dupont or Osta in the role. Anyone know if the Royal Ballet Giselle has been telecast?

Well I've finished most of Mann's book. His main gist is that the Tracy/Hepburn affair was as much myth as fact, and that after Tracy's death Hepburn built up and romanticized the relationship. He claims that Hepburn was drawn to gay alchoholics, and that Hepburn was primarily lesbian (or at least her strongest relationships were with women), while Tracy was gay (or bi). He claims that the Hepburn/Tracy "affair" was primarily platonic, although of course emotionally very intense. Also, he says Tracy and Hepburn were only really a "couple" between the years 1945-49. In the 1950s they led separate lives, and Hepburn was his caretaker from 1960 to 1967, but that the relationship wasn't romantic. Mann uses an awful lot of speculation. For instance, he says the lack of "physical intimacy" between Hepburn and Tracy in their films was due to the essentially platonic nature of their offscreen relationship. He does rely on a lot of people who lived or worked on the Cukor estate for gossip, including people who now claim to be Tracy's lovers. I have to say that although it's an interesting read, I don't buy it. Or at least not all of it. There are too many people like Lauren Bacall and Hepburn's own family who have testified over the years about Hepburn's tireless, constant, and perhaps masochistic devotion to Tracy for me to believe that Hepburn really cared more about her girlfriends. Also, while Hepburn may have romanticized their relationship, I think Mann's view that it was mostly a publicity stunt is wrong. I don't think anyone who spends 20+ years taking care of a self-destructive alcoholic does it for publicity.

I'm reading the new biography about Katharine Hepburn by William J. Mann.

I don't think Ryder plays her as a wheedling manipulator. Just as someone who has more going on underneath than her sweet and innocent surface. And that's how it is in the book. May knows that Ellen is a threat, and she gets rid of her. On her deathbed she admits to her son that she knew about Newland's sacrifice and perhaps even pitied him. The book is very difficult to translate to film, because everything is firmly through Newland's eyes, and in the book Newland's feelings for his wife are very ambiguous. And he vaguely understands that she knows about Ellen, but May is a bit of a stranger to him. In the film Ryder made May three-dimensional, which I liked.

Really? I thought Ryder gave an astonishing performance in Age of Innocence. She was exactly as I'd imagine May: doe-eyed and seemingly innocent, very unimaginative, yet steely and manipulative. I thought Ryder's famous baby voice worked very well. The way May carefully said things like, "Don't you think he's very common?" I really thought she was pitch-perfect, and a nice contrast to the sad, world-weary Ellen.

Ok here's a more detailed review: I think we can safely pencil in Helen Mirren for an Oscar. She really gives a stunning performance. I have no idea what the Queen is like in private, but I believed Mirren's performance 100%. It never descended into parody. And I like how the Queen is as inscrutable in the end as she is at the start of the film. She's cold, regimented, and her life is duty, duty, duty, for a job that she probably did not want. And her hurt at being told that she was out of touch with the English public was palpable. I thought her best scene was when she was sitting up in bed, watching old Diana interviews. Mirren's face expressed so much: both admiration and resentment for Diana, with her calculated heart-on-sleeve personality. Yet for all the justified hoopla about Mirren's astonishing performance, I found the movie lacking in something. I don't know what it is exactly. It was entertaining, with the right mix of humor, pathos, and drama. It was evenhanded -- neither a shameless apology for the monarchy or a message about "modernization." And there are some nice supporting performances -- Alex Jennings as the more emotional but calculated and media savvy Charles, Michael Sheen as Tony Blair, James Cromwell as the curmudgeonly, unfeeling Prince Philip, and Sylvia Syms as the sly, witty, gin-guzzling Queen Mum. I think in the end what it lacked was emotional impact. I would have felt for Queen E, but the movie made me feel too buttoned up and regimented to sympathize with her. In a way, Mirren's embodiment of the Queen was so complete that it was projected into the audience. To me, at least. I would have empathized with the Queen, but it wouldn't feel proper, as she'd say.

I saw the Queen today. I thought Mirren was fine, and this is the kind of performance that screams Oscar, but I too found the movie a tad pointless. I never knew whether the Queen had reached some kind of epiphany. I compare this movie to last year's Goodnight and Goodluck. Both were about famous events, and featured historical people, and both have some kind of political message. But GN&GL I thought was more elegant, witty, and eloquent. I thought The Queen was kind of muddled, and although it focused much more about her personal life, I thought Straitharn brought me closer to Edward Murrow than Mirren to Queen E. I'm glad I saw it to see what the fuss was about, but I definitely won't see it again.

I'm back after an exhausting but rewarding day. Ok, first of all: it was great to see a REAL Swan Lake. The Sergeyev version has the jester and no mime and the happy ending, but it certainly beats the ABT version. (By the way, the jester is less annoying live than on video.) But the real star was the Kirov corps. The 24 Swans were breathtaking. Not just when they were moving. Some of their most beautiful moments were when they were standing absolutely still, and you saw all the hands and arms -- it was JUST beautiful. And in the "colored" acts you noticed how great they were at the national dances. With their Vaganova training that includes years of "character dance" training it seems in their blood to mazurka. It really is something. As for Viktoria Tereshkina? Well ... she's young. She has gorgeous positions. Beautiful back. I ran into nyususan and we said we'd like to see her in 5 years. But I was thinking that at the ABT Julie Kent or Paloma have been dancing this for years and theyre probably not as good as Viktoria, but because Viktoria's being compared to, say, Lopatkina, Pavlenko, and Vishneva, she looks worse. Viktoria made some visible mistakes. She had trouble with Odette's turning variation. So she decided to just sort of slow down and spin and flap kind of meaninglessly to get it over with. Her Odile was doing great until the fouettes. She fell off balance early on but made a nice recovery. But still, she wasn't ever able to gain much momentum after the rocky start. Overall, she seems to have the outlines of a great Odette/Odile, but I'm sure with age and experience those outlines will be pencilled in. Igor Kolb was great! I felt lucky to have seen him. Beautiful classical dancer. Great classical line. A real prince. The cool thing was after the performance M. Vaziev, Viktoria and Igor all came out to do a Q&A with the audience. Vaziev is good-looking in that silver-haired way, and he was very charming. The first question came from a girl and it was a zinger: "Why'd you change the ending? The last time I watched it I cried because they both died." Vaziev said, "Wow you're a real ballet fan" and then went into the history of how the ending has been changed a million times since 1895 and Sergeyev made the ending happy in the 1950's. Vaziev said, "In our version, they don't die, I'm sorry if you were looking for death." Got a laugh from the audience. I got a question in: are they doing a reconstruction a la SB and Bayadere? He said they planned to before the MT got shut down for a year, but now it's not being shut down, and they have vague plans. When he heard my question he drew a breath, like, wow, ballet nerd over there Then Viktoria and Igor came out. Some guy asked Igor why men wear tights, and Igor said it started with Nijinsky. Viktoria looked really tired but was very beautiful. She said she started as a gymnast when she was four, but got switched to ballet. Igor said he started dancing when he was 13. Late starter. Anyway, last time i saw the Kirov in Sleeping Beauty it was a mess. The the corps fell on their butt several times, the jewel fairies in the last act were completely unsynchronized, the performance was just disappointing in every way. Yesterday I felt like all was right and I was seeing the real Kirov at their best, even if it wasn't Lopatkina or Pavlenko.

Now that I remember yes he did. I don't think Baryshnikov went to the Vaganova until he was 15, and Nureyev didn't enter the Vaganova until he was 17.

I will be at Saturday's matinee performance in Chicago. Anyone going to be there?

I know Jerome Robbins hated the film West Side Story so much that he actually tried to get the his credits as director removed. But then again, composer blessings don't guarantee greatness. Supposedly Andrew Lloyd Webber was very involved in the making of "Phantom of the Opera" ...

I forgot to add, if you can get a copy of a used VHS of "Portrait of Giselle" grab it! There are interviews (as well as dancing clips) with Fracci, Markova, Alonso, Karsavina, Makarova, Ulanova, Spessivtseva, and Chauvire. It's incredible to hear Tamara Karsavina talk about dancing Giselle with Nijinsky. Spessivtseva believe it or not looks almost exactly the same as she did when she was young. She even still wore the "ballerina bun." Even though she's not the most articulate, she does come out with some gems, like the fact that she remembered seeing a young Galina Ulanova with her mother at the Mariinsky. There's also a clip of Spessivtseva dancing Giselle in the first act. The video might help you get an idea of what kind of Giselle you prefer. As for Zakharova's Giselle, in Act 2, the effortless flow of her dancing is unfortunately punctuated with a visible effort to push her leg closer to her ear. I don't even mind her hyperflexibility, but it kind of broke the float that is so much a part of Giselle's Act 2 ... And the filming was annoying. Way too many closeups, often at crucial moments.

Another "dog dancer" is definitely Clairemarie Osta. She's so doe-eyed and moves with the dignified sweetness of a basset hound ...

I thought it would be cool if we compiled a list of famous teachers at the Vaganova Academy, and their most prominent pupils. These are the ones I know off the top of my head: Agrippina Vaganova: Natalia Dudinskaya, Irina Kolpakova, Galina Ulanova, Marina Semyonova, Olga Moiseyva, Alla Shelest, Alla Osipenko Natalia Dudinskaya: Uliana Lopatkina, Anastasia Volchokova, Veronika Ivanova, Irina Zhelonkina Inna Zubkovskaya: Altynai Asylmuratova, Veronika Part, Elvira Tarassova Ninel Kurgapkina: Zhanna Ayupova Ludmila Kovaleva: Diana Vishneva Marina Vasileva: Yulia Makhalina, Olesia Novikova, Evgenia Obratsova, Victoria Tereshkina Elena Evteyeva: Svetlana Zakharova, Daria Pavlenko (I believe they graduated the same year!) Alexander Pushkin: Rudolf Nureyev, Yuri Soloviev Anyone know of any more?

Another short-haired actress, from the Jewels dvd documentary: Clairemarie Osta. In this case I think it really fits her doe-eyed, pixie-ish personality. I think Johan Kobborg wears a wig because he's actually bald ...

There are ways around the regions (and even NTSC and PAL). Computer programs for instance can dub a dvd into basically any region or format. Nero does PAL to NTSC conversions and vice versa, and programs like DVDShrink can basically rip the VOBs of the dvd onto your HD.

Agree with FP that the Ferri, Murru Giselle is the best overall video. It's OOP but used copies can be found on Amazon. Also, it's available at www.berkshirerecordoutlet. Search "dvd" and "Giselle" and you'll see a copy. As for the other Giselle videos, I'll give a run-down: 1. Mezentseva, Zaklinsky, and Terekhova (Kirov). Terekhova is a wonderful Myrtha. Mezentseva is horribly miscast as Giselle. She dances well enough but she's a tall stringbean, ancient-looking, overly affected and calculated. 2. Svetlana Zakharova and Roberto Bolle - new from La Scala. A very pretty production, but Zakharova has two expressions (happy = smile, everything else = furrowed brow), and overall I found her cold and not even that technically impressive. 3. Lynn Seymour and Rudolf Nureyev. Nureyev is the standard Albrecht by which all others are judged (IMO), but Seymour is out of shape and technically rather weak. Monica Mason makes for an awesome Myrtha though. 4. Erik Bruhn and Carla Fracci. Exactly as Faux Pas described: great dancing, AWFUL camerawork. Particularly in the second act, when we don't actually see Fracci dancing, we mostly see her reflection in the water. 5. OOP and not on dvd: Makarova and Baryshnikov, ABT. Makarova was a legendary Giselle and she deserves every bit of that legendary status. 6. Bessmertnova and Lavrovsky - N.B. is a wonderful Giselle, but the video quality is absolutely wretched, to the point of being unwatchable. 7. Only available in Japan (boo!): Vishneva and Malakhov. I've seen both of these artists live: Vishneva's Giselle is a tour-de-force, as is Malakhov's Albrecht. I imagine you could get it on Japanese websites though. 8. Also OOP, but can be found in Amazon used: Alonso and Plisetsky. Alonso was/is technically shaky (they cut away from her developpes in Act2) but you can really see glimpses of why her Giselle was so legendary. Her final gesture (a deep penchee while allowing Albrecht to kiss her hand) is absolutely beautiful. Finally, in November the BBC will be telecasting the Giselle with Cojocaru and Kobborg. It might make its way to dvd.

Ok, where do I start? I think the music is inferior to Oklahoma, Carousel, The King and I, My Fair Lady, West Side Story, Singin' in the Rain, basically most of the famous musicals. Or movie musicals. The lyrics are dumbed down and repetitive -- "Do re mi" is cute, but then you realize that every song either has those repetitive gibberish lyrics ("I Am Sixteen," "I Have Confidence," "My Favorite Things") or is so corny I want to put a bullet through my head ("The Lonely Goatherd," "The Sound of Music," "Climb Ev'ry Mountain"). The musical is not funny at all. That's a big minus. There's literally not a moment of humor for three hours. It's just corny sap. Not all musicals have to be funny, but there has to be SOMETHING. I feel that TSOM is like a twinkie diet -- enough to give you an insulin attack, but no real substance.

I'm going to offer an unpopular opinion and say that I loved Audrey Hepburn as Eliza. Yes she was somewhat miscast as "dirty" Eliza, but I always thought Hepburn had a rare comic timing and an ability to seem perfectly elegant yet somewhat eccentric at the same time. See: Breakfast at Tiffany's. Overall I really enjoy "My Fair Lady," especially Stanley Holloway's Doolitle.

The Carousel film was ruined by the 1950s mentality of making musicals wholesome. Carousel has a very dark storyline, and on stage it really packs an emotional wallop, but the movie was really disappointing, although I loved Shirley Jones. One movie musical that I think is underrated was The Music Man. Don't get me started on The Sound of Music unless you want an hour-long rant ...

dirac, the reason I liked The Departed was that it didnt scream Oscar baiting. I just thought it was a fun, exciting thriller, and well-acted. I admit that Nicholshon's over-the-top antics eventually became a distraction, but (BIG SPOILER AHEAD) I thought they killed off his character early enough in the movie. The heart of the movie was the cat-and-mouse game between di Caprio and Damon, and I thought both of them were absolutely great in their parts. I think we can safely pencil in Mark Wahlberg and di Caprio for Oscar nods, and they both deserve it. di Caprio especially plays exactly the kind of character the Academy loves to nominate -- the morally torn. Much like Benicio del Toro's character in Traffic. I also liked the tribute to The Third Man at the funeral.

I just saw The Departed and for the first 30 minutes I thought this was the most cliched film. But it really grew into a thrilling nailbiter. Damon tapped into his Mr. Ripley persona again as he played pure concentrated evil masqueraded in an ordinary good ol' boy facade. Jack Nicholson is of course predictably over-the-top but it works well. Leonardo di Caprio does the best work in a long time as the neurotic undercover, and Mark Wahlberg has a great supporting role. Really, it's a great nailbiter.

I recently got this dvd and I agree, it's a beautifully made film, and the extras (almost an hours worth) are even better. My slight complaint was that the extra dancing clips were obviously compiled by someone who didn't know a lot about ballet, because there was absolutely no attempt to synchronize the music to the movement. For example, there was a clip of Alicia Alonso's Giselle which was the Act 2 pdd but they used music from Act 1! Otherwise this is a priceless documentary. It's amazing how beautiful and elegant many of the ballerinas and danseurs look, even in old age. It was wonderful to hear the dancers and their mixed emotions working with people like B. Nijinska, Fokine, and Balanchine -- an admiration mixed with more than a little resentment, I think, that these geniuses often treated them very poorly on a personal level.