canbelto

Ok so the Globe noms came out today, and it seems as if it's Brokeback Mountain's year. I havent seen the movie yet, but I'm happy about the nominations mostly. Interesting to see how Goodnight and Goodluck got many nominations, while Syriana was completely shut-out. Personally I loved both films, although if pressed I think Goodnight and Goodluck was probably the better-constructed film. Syriana had a lot of storylines and I didn't REALLY get what was going on until about halfway through the movie. Just as I predicted, while the race for Best Actor is loaded with talent, the actress field is relatively weak.

I just saw Syriana, and felt so strongly about it I wrote a "spoiler" to it at www.themoviespoiler.com. The guy (Dan) said that my summary of the review was excellent, not to brag or anything <g>. If you've seen the movie, and want to read my summary, simply click here. I thought the movie was excellent.

This is veering OT, but am I the only one who gets a real sense of frustration when reading the Taper book? Because I always think, this *could* have been a very good biography. But it seems like he just chooses to whitewash, or brush-off, things that were documented in very vivid detail in other memoirs related to Balanchine. For instance, I learned much more about Mr. B reading Tallchief's, Farrell's, and Kent's autobiographies than I learned from the Taper biography. It's like he made a conscious choice to simply skim the surface of a man who had a lot of depth. There are some good stories, some basic info, but I think that the Taper book is basically long in pages and short in substance.

I hope this book comes out at all, because it sure would be an improvement over the Bernard Taper biography. The Taper biography is long but IMO contains very little substance and very little idea of who Mr. B was. It was also extremely hagiographical. I mean, Mr. B had many admirable qualities, but he also did some very unpleasant things (for example, driving Suzanne Farrell to the point of contemplating suicide, leaving Tanny LeClercq in a quickie Mexican divorce, his rudeness to Erik Bruhn). I'm assuming the Croce biography will be much more balanced.

I agree, although I happen to think that in Walk the Line June's character was pretty underdeveloped. She gets married and divorced twice without any explanation. Still Witherspoon did a remarkable job of sounding like June Carter, and she also does her best with this role -- the steel beneath the sunny country music bubbliness. But still, I wonder if after years of stellar performances, this might Zhang Ziyi's year to cross into superstardom. I'd love for that to happen, personally. The real race-horse might be the Best Actor category. Joaquin Phoenix, Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, George Clooney, and David Straithorn all look to be hot contenders.

Unlike last season, this seems to be an unusually strong movie season. And Brokeback Mountain and Memoirs of a Geisha havent even been released yet. I've heard nothing but raves for Syriana, although I havent seen it yet. I think we can pencil in David Straithorn and Joaquin Phoenix for Best Actor. From what I've heard, I think we can also pencil in Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal. For the women, the "buzz" is that Michelle Yeoh, Gong Li, and Zhang Ziyi are all excellent in Memoirs of a Geisha. I think Reese Witherspoon will definitely get a nod. For Best Director, I'm betting that Ang Lee and George Clooney (for Goodnight and Goodluck) as well as Stephen Gaghan (Syriana) will probably get nods.

I saw this movie tonight and loved it. The movie is exuberant, overloud, and Larson's songs range from glorious to pretty darn bad, but overall the movie had a life and vitality that I find missing from so many movie-musical adaptations. (Exhibit A: last year's Phantom of the Opera.) The subject matter seems a bit dated now but the exuberance is still there. I recommend it.

For the ABT, I'd recommend Vishneva, Dvorovenko or Part in the role. What can I say? The Russians just do this better.

I agree that the subplot about the married reporters goes nowhere, except maybe to give a sense of the insular, conservative old boys club atmosphere of journalism at the time. I thought the Liberace segment was clever. It was a humorous moment in a film that tackled a very serious issue, and footage of the very obviously gay Liberace talking about marriage was just good comic relief. It also gave the viewers a sense of the precarious state of news journalism at the time -- someone as serious as Murrow had to do these segments just to get sponsors.

When I mean "cold" I kind of mean a lack of emotional empathy. I always found Bussell sort of a blank emotionally -- great atheticism, good looks, etc. But not much going on underneath that smile. But I always enjoyed her energetic dancing. I forgot to add one more dancer that I mostly like, but I admit is as cold as liquid nitrogen: Svetlana Zakharova.

Ok, I happily announce another winner: Good Night and Good Luck. It's probably not mainstream enough to actually win any Oscars, but it certainly deserves some nominations. The story of Edward Murrow's campaign to expose Joseph McCarthy is so well-known that it could have been a "civics lesson" but instead it's a fascinating study of news journalism, in all its chain-smoking, neurotic glory. David Straithorn doesnt just play Murrow -- he really embodies him. When I saw pictures of the real Edward Murrow I was surprised to see that they really didnt look alike. That's how strong Straithorn's performance is. And instead of getting an actor to play Joseph McCarthy, George Clooney made the decision simply to use newsreels of the frightening senator and his creepy sidekick Roy Cohn. There's also a very funny newsreel segment with Liberace in which the flamer discusses marriage. Like The Insider, this movie probably wont win any Oscars, but it deserves to. Highly recommended.

The description "cold" is so often used to damn dancers that I was wondering if any of you had a favorite "cold" dancer. This does not mean a dancer that everyone thinks is cold, but you do not find cold. I mean a dancer that you acknowledge is rather chilly, but you like him/her anyway. I can't think of that many, but two off the top of my head: Gillian Murphy and Darcey Bussell. Neither of them are the warmest dancers, but both of them have such a solid technique and a kind of coltish, energetic athleticism that is a joy to watch.

I saw "Walk the Line" today and am happy to report that it actually transcends the cliched singer biopic genre, largely due to Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon. They do their own singing, and the movie focuses on their love story, and I guess I'm just a big sap for these kinds of life-long love stories. And I dont even like country music. So it has my recommendation

"We danced with one body, one soul ... For me, Margot is my family. She is all I have, only her." Rudolf Nureyev on his partnership with Fonteyn.

For all the Austenites, that the new adaptation of "Pride and Prejudice" is a fitting tribute to this fine novel. I just came back from seeing it, and it's remarkably faithful (much more so than the 1940 movie version), and strangely enough both Greer Garson and Kiera Knightley have "that something" that bugs me a little, but Kiera has it less than Greer. Kiera's also much more believable as Lizzie Bennett -- with Greer, you got the feeling that she would never run through the rain for fear of getting her hair wet. Kiera's much more energetic and adolescent. The rest of the movie is well-cast, especially Rosamund Pike as the luminous Jane, Brenda Bethlyn as Mrs. Bennett (I predict an Oscar nod for her), Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennett, and Tamzin Merchant in the tiny role of Georgina Darcy. Kelly Reilly is deliciously bitchy as Caroline Bingley (she also resembles Carolyn Bessette Kennedy). Jena Malone is a wonderfully flightly Lydia. Judi Dench has a small role of Lady Catherine. Tom Hollander is hilarious as Mr. Collins. And what about Darcy? Matthew MacFayden is perhaps the only slight disappointment in the film. He acts very well, but he cant really erase memories of Laurence Olivier or Colin Firth. But the movie is funny, well-acted, beautifully shot, faithful to the source, well-paced, just a very beautiful adaptation of a novel. A good start to the "good movie" season.

This is getting OT, but I dont think Fille mal gardee is the greatest full-length ballet of the 20th century, not by a long-shot. There's Midsummer's Night Dream, Romeo and Juliet, Cinderella, just to name three ....

Diana Vishneva on Broadway shows: " I was taken to some Broadway shows which, honestly, I did not like at all. I never thought Broadway could produce such shows with such unprofessional actors." I wonder which show she was talking about

LOL about the bed. I've always hated it too. I especially hate how you can hear the pitter patter of the poor "bed boy" running around onstage under the tiny bed. Another thing I'd change about Balanchine's Nutcracker: I'd restore the original pdd sequence: pdd, male variation, sugar plum fairy variation, etc. I just don't like how Balanchine messed around with the most basic of pdd structuring. Another thing: I'd have 32 Shades in Makarova's La Bayadere. Nureyev's Bayadere has 32 shades, and the effect is much more impressive, IMO. I'd restore Carabosse's and Lilac Fairy's mime in the Sergeyev Sleeping Beauty, instead of having Carabosse simply running around like a nutjob onstage during the prologue. I'd also ditch the wigs the fairies have to wear. In fact, I'd say in 90% of the cases I'd ditch wigs period. Ballerinas have the most beautiful hair in the world -- why hide it under a curly powdered mop?

I'm personally looking forward to it. I sometimes think that Paris etoiles tend to be ice-cold, but no one can deny the absolute uniformity and beauty of their corps. They truly move as one body. And the ballet videography needs a complete Jewels. The excerpts Balanchine created for the Dance in America specials are intriguing, but they do not remotely capture the Jewels experience.

Is there anything you'd like to change about any production? Like, "I'd be able to enjoy the production IF" ... For me, here's a list: 1. I'd get rid of the Grigorivich Snowflake wigs. They look like awful Norman Bates' "mother" copycats, and are so loosely pasted onto the dancers' heads that you can see the crack between the head and the 'wig. 2. I'd change the scene when Marie first meets the Prince in Balanchine's Nutcracker. For me she lies on the bed way too long. I'd love to see the two little tykes run around onstage or something, basking in the night. 3. I'd restore Balanchine's original concept of "Square Dance", with the caller and everything. 4. I'd restore Balanchine's original Apollo. 5. I'd restore most of Act IV of Kevin McKenzie's Swan Lake, as I find it to be the most touching part of the ballet. 6. I'd get rid of the swan formation in the Mariinsky's Swan Lake. The swans lined up in vertical rows doesnt seem as effective as the swans lined up in a triangle. 7. In productions of Le Corsaire I'd make the slave pdd a pdd! I personally find Conrad's presence in the pas de trois to be a nuisance. 8. I'd get rid of Jesters everywhere.

I also wanted to add that Nikya and Giselle's Act II's differ on a fundamental level. The Shades scene is not literal. It is a reflection of Solor's guilt -- Nikya's dying act was to curse him and Gamzatti. Thus it makes sense for Nikya to be angry. For me, a Nikya in the Shades scene must convey anger and remoteness, yet also tenderness towards the man she loved. A Nikya should start out angry, and warm up gradually. The tap on Solor's shoulder I read as a "Remember me? Remember how you betrayed me?" By the end of the Shades scene, Nikya and Solor are connected by the sash -- they have reconnected emotionally. The Giselle Act II is much more literal, and it is about saving Albrecht's life with love. Thus, it is absolutely imperative for an Act II Giselle to be loving, forgiving, and almost a blessed angel who protects Albrecht. There is something almost religious about Act II. In the video with Nureyev and Seymour, watch the way Nureyev prays to Myrtha for mercy. Giselle protects Albrecht almost in a Christ-like manner, with her hands outstretched, as if Albrecht were a cross.

I dont think Fracci ever danced "tutu" ballets, like La Bayadere, Swan Lake, or Sleeping Beauty. I could be wrong, of course.

I think Act 1 is hard to pull off, but it's Act 2 that packs the real emotional punch, and therefore I tend to favor dancers who are successful in Act 2, even if they weren't so successful in Act 1. For instance, Natalia Makarova. Her Act 1 was so-so: well danced, but without much of the wholesome bubbly charm I like in an Act 1 Giselle. But in Act 2, I finally understood why she was a legendary Giselle. I can't watch another Giselle without thinking of the effortless way her leg floated up in her developpes, or her beautiful circular bourreeing offstage at the end. Most of all, you felt the love and compassion she felt for Albrecht. And that was a mean feat too, considering her Albrecht was the miscast and awkward Mikhail Baryshnikov, who looked stoned the entire performance. Many legendary portrayals can't live up to their own legend. Not Makarova. And which brings me back to the point of why Fracci's Giselle left me cold in Act 2: for me, Act 2 is all about love. Love lost and found and lost again. If a Giselle can't make me feel that she loves Albrecht, that's it for me. When I look at the pictures (and excerpts) of Nureyev and Fonteyn's Giselle, what stands out for me is the love they obviously conveyed towards each other. Fracci doesnt convey love -- she acts like she's already a Wili. Giselle is not yet a Wili. She is still capable of love. That's what's missing for me.

Carla Fracci's Giselle was wonderful in Act 1 -- innocent, beautiful, dewy. But her Act 2 was IMO too cold, icy, and remote. In the video with Erik Bruhn I never sensed the love and compassion she felt for Albrecht. Her final farewell to him didnt leave me in a puddle of tears as it usually does. I've seen excerpts of Cojocaru's Giselle (Act II) and my it is beautiful.

Pamela, I'm going straight to hell with you! I can't stand Bergman films either. The symbolism is always about as subtle as a chainsaw. Gifted directors make us care about their characters, even if they are monstrous. (An example: think of how much we care about Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver, or Michael Corleone in Godfather.) I never care about any of Bergman's characters. They are usually such a miserable lot I feel like saying, "Cmon, just slit your wrists, or blow your brains out. Get it over with."