canbelto

Well I havent seen the Kirov per se, but I have seen all these ballets danced by other companies. The only dancer I'd say was "miscast" was Igor Kolb, who doesnt have the effortless, superhuman elevation for Spectre.

But I find it interesting that the Kirov puts out its first video in like, 10 years, and everyone poo-poos it

Besides, I think it's sort of rude to imply that if you enjoyed this video, you were obviously inexperienced and hadnt seen tons and tons of Kirov dancers. First impressions are also important, and I;m certainly one to call a spade a spade if I dont like something. I also have a big collection of ballet videos, go to the ballet whenever I can, and am not a newbie Pollyanna who "adores" everything.

I just reviewed this dvd for Amazon.

I dont see which ballet is "miscast." Certainly Diana Vishneva isnt miscast. And Zakharova's style and persona may not be to everyone's liking, but I wouldnt call it miscasting either.

Well I enjoyed the dvd a lot. The prime reason being Diana Vishneva's Firebird. I've seen three Firebirds on video, and only Diana IMO remembers the "fire" in Firebird. From the moment she flutters onstage, it's like Maya Plisetskaya in Dying Swan -- my eyes were transfixed. The sharp, even dissonant music suits Diana like a glove -- she looks as if she were born to dance the Firebird. Karsavina would be proud, considering how tirelessly she worked to coach younger ballerinas in this part.

Spectre was great, until Kolb's jump. To me he paused a bit too long, "prepared" his leap too carefully, and the magic spell was broken.

I enjoyed Zakharova in Scherherazade. She is a bit of a "cold" ballerina, and strangely unable to convey real sensuality beyond the "vavavoom" type. But the remarkable plasticity of her body were a sight. Farukh I also thought was excellent, although I find Scherherazade a pretty weak piece.

And the Polotsivian Dances was also very entertaining.

Canbelto, I'm pretty sure Asylmuratova is quite tall.  Maybe you aren't as prejudiced as you think

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I dont think she is -- at least in the documentaries Makarova made during her return to the Kirov Asylmuratova seemed just average height.

Not much taller than Natasha.

I too found the article confusing, especially this line:

----------

But some of the company's biggest female stars now are spectacular dancers without being spectacular beauties. Is it merely sexist to lament that the current roster is not "a company of beautiful girl dancers?"

Dancers dance, singers sing. Opera has long been a haven for oversize or physically unimposing people of both sexes. Dancers, too, have historically hardly all had movie-star good looks.

---------------

Why start the premise of the article by saying how the NYCB dancers arent as "beautiful" anymore and then admit that historically many dancers didnt have movie star good looks? What the hell was Mr. Rockwell's point???

To me, personal beauty of a ballerina often comes from within. Great ballerinas will transcend facial beauty. I'll never forget the first time I saw Gillian Murphy dance. I was like "Little Orphan Annie puts on a tutu!" Her red hair and freckles and blue eyes flew in the face of every ballerina stereotype. Within minutes, I thought she was the most beautiful woman in the world, just from the firecracker way she kicked her legs. On the other hand, if a dancer does little for me, I dont care how gorgeous she is facially.

I've seen Nichols a couple of times now, and I think Nichols is the Janet Baker/Peter Pears/Fischer-Dieskau of opera. So "subtle" and "profound" I fall asleep

I dont want to make it seem as if I dont like ANY tall ballerinas. And some tiny ballerinas can have ill-fitting proportions that are just as distracting (for instance, Paloma Herrera or Miyako Yoshida both have long torsos and short extremely thin legs). Overall I like long-legged, long-armed ballerinas. Alina Cojocaru, Natalia Makarova, et al were short but had very long limbs.

Mostly I just like the feeling of absolute weightlessness, of being a "bird" as it were, that tiny ballerinas can create. I love their elevation. I often feel as if taller ballerinas have to use their bodies instrumentally, whereas the petite weightless bodies can "sing". I often also feel that petite ballerinas can play the minx/siren better -- for instance, Kitri waving her fan. It was just wonderful to see the slight Irina Dvorovenko waving her fan and looking as if she'd eat all the corps girls for lunch.

Of course if the ballerina is special enough I love her too -- Sofiane Sylve is an example. But generally, my "favorites" I've noticed have all been short or medium height. For instance, when looking at the NYCB historical footage I fell instantly in love with Patricia McBride and Violette Verdy

Does anyone have a definite preference for tall vs. petite ballerinas? For me, I have this insurmountable (it seems) prejudice against tall ballerinas. Pace Mr. B. For me, they arent able to create the illusion of weightlessness and "floating" nearly as well as the tiny ballerinas, like Natalia Makarova or Gelsey Kirkland or, today, Alina Cojocaru and Alessandra Ferri. Having such long arms and legs also makes it harder for me to focus on the face, and I think the face of the ballerina is the most important thing. I stare endlessly at Maya Plisetskaya's flashing, glamorous red hair, Irina Dvorovenko's mishevious flirty smirk, Altynai Asylmuratova's shy smile and Oriental eyes, etc etc. These ladies are all short or medium height. But with the tall ballerinas, I'm so busy looking at their legs or arms and being short myself I can sometimes barely see their heads in performances.

I recently just realized this. Why I could admire Svetlana Zakharova, Darcey Bussell, Michele Wiles, Olga Chenchikova, Maria Kowrowski, and all the other very tall ballerinas, but I couldnt love them. I want to be blown away by their incredible extensions, their majesty, but I can't.

For women, it seems as if the best jumpers are often the small lithe "elves." The taller ballerinas can't seem to give the illusion of elevation and suspension in air. Alina Cojocaru's jumps today truly seem to be suspended in the air. Historically, Natalia Makarova, and Maya Plisetskaya also seemed to be able to create this illusion.

American girls as a rule dont seem to have the training to do the beautiful, perfect-split grande jetes that Russian-trained ballerinas do so well.

As for men, today, Angel Corella's jumps are a thing of beauty. Marcelo Gomes too. Vladimir Vasiliev and Rudolf Nureyev from the film clips looked like incredible leapers. And I believe all that was said about Nijinsky ...

carbro,

tell us about the important stuff! like whether marcello gomes is as hot up close as he looks onstage, and whether irina is glowing

Also, I found the bulk of Grigorivich choreography very "crude." Especially the Nutcracker -- overemphasis on male muscularity, but things like the Mouse/Soldier scene went for naught. Just soldiers and mice marching around. Everything very busy, all the time, but with IMO little regard for classical corps formation, or aesthetic value.

Well I'm prepared to defend di Caprio. Compared tothe vapid, embarrassing Ben Affleck or Brad Pitt di Caprio brings genuine charm, energy, and individuality to all his roles.

I'm disappointed that Uma wasnt nominated for Kill Bill. She kicked ass!

Also that "Control Room" wasnt nominated for Best Documentary.

I am however glad that Meryl Streep and Nicole Kidman werent nominated AGAIN.

Ok the third movement is Leanne Benjamin. I reallyneed help with the men though!!!

Hi all,

I was recently given a Symphony in C video that is from the RB. The picture was fuzzy but it looks to be a BBC broadcast. The first movement ballerina is definitely Miyako Yoshida and the Secod movement is Darcey Bussell. Can anyone round out the cast? I dont even have a date so I hope this helps

Also, does anyone know if there will be more videos of Alina Cojocaru released in the future? Wouldnt it be a shame if the only surviving document of this wonderful ballerina were her Clara

But there's now parts of "Balanchine style" that are nowhere to be found in any pedagology of ballet. For instance, when did Balanchine ever dictate an entirely different port-te-bras that makes NYCB dancers stick out so distinctly from dancers of different companies (even if they too are SAB trained)? I'm talking about the knife-like movements and jutting elbows. (Remembering Dudlinskaya's dictum in that documentary: "Arms must be tough, but soft at the bottom.")

This wasnt even part of NYCB style during Balanchine's time, judging from the videos. Clearly, the "style" has evolved.

I think John Rockwell's article does have a good point: that what's "cutting edge" often becomes ossified in a few years. For insstance, Balanchine was "cutting edge" but now he's "classic." The Balanchine Trust promotes the myth that there's some magical, special "Balanchine technique" that only SAB-trained dancers can perfect, when in fact other classical ballet companies have been dancing Balanchine for years with a lot of verve and unique panache. (And let's not forget Sofiane Sylve, who is not "Balanchine"-trained at all but now has a huge fanbase at the NYCB.)

But everything that is "classic" was once "cutting edge." This includes Ivanov's "white act" choreography to Beethoven's more complex symphonic structures. I mean, let's not forget that Nijinsky was booted from the Maryinsky because he wore a jacket and tights, which is now standard danseur getup

Just from videos, I find Grigorivich's legacy very disappointing. For one, his seeming insistence on filming Natalia Bessmertnova in every role (Juliet TWICE, Giselle TWICE, Swan Lake, Spartacus) meant that an entire generation of Bolshoi artists were virtually not filmed at all (especially Maximova). Plisetskaya made several films, mostly because as the Prima Ballerina Assoluta I guess even Grigorovich couldnt sideline here.

I'd DEFINITELY try to catch the Giselle with Ferri and Bocca. A ballerina is either a Giselle or she is not, and I have Ferri's video. I know that she is a Giselle. She might not be dancing this role much longer so I'd try to see her in it definitely.

I agree with carbro about the Kirov's Le Corsaire. SIlly story, but some great great dancing. And I'm sentimental about this ballet as it's the one that started it all for Rudolf Nureyev.

I just viewed this dvd and loved it! I particularly loved the stately, opulent production, and Sylve's wonderfully down-to-earth Aurora. Along with Asylmuratova she's been the Aurora I have on video that conveys the actual sweetness of Aurora without seeming overly cute and precious. Sylve has some wobbly, uncertain moments in the Rose Adagio but somehow I didnt mind them, mostly because I felt that her adorable personality more than made up for this. She seems to be one of those dancers (Cojocaru is another) for whom charm comes naturally.

The costumes are stunning, if a bit too fussy. I liked the longer-length tutus. And Gael Lambiotte is really wonderful -- very handsome. The Vision Scene was lovely, although upon closer examination the corps' final lineup had some blemishes.

Highly recommended. I also LOVE the gorgeous photo of Olga Spessivtseva during the overture.

I wrote a rather detailed review of it on Amazon. Basically, I hated Nureyev's production. I found it heavyhanded, way too mature, and just plain busy. Here's what I wrote:

------------------------------

Rudolf Nureyev contributed so much to ballet that it seems ungrateful to criticize his ballet stagings (mostly at the Paris Opera Ballet). Indeed, his La Bayadere staging remains one of the best. But this Romeo and Juliet is simply misguided in so many respects.

For one, Nureyev's staging is way too long, with too many intermittent scenes. The video runs to 150 minutes. MacMillan understood how to juxtapose crowd scenes, character-setting dances, and pas de deux. He overall keeps the ballet moving at an astonishingly fast clip, even though the ballet is very long (about 2 hours). Nureyev's Act 3 has SEVEN scene changes.

Nureyev also does not seem to trust the story itself, and adds a lot of heavyhanded imagery and symbolism. A skeleton is prominently displayed on the scrim before one act, then there is a bit with a grim reaper. Juliet has a dream with the "ghosts" of Tybalt and Mercutio. Because GET IT??? THEYRE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!!!! Towards the end Romeo has a "pas de deux" with Paris, which is also something nowhere in the MacMillan version. All this symbolism and fatalism not only comes across as heavyhanded, but it also changes the very nature of Shakespeare's play, which despite the "star-crossed lovers" bit is really about the senselessness and miscues and poor timing that cause such pain and tragedy.

I am no prude, but I thought Nureyev was WAY too eager to emphasize the violent aspects of the story. Things do not get very unconventional until Tybalt's death. In this staging it does not seem like an impulsive act of rage on Romeo's part. Instead, there is a very prolonged fight scene, replete with choke holds and dropped swords, and the final death seems like cold-blooded murder. From then on things get more violent. Even the Bedroom Scene between Romeo and Juliet has little intimacy, and a lot of rolling around and grinding. But there's a totally pointless scene on the road to Mantua where the messenger is brutally murdered. It's very graphic and gratuitous. Granted, Renaissance Italy was a very violent time, but all the graphic violence IMO not only pushed the limits of classical ballet but made Romeo and Juliet seem much more unappealing as people, and also are confusions and distractions to the storyline.

As for the dancing, the etoiles of the POB are Manuel Legris and Monique Loudieres. They have absolutely perfect technique, with not a bent leg or misplaced foot in the entire ballet. Their precision is jaw-dropping. But in the end, I feel as if they are unable to convey the youth and romance of these teenaged lovers. They are too mature, too serious, more SEXUAL than SEXY (there's a difference). The POB corps is as usual probably the most uniform and well-trained in the world.

But Romeo and Juliet IMO requires more than accurate footwork and well-placed arabesques. This production by Nureyev simply failed to understand the timeless appeal of the story.

Re:  Wiles-Hallberg, there are few men tall enough to partner Michele.  Both are still young -- especially David -- and developing their artistry.  They share a joy when dancing together that pours out into the audience, and that's an indispensible ingredient in a great partnership (not saying theirs is "great" . . . yet).

--Carley

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree that Michele's extreme height is an issue. Especially in T&V. The part where she has to link arms and wind around the corps ... She was so much taller than all the women that I thought it was going to be a domino topple. It wasnt of course but ... (For anyone who has met Michele how tall IS she exactly? She seems to be almost WNBA-ish but I have no idea if she's just giant compared to the other ABT girls.)

In general, I think with more acceptance of different figures and body types for ballerinas there's the inevitable difficulty in finding partners. For instance, it'd be hard to find someone tall enough to partner Darcey Bussell. Also, I think that some dancers will be very great ballerinas but might not EVER really find a great partnership. Especially the more purely virtuostic dancers. This is something I've noticed with some of the POB videos. It's not a crime either. I mean Anna Pavlova never found HER dancing lobster (and yes I'm a dork I loved Friends).

Thanks for the answers, ballet lovers.

ABT has tried to forge a few partnerships --- Wiles/Hallberg, Herrera/Corella, Mr & Mrs Beloserkovsky (Dorovenko/Beloserkovsky) but they haven't really blossomed. I wonder why?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well in the case of Wiles/Hallberg, I've seen enough of them to have a theory: there's seems to be a partnership based on physical appearances (both tall athletic blonds). But I think a lot of great partnerships 'click' because of complementary qualities. For instance, the quote about Nureyev/Fonteyn: "He brought her out, and she brought him up." For Fracci and Bruhn, her sweetness melted his Apollonian reserve, etc. I think at this point Wiles and Hallberg are too similar temperamentally to really generate much chemistry (besides the joy that audiences get from looking at youth and athleticism together.) I think they both have growing to do as dancers.

For Herrera/Corella, I think they're both physically and temperamentally too DIFFERENT. Herrera seems like a hard person to match: she has a large head, long, thick torso, and extremely thin legs. Temperamentally, I'd say she can be exciting but is often more placid than anything. Corella is slight but has more classical proportions. Now the idea seems to be Murphy/Corella. Maybe that'll work.

And as for Mr. and Mrs. Dvorovenko (sorry, I love her too much ) I think they do work. Because you get a melding of complementary looks and temperament: shes tough, sexy, and dark, he's more reserved and classical, blond. They're a bit like Fred and Ginger.

But mostly I think great partnerships are by definition rare, and the reason people still talk about Sibley/Dowell or Makarova/Nagy (or nowadays Cojocaru/Kohborg) is because it's special. If every partnership caught fire, then there wouldnt be "great" partnerships, the way gold wouldnt be valuable if every handful of dirt had gold dust.

I HATE all the weird photography in that Giselle, particularly the incessant shots of the villagers eating fruit, and all the "underwater reflection" shots in Act2, plus the closeups of the feet, in their sweaty, cuto-out-toed glory. I also thought Erik Bruhn didnt take well to closeups -- he looks his age, plus his face constantly has a puzzled look that reminds me of Will Ferrell impersonating Bush on SNL. Otherwise, I love the film, especially Fracci's heartrending Giselle.

Does the Spessivtseva book have any meaty info about her life? I've been fascinated with her ever since I saw her in Portrait of Giselle, where at times she seemed clouded over and confused, but then when talking about Kasarivna, you could see the lights open, and she said, "Most great dancer, great WOMAN."

Hi everybody,

On abebooks it seems as if Anton Dolin was quite the writer, with autobiographies, "final" autobiographies, more reminisces, and biographies of his friends and leading ladies Markova and Spessivtzeva. Has anyone read them? Opinions?