dirac

I thank Helene for her clarification above, and I add the following. kfw, to state that : is to use loaded language to describe what Copeland has said and done. It is harsh language, and in my opinion it is inappropriate and not applicable to her actions and situation -- wrong, if you will. Helene, and others, have explained well and thoroughly why the Big Lie by which you set such store is disputable. You say that you "await specifics." In this thread, and in the old Copeland threads, it seems to me that we are up to the wazoo with specifics. nanushka, perhaps you are coming a bit late to the party. I suggest respectfully that you may wish to review, if you have not already done so, the Copeland threads in the "Dancers" forum, where you will find many of the same points raised here hashed (and rehashed) over. Possibly the solution is to have a "Misty Copeland is a Big Honking Liar" thread where the like-minded can congregate to discuss her personal and professional shortcomings.

Below is what you wrote, to which I responded: To which I responded: As I said initially - very harsh stuff, and highly disputable.

I think there's been plenty of disputation of just those things going on, or have I missed something on these two long threads?

I don't think it's odd at all, choriamb. The historic costumes would be my main purpose for being there. Some images from the Met's website.

To observe that decisions about promotion are not made in a vacuum is merely to note a simple reality. The assertion that Copeland has made accusations of racism as part of a PR offensive is quite a harsh one, as others have said, and one with which many would disagree. "We'll never know" suggests that there will be for ever a question mark over Copeland's promotion, should it happen, and that may be so -- for some. That may indeed be unfortunate, but perhaps not quite in the sense you intend.

Thanks for posting and commenting, mimsyb and cubanmiamiboy. This sounds wonderful. Has anyone else seen it?

The point was that such decisions aren't made in a vacuum and never have been. It doesn't sound to me (not having seen a lot of her dancing) as if Copeland's promotion, should it happen, will be grave violence done to the general principle of merit, but plainly there are differences of opinion out there. My patellar reflexes haven't been making themselves known during the discussion, but others should feel free to report any unusual activity they're experiencing.

From the article: I do not mean to suggest that Copeland's promotion, when and if it happens, will be an example of the type of balance Corella is describing here. Corella is simply acknowledging that many different factors are at play in promotions.The implication that by hiring a flack Copeland has somehow sullied a pristine world where nothing ever mattered but artistry and skill is dubious, at best. And it wouldn't matter, because simply by speaking out the way Copeland has, she would be the target of such criticism even if she had spent her non-dancing time in a corner with a bag over her head.

It read to me like a well-informed piece that instructs readers of the WSJ on an aspect of the ballet world they probably don't know too much about, with a focus on one ballet dancer who has been in the news recently. I have no idea why this is a bad thing. The Telegraph interview has already been posted on the Misty Copeland discussion thread.

Thanks for this. When the revival was new the music was indeed ubiquitous, not to say unavoidable. MacMillan's Elite Syncopations is a nice ballet memento from that time.

Many thanks for the report, Mashinka. Here's an interview with Maltman from a few years back. Six-packs seem to be quite a big deal in opera these days.

Nor would such a literal reconstruction even necessarily be desirable. The past is a different place - the audience looked at their dance with different eyes from ours, the dancers danced with very different bodies. But yes, I would hop right into that time machine myself.

It's possible. That does sound a mite petty, though, and not much like Shearer. An article on the symbolism of red shoes in art discusses both "The Red Shoes" film and the original tale by Andersen.

Indeed. She was working with him as late as 1960, when she played one of the murder victims in Peeping Tom. But I don't think that's necessarily contradictory. Many performers have continued to work with directors and/or impresarios even when the experience behind the scenes isn't so enjoyable. The projects are too good. They want/need the work. The person is good for them in other ways. Or they let bygones be bygones. The making of The Red Shoes was tough on the dancers, apparently. Shearer also seems to have believed that the success of the movie created a prejudice against her when she went back to the company, and possibly she was right. The short answer seems to be that she would have preferred to be remembered for something else. I don't think she fully appreciated how good the movie is, on its own terms, and how good she is in it. It Might Have Been Department: Following The Red Shoes, Jack Cardiff wanted to make a short film of La Boutique Fantasque with Massine and Shearer. Massine was enthusiastic, but de Valois strongly deprecated the idea and wouldn't allow Cardiff to use Shearer or the Sadler's Wells corps, so the project never happened. What a loss.

Yes, I know, as I said above. What I'm saying is that I don't think that's entirely true, and her director, for what it's worth, didn't think so either.

I can understand why she wouldn't necessarily want to see it over and over. I believe she was ambivalent about the outsized place the movie took in her career - for ever after she was always "Moira Shearer, Star of 'The Red Shoes.'" As has been mentioned on this board previously, she was dissatisfied with the representation of her dancing, and she also thought she could have danced better. Nor was she wholly pleased with her own performance, good as she is. I think she was probably being over-critical of herself, not surprising in a dancer. I also wouldn't take everything she said about the picture at absolute face value. For example, she always insisted that she never wanted to do it and had to be pushed into it. I think that was true - up to a point. If she had been putting her ballet career at risk I think she would have flatly refused, but I suspect she was more eager to do the film than she let on, possibly even to herself. Powell certainly thought so. It was a great opportunity, but risky for her too in all kinds of ways.

Also the camera increases a dancer's speed, although Shearer was plainly very fast. The restored version has been showing up on cable again. As FauxPas noted earlier in this thread, high-def doesn't do much for some of the actors, but the colors are marvelous. He was too old, and now it just shows more. Everyone involved knew he was a little too senior for the role, but Michael Powell wanted someone who would support Shearer, a natural but also a neophyte, and he knew he could trust Goring not to upstage her. It's also helpful when the camera is far from Helpmann.

A story on the National Portrait Gallery exhibition features a photo of Hepburn in ballet school.

Indeed, so you said. It's hardly the tackiest of efforts, either, but YMMV.

Another round of pearl-clutching over the shameless Copeland? Yes, indeed, this is just the most outrageous PR effort ever. It seems to be especially popular in upscale advertising pitches. A really frightful use of the word.

Some backstory on Ron Moody and his most famous role. Apparently his view of the kids in the cast was not all that far from Fagin's.

The Devil Rides Out is easily one of Hammer's best. I also think Lee is great in The Mummy. Lee was particularly eager to do The Wicker Man because he was tiring of wading in fake blood, and he worked on the film without pay. (He was also instrumental in getting The Devil Rides Out made.) In the end The Wicker Man is really Edward Woodward's movie, but Lee is still very good in it, probably his best performance. Both men considered it to be their best film. Interesting that both Woodward and Lee were also good singers. I didn't learn until the obits came out that Lee had played Jinnah in a biopic of the same name. Not a piece of casting that leaps immediately to mind. Lee was very proud of his performance in it, considering it his best effort.

Lee did get in on two big franchises late in the game - I wouldn't be surprised if he made more money in the last ten years of his career than he did in the previous five decades, and well deserved too. He had quite a life. I still feel a bit strange - I realize he had to die eventually, but somehow I guess I always assumed he'd go on forever. Loved his Rochefort, too.

Christopher Lee has died at age 93. Farewell, Lord Summerisle, Scaramanga, Dracula...... Related. And farewell to a great Fagin. Ron Moody has died at age 91. Both of them enjoyed long lives, fortunately.

Thank you for the heads-up, Lynette H. I hope people who tune in to this will tell us about what they hear!