dirac

True, sidwich. House was better years ago. It's too bad that so many good shows go on past their sell-by date, although I understand the reasons for it. Regarding Cameron vs. ex-Cameron, I wonder if voters this awards season will split the difference with Avatar getting best picture nods and Bigelow getting Best Director and breaking the glass ceiling, etc. (This makes questionable sense in view of the control directors exert over most contemporary films, but the Academy has done it in the past.) I guess it depends on how you define merit, too. The Oscars certainly don't have anything to do with art but it is nice when a good actor/writer/director gets recognition on the biggest stage. For example, I was pleased for Scorsese when he finally won even if it wasn't for his best stuff. He wanted it so badly I was getting embarrassed for him.... I must say from the fashion angle the awards season has gotten duller than it used to be. The actresses are so terrified of being mauled in the celebrity magazines the day after that they shun anything that smacks of risk and the Rodeo Drive glory days of Bob Mackie and Nolan Miller are long gone, as I've lamented before. I sure miss Geena Davis and Cher.

I also watch the Globes because the show is brisker than the Oscars and everyone is more relaxed, sitting at tables and sometimes getting visibly tipsy on national television. Oh, he was so great in I, Claudius. Patricia Quinn and he made such a marvelous evil couple. You know, I’m not one of those who blame British actors for allegedly “selling out” to Hollywood. They have as much right to anyone to international fame and a nice fat paycheck. (It’s also possible for bad TV shows to happen to good people, unfortunately.) Laurie chose well but some of it is also luck and being in the right place at the right time. And having the range, of course – a lot of great sketch comics have trouble when venturing into other genres. I think Rome was intended to be a series-series, not a miniseries, and HBO canceled it. I didn’t really care for it but it did give opportunities to some good actors. I keep waiting for James Purefoy to hit it big.

I forgot to add to my previous post that Laurie is my main reason for watching the show. Robert Sean Leonard, too - he and Laurie are surprisingly good together.

Nigel Andrews, The Arts Interview: Eric Rohmer, Financial Times, June 22/June 23 2002 It's also interesting to note -- and gives more depth to the story -- that in the early sixties there was a schism at "Cahiers du Cinema" between the younger "group of five," led by Jacques Rivette, and Rohmer, resulting in Rohmer's dismissal from editorship. Here's Emilie Bickerton's account in her "Short History": Rohmer's aloof high classicism had also resulted in the journal's resistance to the New Wave; "Breathless" was given "a measly two stars." Thanks for locating those and taking the time to post them, Quiggin. From Letter to a Critic. I don't know that I agree with him necessarily but it makes perfect sense in terms of his own work. (Thanks for starting the topic, papeetepatrick.)

Thanks, cubanmiamiboy. The medical plotlines on House can be a little Out There but I still like the show, although I stopped watching TV medical dramas as a rule years ago -- too much repetition. Broken Embraces is still playing in my vicinity but I’m not sure if I’m going to see it because as you say it sounded to me like a retread. (On the other hand I’m sure it’s still twice as good as anything else out there.) I am deeply suspicious of what Tom Ford will do with A Single Man, a book I like, so I would really like to hear your take on it when you do see it.

A piqued Brad Pitt and the missus will not attend the ceremony.

Interesting note, innopac. Thanks for reviving this old thread, it's good reading.

Thanks, vagansmom. Rieu' s audiences always seem to have a great time.

Fergie certainly knows something about an embarrassed monarchy. Martin Scorsese was also involved, so I harbored hopes that Peel and Wellington would solve their political dilemma by hiring Ray Liotta and Joe Pesci to whack Melbourne and dump his body in the Thames, but it didn't happen, alas. There are certainly worse ways to pass two hours in a movie theater this season, however.

That's one theory, but I actually had the opposite reaction. The dancers were accustomed to acting big in order to communicate to the furthest reaches of the highest balcony in live performance. I suspect that they did not scale down to accommodate the intimacy of the camera, which exaggerated the impact. It was a new medium, so they couldn't predict what it would look like, and retakes probably would have been prohibitively expensive. True. Stage performers being filmed around the same time had the same difficulty toning it down for the intimacy of the camera. However, it's not all due to that. Acting and performing conventions change over time and probably this pair would look somewhat affected to modern eyes no matter what. Geltzer doesn't look so bad but Tikhomirov....

Thank you for posting, kathaP, and welcome to the board. We had quite a discussion on Kaufman's article when it first came out, as sifting through this thread will indicate. Regarding the Dance Magazine piece, I thought Weiss' defense of Balanchine a very good one.

I was just being facetious, cubanmiamiboy. I watched football, mostly.

What's wrong with a televised parade? The Tournament of Roses was fun this year, and very nice weather for it.

probably Cortot, I really like his Schumann. I have a recording of Cortot playing Schumann and I agree, for what my opinion is worth. I like Gieseking's recording of Davidsbundlertanze, too.

Rieu may well be conscious of the kitsch in his productions but intentional or not (and I suspect that a considerable part of his audience takes it all straight) there's no denying that it's present. As I mentioned above, I make a habit of watching and enjoying his programs. But it can all be a bit much.

Thanks for posting, sidwich. Good to hear from you.

ou dégoût I by no means meant that the two are mutually exclusive - of course they're not! Rather one doesn't listen to Rieu for artistry any more than one watches Somova for taste. Nor did I mean that the music itself (i.e. strauss waltzes) is inherently schmaltz, rather the setting for the music is pure kitsch. Rieu is selling an image, that's it. Some people like it, I don't. Thanks, ballet_n00b, that was what I took your previous post to mean. There is an element of pop and schmaltz in Johann Strauss and there's a whole lot of schmaltz in Rieu's presentation. I don't mind it most of the time but I can understand reacting with "Not for me, thanks." The "Gold and Silver Waltz" used by Balanchine in Vienna Waltzes is by Lehar.

Yes, indeed. Who among us wouldn't want to be able to thumb through old photos of ourselves and think, Damn.

Thanks for posting the topic, cubanmiamiboy. Rieu can be kitschy, but it's most enjoyable kitsch, and I watch his shows regularly on PBS. Nanarina, the Vienna Philharmonic's New Year's Strauss broadcast is one I never miss. There is something about hearing those waltzes and polkas played to the hilt by a great orchestra and the concert hall is awesome. (I too remember a time when you wondered where they found those ballet dancers, Pamela.)

Thanks for posting your review, abatt. nysusan, I hope you'll tell us about it when you've seen it.

Thanks for posting, glebb. Don't underrate yourself - I always enjoy your posts! I also saw The Young Victoria and it was all right, although in all honesty I didn't enjoy it quite as much as you did. I agree that many BTers might like it. There is little in the way of drama but there are royal tchotckes to check out, nice costumes, Jim Broadbent, and Paul Bettany as Lord Melbourne -too young and too hot for the role, but this viewer was not complaining. Rupert Friend is a charming and appealing Albert. Not much happens - Victoria gets a hard time from Mom and Lord Blackwood, I mean Sir John Conroy, but she ascends the throne on schedule, she wants Albert, she gets Albert, and so on. There is a scandal regarding Victoria's ladies-in-waiting, but that's about as intense as things get, so the filmmakers, casting about for some action, have Albert take a fictional bullet for the little woman. (Flora Hastings gets a passing mention but the movie doesn't go there.) We're told that the monarchy is on the brink of tottering, but as we don't see anything in the movie that would seem to make a throne totter, there's not much in the way of dramatic tension. The tone is bland and positively deferential, as if Victoria and Albert were still on the throne and might drop by the premiere.

glebb wrote on another thread: Hi, glebb. I think the expectation for movie audiences is that there's going to be some glitz, so perhaps that was the idea, not to mention some needed distraction from the mediocre score, never much liked by me. But the film is at its best when nobody is singing or dancing, not a good sign for a musical. I thought Marshall toned down the hard sell of his two previous outings, Chicago and Memoirs of a Geisha, to good effect. The presence of stars who can't really sing seems to be the price of getting musicals made in the current industry environment and it may be too high a price to pay. True movie musical stars no longer exist and you couldn't get funding for Nine without a few star names. ("Dreamgirls," with its faux R&B material, could use contemporary stars with real voices.) Of the women Cotillard has the best role and she comes off very well. Maybe her eyes well with tears once too often, but she is genuinely touching. (She also has the "best" number, insofar as there is one, in "Take It All.")

Thank you for posting, jsmu. Here is a link to the obit.

The movie was available on cable this month and so I saw it again. I'm afraid the novelty still wears off after an hour or so, the movie often doesn't bother telling the stories clearly, and although the costumes are charming in their detail they're clunky for dancing. But there are many delightful moments just the same. The mouse waltz is wonderful and very Ashtonian as rg notes, Alexander Grant and Brenda Last are delicious in the piggy pas de deux, and the Hunca Munca segment with Lesley Collier (such neat feet) and Wayne Sleep trashing the dollhouse is a minor classic. And of course very few films offer the spectacle of one of the world's great choreographers dressed as a hedgehog. I love Ashton's little dance and it's a pleasure just watching him pluck the laundry off the line.

I too would be interested in hearing from anyone who's seen this, although I can't say it's something I would go out of the way to see, myself. Thanks for posting the topic, papeetepatrick.