dirac

Watching a movie at home, often more than once, is becoming increasingly common, but if you’re in a theatre coming to the work for the first time you can’t really do that - not that I think you must do that in order to appreciate a picture in a foreign language. And not too long ago the only way to see a picture like ‘Maud’ was to travel, sometimes a considerable distance if you were not a city dweller, to an art house and it could be years before you saw it again. (And it’s not always desirable; I’m glad I saw ‘The Lives of Others’ in a theatre. And there are some films for which one viewing is quite enough, thank you.)

Hoo, boy:

Mashinka writes: A good point. I recall Christopher Plummer saying awhile back that the training he received wasn’t available today. Don’t forget Ray Winstone, who scares me witless. Anthony_NYC writes: Technology has changed, too. Actors used to have to speak louder and clearer to ensure the mike picked them up. I’m of two minds. I certainly don’t miss Joan Crawford saying ‘cahn’t’ for ‘can’t’ but I did wince every time John Malkovich tried to get his tongue around words like ‘mademoiselle’ in Dangerous Liaisons – he sounded more Shepard than Laclos. papeetepatrick writes: Perhaps ‘sophistication’ in the highest sense. I think of Les Enfants du Paradis, where the acting is heightened in a theatrical way but not mannered or artificial – nobody is playing an ‘ordinary’ person or trying to, yet the emotions are very real. A Brando story. A member of the National Theater of the Deaf told Patricia Bosworth, a biographer of Brando, that he was tops with them because ''even though we can't hear what he's saying, we know exactly what he means.” (I could have that quote wrong – from memory.) I just saw her in The Piano Teacher again. You can see it over and over and still catch something new. What a performance.

Quite right, zerbinetta, but in McNulty’s defense I think he is referring not so much to place of birth as training, style, and theatrical heritage. O’Toole studied at RADA and may very well have been born in Leeds, and where British theatre would be without Shaw, Sheridan, Congreve (born in Leeds but educated in Ireland), and Wilde is not a good place to contemplate. (Okay, Shakespeare wasn’t Irish, although if evidence were suddenly to turn up to that effect I’d not be stunned. ) The article does mention Whitaker, I'm pretty sure.

Anthony_NYC writes: Saw the movie yesterday. I was on the fence about the conclusion and finally decided, presiding-judge style, that “I’ll allow it.” It was in keeping with a certain sentimental thread running through the film and in a way it was fitting. It’s true, I expected the movie to end at that certain tragic point, yet there’s a need to follow through. I’ll say this – you come out of the theatre with the feeling that you’ve really seen something. The reaction at the end of the show I saw was similar to that reported by Old Fashioned – people remained quiet in their seats and nobody got up quickly, there was silence, and then a really big hand.

The discussion over at ArtsJournal has not run its course, it should be noted. John Rockwell, among others, has contributed his two cents. Worth checking out.

Thank you, Mashinka, for the link and raising an interesting topic. I must be brief right now, but a couple of thoughts. It is indeed a discussion of potential interest, but I’m afraid for me McNulty doesn’t go far beyond the superficial – as papeetepatrick says, the piece itself doesn’t have much application beyond this year’s Oscars, in relation to which McNulty fails to mention The Departed, a movie that shows a master actor, Jack Nicholson, in an erratic performance that nonetheless shows some of the best aspects of American style performing, leading a remarkable cast of younger men. Maybe they can’t take tea with Helen Mirren, but they have an intensity and directness often lacking in British actors. McNulty suggests that acting in independent film makes some of the difference, but until Titanic put him over the top DiCaprio cut his teeth and made his reputation in those same indie pictures. Again, there is certainly more to discuss, but I fear this piece was mainly ginned up for Oscar time. I will say that British actors tend to make better acceptance speeches - they always show up with something elegant, well prepared, and to the point, unless it's Sacha Baron Cohen talking about the scent of his co-star's naughty bits.

I’m already rooting for Ziering and Ohno. And whatever else can be said about Heather Mills, she is a lady of spirit. I love reading your reports, miliosr, but wouldn’t want you to do them unless they’re fun for you. Last season was certainly less than inspirational.

Indeed. I was also impressed by the way even the most monstrous character is still a recognizable person, not a cartoon.

I appreciate and respect what Guettel was trying to do in “The Light in the Piazza,” for example, but if these are the writers that are going to carry Broadway in the future there are pitfalls ahead, and if it proves to be the case that Chenoweth can’t work with them it may not be entirely her problem.

Kinnear isn’t quite up to the demands of the last part of the film and Bob Crane as a performer had a certain knowingness Kinnear couldn’t or didn’t reproduce, but he’s still really good (so are Willem Dafoe and Kurt Fuller). The movie itself might have been better if it had been made with a little humor, which Paul Schrader isn't known for, and less head-shaking, but it was okay. (It helps to have watched a lot of Hogan's Heroes, which I admit I did in my time.)

I will see LMS –thanks for the prod. I’m afraid my comment sounded unduly snippy. (The hoopla made me a tad suspicious.) I really like Kinnear, too, even in Auto Focus, which I thought was misjudged in approach, and he’s been the saving grace in more than one ‘romantic comedy.’ It sounds like a very good part for him, too. mmded, I too would like to hear more of your thoughts on 'Water' and the other parts of the trilogy. I missed it when it came out but it's on my list.

I’ve enjoyed Macaulay’s writing over the years and as already noted above I’m delighted with this appointment. I don’t agree with Scherr in this particular instance, but I don’t think that her criticisms are ridiculous or out of line. As Paul Parish says, you can have reservations about what is unquestionably a step in the right direction. It is possible for an outsider to lack a feel for the local situation but that is not something that would show immediately and Macaulay should not be pre-judged on that account, IMO. scoop writes: scoop, I’d suggest, respectfully, that Scherr has a right to speak of her own experience and that of others she knows, as do you. That hers is less positive doesn’t make her Miss Pittypat. She is not the first to voice such observations and I would hesitate to take the line of ‘they’re complaining because they can’t cut the mustard.’ I'd have liked to see Laura Jacobs in the spot, had anyone asked me, but for some reason nobody did.

One quote from the piece: Thanks for that link, Dale. I'm not sure this appointment makes Macaulay a rooster among hens or that being from the UK is necessarily a disadvantage. It’s not as if the Times has never had a woman in the top slot. Thoughts?

Alastair Macaulay has been appointed the new chief dance critic for The New York Times. I couldn't be happier. Congrats to him and the paper. Dance Insider has the story, and I believe it's a scoop: http://www.danceinsider.com/f2007/f0215_1.html

papeetepatrick writes: I also like ‘The Deer Park’ and parts of ‘An American Dream,’ but I especially admire Mailer’s non-fiction. He’s great on stuff like the moon shot, the march on Washington, and political conventions. As you say, he gets away with all manner of fatuities because just as he’s annoying you with something outrageous or just silly he produces in the next paragraph or even sentence an insight that will knock you over. (“Marilyn” is full of such passages – both kinds.) There’s gold in them thar hills, even if it does take a lot of digging on occasion. Thank you for the link. I was struck by this paragraph: He should indeed get the Nobel, and they better hurry up, although he looks and sounds full of beans these days, going by interviews. I didn't actually intend to recommend Pynchon's new book. He is not a favorite of mine and I would never urge anyone to rush out and buy even Gravity's Rainbow without at least peeking at a library copy first. On the other hand, when he produces a book it's news, so I thought I'd post an alert. Any Pynchon fans out there should please offer their opinions.

I never saw Peters live but elsewhere she has always struck me exactly the same way. (If I had, I don't think it would have made a big difference.) It could be me, though. Thanks to both of you for the stimulating discussion. Others join in, please.

I agree that no one wants to do that, but on the other hand some very draconian forms of censorship have been imposed in the name of not 'perpetuating nastiness' and milder forms of censorship with more benevolent intent are no less undesirable, I think.

I was surprised at its nomination, since everyone I know who has seen it disliked it. I've been kind of avoiding it myself, though I'll see it eventually. I haven't seen Pan's Labyrinth yet, either, but hopefully I will this weekend. And Little Miss Sunshine - I liked it - but I can think of a few films more deserving of Best Picture. Ditto on Little Miss Sunshine. Babel had to be one of the most painful movie watching experiences for me. I was tempted to leave the theater at times but I trudged through it til the end. I can handle blood and violence, but something about that film struck a nerve. I saw Children of Men and feel it is more deserving of the nomination. There isn't a single film I want to root for in the Best Picture category. I haven't seen The Departed and The Queen and don't really care to (I've seen Infernal Affairs and The Queen just seems a bore). Letters from Iwo Jima is good, but as far as war films go, I didn't think it represented a great departure from the status quo. A bit too idealized, IMO. It's unfortunate my two favorite films of the year have to compete against each other in the Foreign Language Film category (at least Apocalypto and Iwo Jima are not included). For anyone who has not yet done so, please see The Lives of Others if it is playing near you. I'm no good at reviewing, but the film is a subtle study in human emotions and relationships. The few people in the theater with me last night were transfixed in their seats long after the credits started rolling and a few even managed to clap. I'm predicting that Pan's Labyrinth will leave with the Oscar (the other favorite), but please don't let Lives go unnoticed. The Lives of Others hasn’t made it to my area yet, but I plan to see it as soon as it does. I agree, Pan’s Labyrinth has to be considered the favorite, but the Academy has made some unlikely choices in this category and can be hard to predict. I don't think it will vanish unnoticed, though. The Departed is in some ways a step back for Martin Scorsese, but I liked it and it’s an interesting contrast to Infernal Affairs. Like you I have no great stake in the winner this year, but I wouldn't cry if The Departed won. (The two pictures are very different, but I don’t think one is necessarily superior to the other, although I concede that’s a minority opinion.) I haven’t seen Letters from Iwo Jima yet, but based upon my previous experience with Clint Eastwood movies your estimate sounds about right. I admit to having gone out of my way to avoid Little Miss Sunshine, although I expect to see it eventually. As for being no good at reviewing, you're doing just fine.

Another, even more vulgar distortion of the composer's intent. As written, Mimi soars from high A to high C, and Rodolfo from F (not very high for a tenor) down to E. Both pianissimo! More often than not, what one hears is a fortissimo belt-fest for both singers in unison, completely destroying the poetry of that ending. Most of the audience doesn't care, so long as it's loud.

papeetepatrick writes: Also, all the 'Apple Tree' is no masterpiece, it is charming and much of the music is very pretty and you enjoy it while still in the theater. I enjoy it at home, too. Okay, so it’s not The Magic Flute. It’s too bad that the old style variety show is gone from television. I don’t say that Chenoweth is Carol Burnett, but she might have fared better in that than in the sitcom format (didn’t see it, but I’m perfectly willing to take sidwich’s word on the matter. I have never seen Chenoweth live. On those occasions when I’ve seen her on television she was not shown to her best advantage but I didn’t find her annoying or grating.)

Thank you for the heads up, drb. If anyone attends please report back.

The Guardian offers a digested read of Norman Mailer’s “The Castle in the Forest.” I certainly hope it’s not that bad but this sounds plausible, I fear. Has anyone read it yet? http://books.guardian.co.uk/digestedread/s...2011818,00.html

Considerably more justice than it deserved. Seldom have I been so embarrassed for Grant.

That is correct. As written, the last tenor note in Dqp is a G, which makes a perfect harmonization to the C and E's held by the chorus. Elsewhere in the opera, Manrico never goes above an A, except for a couple of optional B flats. Fact is that tenor voices were generally lighter in the early Italian ottocento, and the belted high C one hears at the end of Act Three in Trovatore really distorts Verdi's intent, even if he eventually gave in on the one occasion dirac quotes. Thank you for the further details, Klavier.