dirac

On a less flippant note, this would seem to be a better move for Wheeldon, from the artistic point of view, than the peripatetic choreographic existence he’s been leading.

Yup - or just plain 'Morphoses.' Whatever. The NYT article has some choice quotes. Perhaps Martins should have had him sign a noncompete agreement.

I'm afraid it sounds that way to me, too. And you don't have to go to Harvard to know that at the very least such remarks are not the height of tact. There are many ways of communicating interest in a position that don't involve The New York Times.

She should shy away or not from discussing it, according to what she values most--her career or membership in a party that she didn't even bother to fully understand when she joined it. She talks in platitudes about 'I think I'm normal' and 'people like me who like Christmas.' I went through 9/11 quite directly myself, and that did not make me turn to Fascists like Griffin--or even to near-Fascists in non-Fascist parties that made themselves readily available. She probably has advisors telling her what is going to be the best damage control. If she wants to join a party that supports Holocaust denial and extreme racism of blacks in Britain itself, she should either have informed herself fully beforehand on what this might mean, or it should certainly come as little surprise that people are not going to fully embrace it, in fact, that they would obviously condemn it. Of course, it is all naivete, but you'd think she'd at least have 'asked around' about such a thing before expecting to have her cake and eat it too, in such a hugely controversial matter that does not reflect any group of ballet people I have ever heard of--even the ones stuck in very small towns are the ones who aren't into backward thinking, they are always the cosmopolitans. If she didn't know that it was quite possible she'd have to choose between BNP and ENB, then she is not quite mentally equipped enough to go it alone without a huge staff of advisers. Of course it does not, but it does go without saying that BNP is a Fascist organization, and her focus only on immigration and PNLU (People Not Like Us) probably indicates that she is trying to take the overwhelmingly obvious matter of what BNP actually is well-known to be and say 'well, they were doing pretty well with some issues that were important to me.' She thinks she can stop short of getting rid of her membership and not denouncing the party by trying to divert the attention to her little fears--fears which, incidentally, we all have. After some time in the BNP, it's impossible to imagine she didn't know what they were actually made of--or if she's become enlightened since being outed, how can she not know what they are? She's still got time to prove whether she's just naive, or whether she's just not very bright--because she'll never turn the ballet world into a BNP-loving special-interest group. Agree with GoCoyote, therefore, on most points. In other words, maybe it's less important what she did previously and then what she did 'in the discussion' than whether she gets smart enough to know that BNP is not the same as being Democratic, Republican, Green Party, Tory, Labour, or even Socialist Workers Party, etc.: It is the same as American Nazi Party, or at least closer to that than any of the mainstream or non-violent alternative parties--maybe like Jean-Marie le Pen, who also has been convicted for holocaust denial. She's not even an intellectual lightweight, much less anything more, so it is a little absurd for her to be taking a stubborn stance, and my guess is that she's probably trying to figure out how to get out of this with the least embarassment possible. I don't see why not. It doesn't somehow seem 'quintessentially British', frankly. The only thing that does is the way she uses some old phrases much like Margaret Thatcher's early campaigning in the late 70's like 'it just doesn't seem very British, does it?' which were playing to the bigotries of the day. What the Daily Mail says here sums it all up for me. If she didn't even know this much, then Pamela Moberg's term 'pathetic' definitely applies. 'Instead it [the current BNP] is led by a savvy Cambridge graduate in a suit. That leader, Nick Griffin, advocates the repatriation of Muslims, denies the Holocaust and believes that black footballers who represent the national team cannot be classed as English.' Well said.

Thank you for being so gracious, Giannina.

I saw “The Good Shepherd” yesterday, missing the Fiesta Bowl, which turned out to be an entertainment selection error of major proportions, and I didn’t tape the game, damn it. But I digress. I’m glad you liked it, Giannina, and thank you for letting us know your thoughts. I feel bad about it and don't mean to play the killjoy, but I disagree, I'm afraid. This wasn’t an easy picture to get made, I’m sure, and it’s obvious that everyone involved had worthy intentions. I had been looking forward to it because it takes up a major subject that hasn’t really been explored on the big screen, but I’m afraid they bit off more than they could chew, pardon the cliche. The movie is indebted thematically and visually to the Godfather movies -it's basically 'Godfather II' with Episcopalians and minus any energy or pulse (and Matt Damon is no Pacino, I’m sorry to say). TGS lasts three hours and feels like six, but it still tries to cover too much time and ground – characters and situations go undeveloped, loose threads stay loose, yet scenes still go on for too long. Certain plot developments pack no wallop because you can see them coming for miles. I understand the wish of De Niro and his screenwriter, Eric Roth, to avoid the usual spy flick thrills, but there has to be something to keep us with the story. It wasn’t there for me. The movie has a large and impressive cast, but only a few of the actors can really make their presence felt. I’m not sorry I saw it, exactly, but I can't really recommend it, either. GWTW writes: Jolie ages rather like Elizabeth Taylor in “Giant” – gray streaks in the hair, not much else. And heavy drinking has no effect on her skin or figure. Both she and Tammy Blanchard do what they can with what they’re given. But Jolie is still too forceful a personality for the part, such as it is - she could obviously eat Damon for breakfast.

Yes, she's a public figure even if she's no Darcey Bussell. (Judging by the interviews she's not exactly shying away from the discussion, either.)

I saw 'Babel' and came away with the mixed feelings I'm becoming accustomed to this moviegoing season. I thought it was a big improvement over Inarritu and Arriaga's last effort, '21 Grams.' It is beautiful to look at, although not in a picture postcard way, and the actors, some of whom I gather are nonprofessionals, give their all to their roles (some of which don't deserve the effort). The Mexican wedding sequence and the Japanese club rave are as remarkable as papeetepatrick says, but I grew increasingly annoyed by the melodramatic plot contrivances. I may very well see it again, though.

Blanchard's been on the rise, playing with a number of famous and more established actresses. She picked up an Emmy playing the young Judy Garland in "Me and My Shadows" and a Tony nomination as Louise opposite Bernadette Peters in "Gypsy." I think the subject matter would have been hard for some audiences no matter what, but the idea of Jolie as the archtypal suffering 40s wife is a bit odd. Jennifer Connelly might have been a better choice. (I think Jolie could have made a killer Ava Gardner in "The Aviator" a few years ago, though.) Thanks for the info, sidwich. (The thought of Jolie as Gardner crossed my mind, too, but although she would have brought the right spirit to the part I think her face and figure are just a little too contemporary.)

Thank you for the report, GWTW. The reviews of “The Good Shepherd” have not been favorable, which is too bad as on paper this looked promising. Generally speaking, movies directed by actors do tend to have good performances if not always much else. I wouldn’t think of Jolie is as the wifely type, unless you count Olympia in “Alexander,” where she was indeed a suitable match for Val Kilmer. (Her looks aren’t very Forties, however.)

Thanks very much for posting. I wish the project the best but I’m not sure how widespread these broadcasts will eventually be. Fingers crossed.

I recently caught the movie version of “The History Boys.” It’s not flawless, but if it’s playing in your area you could do far worse this season. I understand it was shot not too long after the play began to run, so the performances wouldn’t be ossified after months of repetition. The theatrical origins of the material are still clear in staging and the actors’ delivery (and it is more obvious onscreen than it would be onstage that these kids are kind of old for high school) but I didn't mind. I have not read or seen the play -- if anyone has seen both I'd like to hear about it. The material has been opened up with some very ordinary montages accompanied by rock music, but these are tolerable. I’m afraid that for me the elegiac ending fell quite flat, alas. Regarding the story – I found the central conflict not all that compelling nor was I able to take an entirely mellow view of the serial groping of the students indulged in by the character played by Richard Griffiths, however inspirational he’s alleged to be. Bennett stacks the deck with care, making it clear that both pupils and teacher regard the activity as an essentially harmless one, the only people who object are made out to be unduly censorious and/or hypocritical and yes, these boys are clearly old enough to take care of themselves – but. (We are also informed, in a speech assigned to the one major woman character, that the unfortunate wives of such unhappy closet cases are probably aware of the situation and really don’t mind. Sure they don't.) Bennett’s dialogue is always a pleasure to hear. It’s also a pleasure to see a company of actors as good as these. Griffiths is good but I did not take to the character or the performer as much as I was evidently meant to do and I was just as impressed by Stephen Campbell Moore, who is very good indeed. I particularly liked the scene in which the class heartthrob, a shameless tease with both sexes (well played by Dominic Cooper), propositions him. Samuel Barnett as Posner was wonderful, very touching. Clive Merrison overplays as the headmaster, although the director, Nicholas Hytner, and maybe Bennett should probably take the blame for that.

I really didn't think I'd go through with this, but I'm glad I did. The Afterword, which I only noticed as I was finishing the novel was written by Ellroy on February 27, 2006! He praises the film in a way which demonstrates how differently authors feel about how their work is adapted. Truman Capote was always disgusted. I read 'Beloved' before seeing the film, and then was surprised at how faithful it was to the novel, or so I thought, and how much better I thought it was than critics I'd read had. Then I saw Toni Morison on Charlie Rose and she said they didn't get it right at all. All I can say is that they followed her text closely. He thinks Josh Hartnett is perfect as Bucky Bleichert, for example! That it's a 'trinity' of Bleichert/Ellroy/DePalma. That's why this mind-blowing Afterword Ellroy wrote for the edition to accompany the movie's release ought to be read by anyone who found the movie interesting. And if you read the book, it's simply nearly unbelievable; but if the film interested you, then read the Afterword even if you don't read the novel (only in the 2006 edition, as mentioned.) Thanks for the update. I suspect Ellroy’s comments are partly genuine enthusiasm and partly courtesy. Many writers past and present have complained about adaptations of their work for the screen, but I consider it bad form even if the book was mauled. It’s not as if Capote and Morrison didn’t know what they might be in for, after all, and it’s tacky for novelists to go around bleating about How Hollywood Destroyed My Masterpiece after the check has cleared. Even if he disliked Hartnett’s performance, and I’d not blame him if he did, it would be impolite to go around saying so for publication. (On the other hand, if he actually means what he says, one doesn’t know what to think.) Regarding Morrison, I can’t imagine what she was upset about. Even if the adaptation wasn't perfect, the film was carefully and thoughtfully made, with a beautiful performance by Thandie Newton. She was lucky. I’m going to check out that Afterword. I’ll try the book again, too, although my previous attempts at dealing with Ellroy have not been fruitful.

I can't speak for those in Seattle, but it will certainly be nice to have Weese on this coast. I've only seen her on television, in the Swan Lake and a bit from Liebeslieder, but I thought she was beautiful. I only wish her destination was a little further south - maybe she'll pay San Francisco a visit, too.

That's a bit much. Alagna is saying low blood sugar was the problem, according to this AP report.

Thank you for the report, papeetepatrick – I must see that. I’ve gotten to like Deneuve more over the years. As you note, she’s had remarkable luck (and taste) throughout her career and has made more films that will last for awhile than many other stars. (Initially I was more favorably disposed towards her older sister, the late lamented Francoise Dorleac.) The young Deneuve struck me as a director’s tool, interesting enough if Polanski orBunuel was telling her what to do but not a performer with much individuality or initiative. But with a face like that, who cared? (And she was very appealing in The Umbrellas of Cherbourg.) Not 'ordinary-snooty' - just sensible. The awards shows are a guilty pleasure of mine, although they’re not nearly so much fun since the heyday of Cher and Geena Davis, with all the female stars today showing up in simple sheaths lest they be jeered to death in the press. Politics are certainly important – it’s useful to think of the Oscars as a form of election-cum-popularity-contest, with everything that accompanies such things. I’m steeling myself for ‘Apocalypto’ this weekend.

I was also put in mind of Fonteyn's remark to the effect that if there was a real understanding of the pain involved, the only people watching ballet would be those who liked bullfighting.

Thanks, sidwich.

That sounds like a lovely idea, mnclimber, and congratulations on your expectations! I'm on the west coast and can't contribute much information of value, but perhaps others will have suggestions. Also, in the past we've had several threads in various forums regarding travel tips, such as this one. A search using various keywords, such as 'New York,' 'travel,' 'hotel,' or 'restaurant' might also be productive. I hope you both can make it, and that you'll report back if you do. Good luck!

Yes, heckling is always with us, but that doesn't necessarily make it a justified reaction in some cases. A performer should never leave the stage mid performance because of a hostile audience, but I’m holding off before passing judgment on Alagna – I don’t know enough about the background of the matter and the news accounts, the ones I’ve seen at any rate, are skimpy. Callas took a beating in 1958 in Rome when she walked out after the first act of “Norma” and it wasn’t necessarily justified. I don’t suggest it’s an exact analogy, far from it, but sometimes these things look different in retrospect. richard53dog writes: I agree. In a way they did him a favor by firing him.

Thanks, leonid. My favorite quote, from Monica Mason: Well, that's reassuring.

That was beautiful, Anthony_NYC - thank you. Thanks also for the link. I had my doubts about the 'High Fidelity' project when it was initially announced, but one wishes Ms. Green and her colleagues all the best.

Yes, we've been posting a great many RIPs recently, I'm sorry to say. Truly a magnificent career and I think it is safe to say we won't see the likes of it again.

Wasn't that Juliet Stevenson? A great actress, although I have no clue as to whether or not she has a background in musicals.

It was shot on the cheap, and it's pretty bad. I cringe every time the Phantom opens his mouth (if they were going to get an unknown, couldn't they get one who could sing the part well?), and the sets look like they're going to fall down at the next brisk breeze. My brother (who is a filmmaker) called me up one day to ask me what I knew about it, because he'd been flipping channels at home and came across it, and he couldn't believe how bad it was from a technical filmmaking perspective (apparently, you can see reflections and glare on the film all over the place). But apparently someone liked it because it did make money, although most of it was overseas. In addition to the above, they couldn't quite bring themselves to make the Phantom unattractive, and they gave him this absurd little mask that looks as if it was gluesticked on so we could see how cute he was.