dirac

I bought 'Gilead' but haven't begun it yet. It received glowing reviews, but I had the impression they weren't so much for the book (or only for the book, let's say) as they were for Robinson -- everyone was so pleased to have her back. 'Housekeeping' is a beautiful book. Robinson also has a piece in the current Harper's, reviewing Richard Dawkins' latest book.

It’s decided: Helena Bonham Carter will play Mrs. Lovett, and she will do her own singing, natch. Not an obvious choice, but, like Depp, she has worked often with Burton in the past. I have no idea if Bonham Carter can sing, but we’ll find out. I understand Depp is taking singing lessons from Vanessa Paradis to prep for the role. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6065260.stm

Returning to the topic , what happened on Tuesday? I missed it.

Arlene Croce referred back to that incident when she reviewed Ib Andersen, who took over the role for Martins late in the latter's performing career. She also mentioned the diminished effect of the part with the casting change, and commented on the force and conviction it took for Martins to assert himself in a ballet made primarily for Farrell. (Going by the video, he’s by no means an afterthought. Farrell could carry the piece alone, sure, but the conclusion is the more effective for his presence. She benefits too, IMO.)

I'm certainly not sorry I missed that.

I didn't. Interesting reading. miliosr writes: I think it finally comes down to ratings. They don't want to eliminate popular teams that are bringing viewers back, even if the actual dancing is not that great. I was dividing my viewing time last night between this and the NL playoff, so I was not that focused, but I couldn't agree with you more about Jerry and Kym. Last night's routine to the "Habanera" with Jerry in Spanish costume was just....indescribable.

I'm revisiting Marilynne Robinson's "Housekeeping" currently, and dipping into a book on heraldry.

Just a note that I didn't mean to ignore you, canbelto. If the praise and the box office finally get Scorsese his Oscar, then okay by me, but after all the critical tub thumping I expected more from this and came away disappointed. I will say I thought Nicholson started out note perfect and it's too bad he didn't stay that way. I'll blather at length when I have the chance. papeetepatrick writes: Will report back to the other thread in a few weeks after I have read the novel. Please do. I saw an interview with Ellroy and he seemed most pleased with the picture. I understand the movie does depart from the book, but apparently a real effort was made to follow Ellroy, although there were significant changes.

papeetepatrick writes: The effect was eerie, as if Dunaway had dubbed her. But she missed completely the fragility and desperation that Dunaway was hiding; you had the feeling that if you touched Dunaway, her skin would start to craze like old porcelain. Madeleine didn’t have to be an exercise in camp. I’m not sure what can be done with Swank. She’s very talented, but the qualities that made her ideal casting as a cross dressing petty criminal and an aspiring boxer don’t translate well to more conventional roles. The casting of Swank also did damage to a critical plot point, the physical resemblance of Madeleine to Elizabeth Short, as Swank didn’t look anything like pretty little Mia Kirshner and it just seemed weird when people kept referring to it. I felt sorry for them. They needed help from De Palma and didn’t get it (not that anything would have helped the hapless Hartnett). There was an agreeable bit of unintentional humor early on when Johannson is watching a movie in which a terrified woman is threatened and she is supposed to be registering distress. Eckhart had the bad luck to be following Russell Crowe, who played what was basically the same character in “L.A. Confidential.” There’s a scene that resembles closely one in the earlier picture, in which this character reacts violently to the mistreatment of a woman, and the contrast in acting and staging was glaring. The movie went off the rails for good, IMO, in the dinner scene at Swank’s family’s house. Leaving Hartnett and Johansson to twist in the wind is one thing, but when a great actress like Fiona Shaw comes across as a circus freak, it's unforgivable. (Also, I don’t know if that scene was taken from Ellroy’s book, but the whole family thing is a barefaced steal from The Big Sleep.) It's watchable, but everything about it is slightly off kilter; the tone is wrong. The De Palma Virtuoso Action Set Pieces ™ are fun. The most intelligent defense of the movie in auteurist mode that I came across -- actually, you can’t really call it a defense, as the writer conceded it was mostly terrible – was written by Stuart Klawans in The Nation. And the actors’ smoking was totally unconvincing.

Awards season is just around the corner, which means that in the next few months there will be a plethora of major and minor releases of films aimed at a more or less serious audience. Please let us know what you’re seeing!

They are having a similar effect on this viewer.

Yes, Mme. Hermine, please do.

I second the above. Great show, and worth watching more than once.

I realize that times change, and this was not an unexpected development, but I still feel sad. It leaves a real void – yes, you can shop online, but there was no other store around that filled this particular niche.

My recollection, which could be wrong, was that she received great reviews. Even if that weren't the case, I'm sure she'll have much of value to pass on to her pupils.

I saw Mark Morris’ “King Arthur” in Berkeley recently, and while I had mixed feelings about the show I felt I had to own the music immediately, so I went today to my local Tower Records and Books store. Under normal circumstances I would have probably found several different versions of the music, could compare and contrast cast, packaging, and price, and made my choice, but the store is being liquidated along with all the other Tower stores. This did not come as a huge shock. We lost the Berkeley Tower Classical Annex store years ago, but the one in San Francisco was still around last time I checked, and you could browse among a wide selection with a knowledgeable staff. The Tower Books store was smaller than the local megastores but still managed to have a better selection of magazines, poetry, and dance and was the only remaining bookstore in the area with a wide selection of regional Sunday papers, including the city edition of The New York Times. This loyal customer will miss you, Tower Records. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/287...rrecords07.html

Thanks to all of you for keeping this thread going. whitelight writes: It's terribly interesting, and very easy to read, though it does skip around a bit, A common and very helpful evasive tactic when composing a memoir. miliosr writes: Agreed. They’re meant to be set to music or spoken aloud – there are no echoes when you read them to yourself. kfw writes: I’ve never read any of Chesterton’s apologetics save in snippets but I did enjoy his Father Brown stories in the long ago, and of course his memorable versified rebuke to the future Lord Birkenhead. I'm sure your father did a fine job. On what aspect of the era does his novel focus?

I plucked this quote by papeetepatrick from the Modern Dance forum for discussion. I do not have time to respond just now, but if anyone would like to, please get the ball rolling! papeetepatrick writes:

I'm afraid I've only seen one piece of his, and it was done not by his company but the Ailey troupe. I remember it as being a zippy little number and fun to watch, but not its name, alas. I really do think I'll seek him out next time around, though. Helene: Couldn't agree more with both of you. I'd go so far as to call von Trier 'victim porn' (although I admire some aspects of his filmmaking). It doesn't sound to me as if Jones is trying for that, but obviously opinions differ and I'd have to see for myself.

papeetepatrick writes: That was Tina Brown stirring the pot. She invited people to write in about it. I tend to regard the whole brouhaha as a sort of pseudo-event. But it's quite true, the 'victim art' bit has hung around.

He was a stiff, poor thing, and he seemed to know it. Yes, wasn't it great? What will the children think of next? I think she's loosening up a bit, but I agree, she has that grim Fox Force Five game face on much of the time. Jerry and Kym will be to next to go.

Thanks, GWTW. Looking forward to getting my copy in the mail. Stern may have been a lousy husband, but he's taken some great pictures. Of course, having such a wonderful camera subject helps.

Thank you for the report, GWTW. I, too, would like to hear from others who took advantage of the offer. I had considered it, as mentioned above, but instead took my niece, rather than my nephew, who was otherwise occupied, to Berkeley for "King Arthur." It's possible we might have been better off at the museum.

volcanohunter writes: I’m inclined to sympathize, but then the only Altman picture I like without reservation is McCabe and Mrs. Miller. Thank you for the information regarding the score of "Blue Snake" – I hadn’t know that. (But as you say, it wouldn’t have made much difference.) "The Company" is far from perfect, but I do think its approach was worth trying -- at least you get a better sense from it of how a company might actually work than you do from the melodramatic devices so often deployed in ballet films (although that doesn't make it necessarily superior). It was a big improvement over the other relatively recent ballet picture, "Center Stage," in that respect, although I preferred the dance selections in the latter.

Thanks for posting this, Mashinka. Very interesting article. It sounds as if Voigt made the right move for herself and she feels good about it, which is the main thing. Also, she does look fabulous.