dirac

You are right in a sense, canbelto – Roxie isn’t talented, just as Sally Bowles, as Christopher Isherwood was at some pains to make clear, had NO talent whatsoever. But you're making a musical and the stars have to know their business. There was – “Lady Sings the Blues” with Diana Ross, Billy Dee Williams, and Richard Pryor. It bore only a passing resemblance to any kind of reality, much less Holiday’s real life, but Ross was excellent and her singing was fine (although she couldn’t replicate the original's peculiar intensity) especially in lighter numbers like “Them There Eyes.”

I agree – but I think for many people the insinuation, without any context, might cast her in an even more negative role, that of Casting Couch Nazi Slut. But I was bothered more by his phrasing.

Kater’s worth reading. Not the world’s greatest writer but he knows his stuff. Schwarzkopf was either displeased, or she wasn’t. Speculation. . Innuendo. “Those who claimed”? “Never been proved”? Pleeze. Of course, one reason we’re arguing about this is the fact that musicians in general were very highly regarded during the Reich. There was a growth spurt in music schools and groups. Hitler made a point of supporting and encouraging amateur musicians. It grieves me to have to say anything nice about the Nazis, but there it is.

They'll never dare. It's too bad, because it would be interesting to see her have a go. papeetepatrick writes: The director, Jacques Demy, said they were also helped by not having to worry about speaking voices, as everything in “Umbrellas” was sung. But he did indeed work hard on that aspect, as he also did with “The Young Girls of Rochefort,” where it really does seem as if Deneuve and her sister and co-star, Françoise Dorléac, are doing their own singing. (Demy did less well with George Chakiris and Gene Kelly.) Anthony_NYC writes: I saw her in support of La Kidman in the ghastly Nora Ephron "Bewitched." She did well what she was called upon to do, which wasn't much. It would be interesting to see her in something more substantial. bart writes: For me, it goes downhill after "A Little Priest."

Yes, ‘Umbrellas’ was dubbed.

papeetepatrick writes: I've read that at some points Kerr's and Nixon's vocals were merged, so the voice we're hearing is often a combination of the two. She got blamed for everything that wasn’t her fault. We're wandering off topic, but it's a fruitful discussion, so I'm letting it proceed.

Isn't usually the singer who must match up? Not in the case of Cline/Lange, or any other musical biography where the use of the originals' voices is contemplated. It can actually be rather fun, depending on the context, when such matching isn't even attempted. The movie version of 'The Beggar's Opera' in the fifties is one such. No attempt whatsoever is made to disguise the fact that the actors are dubbed (save for Olivier, who should have been) and it works.

papeetepatrick writes: That's absolutely right, IMO. Years ago I remember listening to an interview that Terry Gross conducted with the late Uta Hagen for the NPR show “Fresh Air.” Gross ventured to ask a question about technique and Hagen slapped her down hard – how could Gross possibly understand? Wasn’t she condescending to acting? Would she ask a violinist such questions? (Gross stood her ground and said, yes, she would.) Hagen was reacting against the perception that acting is something that “everybody” can understand without any study or technical knowledge, and I know why she felt that way, but it can certainly be discouraging to those who don’t know much and would like to know more to hear that from an artist.

Dubbing isn't a problem if it's done correctly -- and if the actor matches up with the voice. I mentioned Jessica Lange as Patsy Cline earlier. She really used her body beautifully and she had an imposing physical presence that matched up well with Cline's voice. Anthony_NYC notes that you can't put a voice like Terfel's together with Depp, and that would be true even if Depp mimed well; he doesn't have a body that goes with that sound. I've noted, however, that in the publicity surrounding recent musicals, the fact that the actors do their own singing is invariably cited as a plus even if the actors in question can't really sing (or dance). Dubbing seems to be frowned on in a way it wasn't in the past. That might be a hurdle. I think the inside/outside distinction is sometimes misleading -- it's very helpful but also can lead to oversimplification of a complex process, IMO. Redgrave would be fabulous but she might be considered too old for a screen version. And she is English, which is not essential for Mrs. Lovett but it's a big help.

Thank you for confirming my impression, papeetepatrick. I had only heard Close on television in a clip from "Sunset Boulevard" and she didn't sound too good, but I didn't want to draw large conclusions from that. (I love Gena Rowlands. You should check her out in 'The Skeleton Key,' which came out last year. Not the greatest thriller ever made, to understate somewhat, but a fine opportunity for Rowlands.)

sandik writes: True, visual impact is important, but as a few of Burton’s own pictures demonstrate, striking visuals alone aren’t going to make for a successful whole. Movies are also great at storytelling. (If Sweeney Todd as written was perfectly constructed, there would be no worries, but it’s not.) Glenn Close is a good idea, too, although my impression, which could be mistaken, is that Streep is a stronger singer. Both Streep and Close are in their middle fifties and Depp is in his early forties, so I think that’s a difference that can be finessed.

I do not believe Dame Margot Fonteyn personally financed any revolution or political campaign. If you want to know about possible financing of Roberto Arias's political aspirations I suggest you visit, http://www.pophistorynow.com/scripts/April%2025,%201959.pdf and discover the probable involvement of a legendary American film star who had been a friend of Roberto Arias from childhood and involved in business with him. (Edited in anger and some despair) I forgot to add, leonid, that my comment was intended with a certain amount of facetiousness and not entirely literally. (Smilies don't always do the job. ) However, I'm still inclined to think that some of Fonteyn's money was used for less than savory purposes, doubtless without her knowledge. Perhaps this will inspire someone to write another book, or perhaps a long article, disputing Daneman's conclusions. It would certainly be worth reading, I'm sure.

Thank you for those thoughts, leonid. John Wayne appears in the documentary, talking about his friendship with Arias. I would not be at all surprised if Tito tapped his friends with deep pockets. I thought that Fonteyn did come across as a woman of style, culture, generosity of spirit, and extraordinary charm, and as a great artist??? There was a missing presence in the film -- Ashton. We do see clips from interviews, and their relationship in the early days is discussed, but Ashton's role is neglected, IMO. Margot and Fred are as significant a story as Margot and Rudi, and there's not enough of it. It's possible that there wasn't enough good footage available, but I'd have liked to see a fuller representation of Fonteyn in the Ashton repertory beyond Cinderella, Marguerite and Armand, and Salut d'Amour.

Unless there’s someone perfect out there that I don’t know about, I’d cast Meryl Streep. Not ideal but she can do it, she’s well known to moviegoers, and she can sing. I think there's great pressure on actors in movie musicals these days to do their own singing, even if they don't have real voices. In studio days they were more realistic -- okay, Rita Hayworth can dance but she can't sing, so dub her already and move on. There is a way for actors to mime singing convincingly -- Jessica Lange did a great job in "Sweet Dreams."

Nureyev was a panther. Also, dogs are pack animals, and RN was never a member of any pack, not even back home. Although Fonteyn also owned dogs from time to time, she was a Cat Woman, in more senses than one, like Vivien Leigh -- both collected cat figurines. Speaking for myself, I like dogs just fine, except they require a great deal of attention and entertaining and although some can be left alone it is still not good for them, and I can't commit to that much time. I have two kitties, a skittish but sweet calico cat and a little gray tabby who is the mistress of all she surveys and has the local dogs terrified.

Start with Ugetsu -- that's how most people did.

Thank you for the heads up, sandik. This project has been bruited about some time, but it’s now sounding more definite. My hopes are not high. I do not see an adequate replacement for Angela Lansbury on the horizon, and although I like Johnny Depp he can't play everything. His most recent serious role, that of Rochester in “The Libertine,” showed his limitations rather baldly. I fear that he will approach the role of Sweeney by camping it up. I don’t think Burton is the right man here, either. I’m not sure offhand who would be, but you need a director who will give the story a stronger structure and narrative drive than it has, and Burton’s not known for that – he’ll probably try to compensate by overstaging. I'd like to be wrong, of course, and it would be great to see a musical that enjoyed something like the success of "Chicago" even if I wind up not caring for it much. However, I don't think this is the property to keep the revival going. Depp is very fashionable right, now, though, so you never know.

Forgot to add that I couldn’t believe the terrible wigs that Michael Somes had to wear. How right Nureyev was take a stand on that. It would have been helpful if Fonteyn's partners had been identified for the dance excerpts, e.g., "Swan Lake with Michael Somes (date)". Somes, David Blair, David Wall, et al. make their appearances but if you didn't already know who they were you had to figure it out from the context.

And finance also the occasional revolution. Or political campaign. I was particularly annoyed by a bit of spin control from Fonteyn’s sister-in-law, Rosario Arias, who remarked on how unusual it was for Tito, as a Latin male, to allow his wife to keep working and spend so much time on the road. She seemed to imply that it was big of him.

I recently saw the whole thing and I thought it was, as a whole, a fine effort. I don’t see how a ballet fan can afford to miss it. It does focus more on the personal and on subjects that couldn’t be discussed freely in Fonteyn’s lifetime, but that was obviously the point of making the documentary in the first place. There’s wonderful footage that I haven’t seen elsewhere. The tone is a trifle melodramatic, but familiar to those who saw Palmer’s previous Callas documentary; this one is in much the same vein. The picture is a lot harder on the family Arias than Meredith Daneman is in her book – there’s nothing in Daneman about any codicils to Fonteyn’s will or thumbprints – I don’t believe she discusses Fonteyn’s will at all, in fact. I assume that’s because she needed on them for information about Fonteyn’s last years – the movie relies more on the testimony of Phoebe Fonteyn and the book relies mainly on Querube Arias (who’s also seen in the film). I must say they do seem like a creepy lot, even worse than one had previously suspected. Fonteyn’s son-in-law was really an item for the record books. And I have to admit that I was appalled by the shot of Fonteyn’s burial place. On the other hand, they must have had something to keep Fonteyn paying the bills all those years. Gosh, Nureyev was attractive. Even after all this time those shots of him in his youth make my jaw drop. In re Nureyev: the movie quotes a dancer as observing him “explode” in a rehearsal upon hearing of a miscarriage by Fonteyn, if I heard her correctly. Daneman’s book quotes Fonteyn’s gynecologist as stating that she never had a miscarriage, so there should obviously be a question mark. Evidence of the unreliability of company gossip. A few sad reflections, after watching the interview with Pamela May, on the ravagings of old age. Very moved by the segment with Clive Barnes, where he gets teary remembering a performance by Fonteyn and the evanescence of such beauty. Fonteyn really had a beautiful backbend, didn't she? Very deep, and she can do them very quickly or slowly with a lovely limpid motion. Yummy. canbelto writes: Yes, it must have been difficult for a man so obstinate about preserving his independence -- sexually and geographically, if not financially -- to suddenly be so utterly and absolutely in the hands of others, especially his wife.

I enjoyed that “Hamlet,” too. Tra-ta is speaking of the version directed by Michael Almereyda and starring Ethan Hawke, with Denmark changed, quite plausibly, to Denmark Corp., an Ophelia who begins going to pieces on the spiral staircase of the Guggenheim, and “To be or not to be” is staged in a Blockbuster store (the “Action” section). You wouldn’t go to this version for a “Hamlet” whole – it’s very short – but it’s done with considerable style. It’s also on the superficial side, however, and Hawke isn’t up to the finish. But very much worth seeing. The “play within a play,” which here is a video put together by Hamlet, was especially clever.

Ray, I was just using the opportunity to remind everyone, that's all.

Paul Parish writes: Absolutely nothing. I think here is where Schwarzkopf’s being a woman becomes a factor. Strong ambition openly expressed attracts more negative notice in women than in men, as a rule.

Ray, this is the perfect place for that article and thank you for posting it! While we're on the subject, for the record we do not post articles related to modern dance in the Links unless they are have a (strong) connection to ballet. For example, if Mark Morris, say, is doing a ballet for a classical company and there is an interview or preview related to that, it is appropriate for the Links. A review of a new dance by Morris for his own company is not, even if there is a passing reference to ballet in the review. If Morris gives an interview where ballet is mentioned in passing, that also is not for the Links, but if he gives an interview where he speaks about ballet at length, that would be fine, too.

Dale writes: I think that happened to many people, including yours truly. You read the name or the word and automatically work out what sounds like a reasonable pronunciation, not realizing that it’s totally off base. The following doesn't qualify as an eggcorn, but in junior high school I once called the poet Yeats the poet Yeets and was gently corrected by my teacher. Over the years I've found myself on the other side -- do you try to correct the person, tactfully, or let it pass? There are some occasions when you can only do the latter, and I recall at least one where it was a positive pleasure to let that pretentious blowhard make a fool of himself. But I digress.