dirac

Elizabeth did do the Spanish panic, apparently. In old age she stopped dancing in public, but there is a report of her doing the dance in private, accompanied by tabor and pipe. Apparently she was a great dance enthusiast and was forever trying out new versions of court dances. I also recall reading a complaint by one of her courtiers that she was making them too hard and only experts could do them.

Elizabeth's fondness for the dance is also highlighted in the recent "Elizabeth" starring Cate Blanchett, in which Elizabeth calls out for "La Volta!" whenever she's feeling especially chipper.

I don't think the movie is intended primarily as a record of the performance, so I'm not expecting Dance in America, but Maddin has an intriguing track record and it should be worth a look.

I also look at Pointe mostly for the pictures, which are indeed gorgeous! (Re: Playboy, I don't think the guys were being entirely disingenuous. It's been a long time since I looked it, but once upon a time H. Hefner did aspire to give the magazine broader appeal, as it were, and there were some interesting articles in it. However, they never shoved aside the good old T&A. )

I must say it will be very strange not hearing the references to Texaco during the broadcast, not that it's easy for me to hear the broadcast these days -- the program keeps getting shifted to ever more obscure locations on the dial, and I now have to listen to it on a fuzzy AM station. Doubtless it will soon disappear entirely.

BW, you are not alone. Last weekend I had to fulfill my obligations to Keanu, but I fully intend to see this soon if it's playing locally, and I promise to report. It's going to be on the strange side, but very interesting, I'm certain.

I liked Lorena Feijoo's Giselle more than I expected, although I wouldn't call it a wildly successful example of this type of casting. I'm not sure if Fonteyn as Juliet qualifies as an example of casting against type. It was a regular theatrical practice for older dancers (and actresses) to play younger women; on the stage, where the performer is at a distance from the audience and controls his effects, this is less of an issue than it is for film and television. There was a saying that an actress had to be forty in order to play Juliet properly, and while I wouldn't agree with that in a literal sense, it's true that while Romeo and Juliet are kids, the emotions they are called upon to display are adult-sized, and performers who are too young tend to be not up to the demands of the parts. (I speak as one who thought Zeffirelli made a bad mistake casting Hussey and Whiting. Too young, too bland, too unformed as actors and people.) I think this is true for R&J in ballet as well. A young dancer can look more like Juliet than the matronly Ulanova, in her snood; but she may not have the artistry to explore the fullest possibilities of the role. Maybe Gregory was too robust for Giselle, but does the latter always have to be frail and wispy? Spessivtzeva, in the very brief film clip, looks like a big hearty girl.

Gottlieb is saying what he thinks, and because he's writing for the Observer as opposed to, say, the Times, his tone can be sharper and he can dispense with diplomatic niceties.

I'd second that.

Mary J, it's slated for an autumn release. GWTW has a point. Ideally we would get a real principal dancer playing a principal, and not someone with only "training," but without Campbell pushing the project there would probably be no project, so there you are. I felt similarly about "Frida" -- you had to give Hayek credit for working like a coolie to get the movie made (and she also received a producer credit, most deservedly, I'm sure) – but she just wasn't quite up to the part, and I don’t say that with any pleasure. But no Hayek, no movie. In any case, beggars can't be choosers. For "The Turning Point," you had a successful Hollywood director who also happened to be a choreographer, married to a savvy ex-ballerina, and a successful scriptwriter who was also knowledgeable about the world he was writing about. In addition to this, you had an internationally famous defector phenom to showcase (and we might have had the young American ballerina alongside him). This happy set of circumstances is unlikely to arise again any time soon, so let's take what we can get.

It's fun to read the Kain/Augustyn memoirs and compare accounts. Karen: I want to work at something until it's absolutely right. Frank: That's great, but my back is killing me from doing this lift a jillion times. (Both of them are united, however, in their praise of and gratitude to Nureyev.)

Oy. I'm sure nlkflint is correct and the core problem here lies with clueless parents. What's even weirder is that they would attend the rehearsal, presumably look at a handout with an outline of the story, etc., and still find nothing problematic for their kids until this scene. As for the substitution of a wholesome, family friendly "food fight"-- no comment necessary.

I can't say that I've noticed any difference in these parts in audience chatter when the music is not live -- generally the lights going down tips people off and they hush up. When they don't hush, I will deploy a glare if the chatter is persistent, but it has to be pretty bad. Often as not people will take any indicator of unhappiness on your part as a signal to raise the volume, as Treefrog notes. Live music is ALWAYS better. But today's economics don't always allow it, unfortunately.

My take on his recent movies is pretty much the same as yours (although I did make it all the way through Dr. T. You were lucky to miss the ending). I did see Campbell in the first "Scream," and while my impression is that she belongs on the small screen, I'd be happy to be proved wrong. It's way off topic, but "Last Call" was interesting. Irons was seriously miscast, although he did look as if he could drop dead any minute, I must say. Sissy Spacek is not my idea of Zelda, but she was excellent. ( I sort of got the impression that the secretary was mainly annoyed that Sheilah Graham was sleeping with Fitzgerald and she wasn't. ) The Fitzgeralds seem to be regulars on the cable movie circuit. There was another one a few years back with Timothy Hutton and Natasha Richardson, in which Richardson demonstrated Zelda' s dancing skills by flailing around in a chiffon shift. I was peeved on Zelda's behalf.

Altman has not been working at peak strength for some time (although some people liked "Gosford Park" much more than I did, and in its way it is a virtuoso turn), so I don't think we should expect "Nashville" on pointe. And Neve Campbell does not exactly wield major star power. But it would be great to see some good ballet dancing on the big screen again.

I am waxing impatient, people. Next time I'll just have to hop a plane to New York.

Well, management is doing the best they can. There's no such thing as the perfect spot, but they want to make sure the reviewer can get a good look. Ideally, you should get something from a ballet from all parts of the house, even in the nosebleed seats, if the choreographer knows what he's doing. I agree that you can see things from on high that the people close up don't -- the example that always comes to my mind is the first section of "Diamonds" where, from the orchestra, the girls just seem to keep shifting prettily to and fro and one's attention tends to wander, although the music is beautiful. Then I moved up a couple of sections for the next performance, and then it was, "Oh, that's what he's doing." It still wasn't deeply fascinating, but I could see Balanchine's patterns much better. And for an applause machine such as the "Diamonds" finale, where the stage is full and still the dancers keep coming, a more distant location is best. However, for most other ballets I do like the orchestra or something close to it. You get used to looking for the details, and shifting to binoculars or opera glasses distracts me.

Any other reports? Inquiring minds in the provinces want to know.

This is a touchy subject, and I'd like to remind everyone about the importance of keeping a civil tone. There's a difference between sharp debate and tit-for-tat. I think everyone has behaved remarkably well so far , but let's do try to avoid that slippery slope. Thanks to everyone. it's the mom, thanks for weighing in, and let me take this opportunity to welcome you to the board.

silvy, someone whose memory of the film is fresher than mine could tell you more about that, but my understanding is that Alonso was virtuoso enough to accomplish that, and more. (Balanchine made the ballerina role of Theme and Variations on her, just to give you an idea, and apparently she made it look easy.) Any other insights for us? atm711?

cargill, the Diaghilev/Nikitina precedent also occurred to me. He knew how to pick his battles.

I didn't find that out till later, Hans. You know, it's true that "updating" can go too far, but it's not a bad thing in principle. If we saw nothing but traditional productions, however well done, we'd probably be complaining of monotony. Even if a New Look doesn't work, it can be interesting, and show you some aspect of the work you might have overlooked. What aspects of the work translate well to another time? Which ones don't, and why? These can be fruitful questions. It's not always the director trying to show off, although that is all too frequently the case. And if the production is beyond outrageous, you can always laugh, through your tears.

Thank you for the review. This opera really does have everything – great libretto, great score, great story, strong characters, and the simple pleasure of beautiful, well known melodies --the works. I remember hearing Leporello's aria for the first time in high school and wondering why there was so much more action in Spain.

It's amazing how complex the issue of ancestry can be. I remember Tiger Woods remarking that if you broke it down by percentages, he's actually Asian. Plainly, Calliope, you don't follow baseball.

Thanks sz! How different ballet history would be without him.