dirac

The major studios also produced their own Bs; for example, MGM's Tarzan and Maisie movies were Bs. (Independent movies were and are often small and made on a shoestring, but that's not quite the same.) It's true that B movies in that sense are no more, but as Calliope notes, they're still being produced, although not as a standard line of studio product. In any case, I thought the point worth clarifying, and I thank the board for its indulgence. (The I-Know-It-All flair of Norton's comments annoyed me sufficiently that I actually felt roused to defend two of my least favorite chief executives. )

He didn't make any classic movies with the arguable exception of Kings Row, but he did qualify as a star and did receive star billing, Calliope. (It's unlikely without his subsequent career as a politician that he would be widely known today, but that's also true of other actors of brighter stellar status than Reagan.) There's a difference between being a second rank star and being known as a B-movie actor. Eventually Reagan did decline into some features that could be defined as Bs, but it's still not the same. It may seem like nitpicking, and I suppose it is, but what can I say.

This caught my eye recently. The actor Edward Norton was interviewed by the Telegraph (4/19): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml...requestid=54733 and he made the observation: I must say that this is the sort of thing that gives actors who speak out about politics a bad name, but that's not why I post it. I'm not an admirer of former President Reagan, but in the interests of historical accuracy I would like to point out, because this error is frequently made, that he was NOT a "B-movie actor" (in the sense that, say, Ann Sothern was a B movie actress). He had star status at Warner Brothers. True, he wasn't Errol Flynn, but he was A-list, and not bad, either. As for Norton's (an actor I like, although he's maybe a tad overrated) "ferocious intelligence," that's not the impression I got from his performance in "Red Dragon."

I don't think Gottlieb meant to attack anyone's character; he just thinks critics should know better.

Ed, there have been some recent singers who've earned praise in the part without being flawless. The situation's not quite that bad. And some of those dead sopranos were pretty darn good.....

"Midnight Lace" is the correct title, and it was indeed Harrison terrorizing poor Doris.

I'm sure Segal didn't intend to be taken literally.

If memory serves, the film credits spelled the name as Ekaterina Chtchelkanova.

Lavrovsky will never be blue-chip, but there will always be savvy niche investors interested in him, I think. Interesting point about works being kept alive because performers want to do them, and a little worrisome in a sense, because what happens if a generation comes along that has other fish to fry? In ballet, the question is more urgent, because while Shakespeare is on the printed page and can always make a comeback, a body of work in dance can be lost in one generation.

Thanks so much for the long review -- better late than never! It is wonderful that the entire ballet is finally in the repertory. Rubies looks best in context, definitely. I also agree that Feijoo isn't ideal in Emeralds, but it's something different for her, which is good.

I second that. You can't get a better look at Shakespeare from a theatrical perspective. Guinness, oddly enough, was not a huge success in the big Shakespearean roles. He stole the notices in parts like Osric, Lear's Fool, and Sir Andrew Aguecheek, but flubbed Hamlet and Richard II -- two roles he should have been good in.

Callow mentions in the review that Guinness gave him "precious" advice about film acting. Perhaps one day it will show up on the screen. I am reading the O'Connor bio, and it reflects, in passing, the rise in the status of actors that occurred, for good and ill, in the century just passed. (It is unlikely that anyone respectable or serious-minded in the nineteenth century would have been greatly interested in reading a book called "Being an Actor." ) I agree with most of Callow's criticisms. The biography has some fascinating things in it, but O'Connor was right – Guinness seems to have eluded him and pretty much everyone else, save perhaps his long-suffering wife, in the end. I think he'd be pleased.

Thank you for the review – you made some very good points. I thought SFB's "Jewels" looked much improved from last year, and I'm sure the company will continue to grow in it. I missed Berman in "Emeralds."

It's an interesting book. There's a picture of Balanchine and Zorina at about the time they were married, both of them looking touchingly young. I remember reading somewhere -- it could have been her book -- that a critic dismissed her as a "soubrette," causing Balanchine to write a letter to the editor disputing the description. I can't say I blame the other ABT dancers for being resentful under the circumstances. She must have been pretty good, though. Balanchine wasn't in the habit of falling in love with lousy dancers.

She also dated Orson Welles, driving Balanchine bananas with jealousy. She was married to Goddard Lieberson, who was responsible for many distinguished recordings.

The conventional wisdom seems to be that the Boheme buzz is kaput, and its Tony chances are not good. That's showbiz......

I lost track of how many times I read Tom Sawyer as a kid. I think we can include Twain along with Balanchine as one to hold onto.

Twain at least has the White House imprimatur of Laura Bush, who characterized him as "the first real American writer" if I recall her phrase correctly. One sees what she means in a way, although I imagine Messrs. Melville, Hawthorne, and Thoreau are somewhere nearby, clearing their throats. Not to mention Anne Bradstreet. To the topic: Balanchine's a keeper.

"Rob and Harvey" check out Nine -- another movie musical on the way? (Although Nine is already a great movie, without the songs, of course. ) Article by Michael Riedel in the Post. He also notes that if Nine does well, it should mow down Gypsy and Boheme at Tony time: http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/73002.htm

I agree, Farrell Fan, the execution didn't match the concept, but it was a nice idea. Alexandra, don't we already have some embedded criticism, in a sense? It occurred to me that some of the criticisms of the "embed" program – I still can't get used to that word applying to people, makes them sound like those robots from"A.I." – that the reporters get too near to the subject at hand (too close to the trees to see the forest, and they also start identifying too closely with the force they accompany) can also apply to some critics, who can run the danger of becoming too insider-ish. (I don't have anyone specific in mind, mind. )

Embedded critics? Dominic Papatola of the Pioneer Press discusses the possibilities (4/6). (He may be the only media person as yet unaware of the change in command at the Times, I note): http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/e...rts/5543889.htm

The original context of that quote was a discussion of Kistler's (slowly) returning to performance after a long absence due to injury. It seemed to Croce that Kistler was appearing more infrequently than this process seemed to require, and she was considering the question of whether Kistler's method of preparation might be playing a part in this.

I think Drew has a point, and I'd add that the presence of cameras can be very inhibiting and create a great deal of self-consciousness among people who aren't used to them. Maybe we should give the kids the benefit of the doubt.

Yup. I have it on video, although I haven't pulled it off the shelf in quite a while. It's a curio. There's no dialogue, if I remember right, and Robert Rounseville in the title role looks lost, or maybe confused. No ballet fan should miss it, though -- Shearer gets to do more dancing than she did in The Red Shoes, and Ashton appears in the roles of Kleinsach and Cochenille.

Everybody is good in "Grand Hotel," with the exception of Lionel Barrymore, although Garbo looks a tad unconvincing in her tutu. She has a splendid scene with John Barrymore where both of them are in peak form – it's a pleasure to see. I don’t know if it's on DVD or video, but it shows up on Turner Classic Movies from time to time, if you have cable. I just loved the choreographer in "Bring It On."