miliosr

Finale Results: 1st Brooke/Derek 2nd Warren/Kym 3rd Lance/Lacey Over seven seasons, the show has had a 4-3 male-to-female distribution of winners: 01 Kelly Monaco 02 Drew Lachey 03 Emmitt Smith 04 Apolo Anton Ohno 05 Helio Castroneuevas 06 Kristi Yamaguchi 07 Brooke Burke (Interestingly, as others have remarked upon, the second place finishers in seasons 2, 6 and 7 have all been current and former National Football League players.)

Week Nine Ratings: Performances -- 1st -- 19.6 million viewers Results -- 4th -- 17.6 million viewers

I wonder if Quantum of Solace would work better if it and Casino Royale were edited into one movie. I can't help but think of Kill Bill and its two parts. Kill Bill - Part One is like Quantum of Solace -- non-stop mayhem. And Kill Bill - Part Two is like Casino Royale -- some action but very heavy on mood and character development. Part One is visually exciting but it lacks a certain heft until it is paired with the more thoughtful Part Two. Maybe Quantum of Solace would benefit from being joined with Casino Royale as one movie? (I freely admit that the audience for a four hour Bond movie is likely non-existent.) Agreed about the Jack White/Alicia Keys theme song. (The last theme song I liked was Garbage's The World Is Not Enough.)

Aw, congratulations to the Limon Dance Foundation for receiving a 2008 National Medal of Arts -- what a nice way to conclude the centennial year! And congrats to the other 2008 recipients: Olivia de Havilland, actress, Paris, France Fisk Jubilee Singers, choral ensemble, Nashville, TN Ford's Theatre Society, theater and museum, Washington, DC Hank Jones, jazz musician, New York, NY Stan Lee, comic book writer, producer, Los Angeles, CA Jesus Moroles, sculptor, Rockport, TX The Presser Foundation, music patron, Haverford, PA The Sherman Brothers, songwriting team, Los Angeles, CA and London, England

Having seen neither film treatment of Patricia Highsmith's Ripley novel, I was wondering if Ballet Talkers could give me a recommendation as to what they think of either film -- the 1960 Alain Delon version and the 1999 Matt Damon version. They both look interesting and I can't make up my mind which one I should watch first.

Chicago's Luna Negra Dance Theater rolled into Madison's Overture Center last night as part of their tenth anniversary tour. The first work on the bill was Jose Limon's There Is a Time, his treatment of Chapter 3 of Ecclesiastes: "To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven" "A time to be born, and a time to die" "A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted" "A time to kill, and a time to heal" "A time to break down, and a time to build up" "A time to keep silent, and a time to speak" "A time to mourn, and a time to weep" "A time to laugh . . . a time to dance" "A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing" "A time to hate, a time of war" "A time to love . . . a time of peace" The dance begins with the entire company assembled in a circle, gently swaying and breathing as one. The dancers break the circle and then a series of variations commence in which the dancers illustrate the various passages in Ecclesiastes. Within each variation, however, the main theme -- that of the circle and, by extension, the passage of time -- reasserts itself time and again. The dance concludes with the entire troupe reforming the circle and becoming one despite the trials and tribulations contained within the dance. I had never seen this work of Limon's before and it impressed me greatly. There are many strong sections to There Is a Time but my favorites were the opening and concluding segments -- the dancers moving as one within the circle (without breaking it) was breathtaking. So, so beautiful. The interesting thing about There Is a Time is that an audience member can either watch it for the theme (Ecclesiastes) or as an abstract work. The variations are beautiful enough that they don't require any knowledge of or sympathy with Ecclesiastes to enjoy them. Unfortunately, as I was laboring under a bad head cold last night, I left after There Is a Time and missed the next two works on the bill. It was either "go home and get healthy" or "stay and need an iron lung the next day". The loss was mine as I would very much like to see this company in other pieces. Recommended!

Week Eight Ratings: Performances -- 4th -- 18.7 million viewers Results -- 7th -- 16.5 million viewers Out: Maurice Week Nine Ouster: Cody Final Three: Lance, Brooke, Warren

GWTW -- Reviving the Cult of Isis is analogous to reviving Antony Tudor's Romeo & Juliet, isn't it? We can figure out (with some certitude) what the principals (Isis/Osiris, Romeo/Juliet) should be doing but what about all those pesky corp members/other Egyptian dieties?? And, the cost of recreating all those ancient Egyptian temples/head pieces would appear to be as beyond us as recreating those marvelous sets/costumes from Romeo & Juliet! Alas, I'm beginning to feel a bit like Julian the Apostate. Except where his dying saying was "Vicisti, Galilaee," mine will be "Vicisti, Balanchinean"!!!

Maybe this needs to be a third thread discussing Macaulay's article from Sunday but I thought the paragraph in which he compares Ashton, Graham and Tudor to Jonson, Marlowe and Massinger (second to last in the article) should have been the lead paragraph. I can only speak for myself but I would rather have read Macaulay's thoughts on how to preserve Ashton, Graham and Tudor (and others) in the face of the global Balanchine onslaught than read yet another article about the extent to which performances of the Balanchine repertory have/have not declined under Peter Martins' leadership. (And, for the record, a more apt comparison would have been between Ashton, Graham and Tudor on the one hand and Baal, Isis and Odin on the other. After all, we still have the texts of Shakespeare's contemporaries. But dances are perishable goods. Once lost, they're as impossible to revive as the cult of Isis.)

I just got back from the new James Bond movie Quantum of Solace. I enjoyed it . . . but not nearly as much as its predecessor Casino Royale: SPOILERS AHEAD (Stop reading now if you don't want to know!) Quantum picks up almost exactly where Casino Royale left off w/ Bond continuing his pursuit of those who contributed to the death of his love Vesper Lynde in the first film. (The two films are almost like one four hour film split [Kill Bill-style] in two.) I watched Casino Royale last night as a refresher and I'm glad I did -- I don't think Quantum would have been very intelligible without the refresher course. The bigger issue I had with Quantum is that I felt like it was chasing a trend and that trend is the Bourne franchise w/ Matt Damon. If you watch the opening rooftop chase in Quantum, you'll spot some remarkable resemblances to a similar chase scene in the last Bourne installment. I think the producers need to be more careful in this regard in the future. Bond and Bourne are very different creatures and it would be a pity if the older franchise dilutes itself by imitating the younger.

The Final Four entering this week's round: Lance, Brooke, Cody, Warren If pressed, I would predict Brooke and Warren for the Final Two w/ Warren taking home the coveted disco ball. But you never know what's really going on with fanbases until Tom Bergeron announces who's staying and who's going. I agree w/ perky -- Kym definitely knows she has a strong contender for the win on her hands. (Derek does too.) The wild card in all this is Julianne -- she has won twice (w/ Apolo and Helio) and has a following in her own right.

Thanks sandy for your insightful comments. Speaking only for myself, it wouldn't bother me a bit if ABT billed a reconstructed Romeo & Juliet as "After Tudor". After all, nobody blinks an eye at the "After Petipa" moniker. I would rather have Antony Tudor's Romeo and Juliet where portions of it are really just educated guesses rather than no Tudor Romeo & Juliet at all. As for the cost of reconstructing it, I admit that $2 million is a big sum, especially now that the boom times of the last 25 years have come (at least temporarily) to an end. I have to be honest, though, that I grit my teeth when I hear ABT management crying poverty over this given all of the big budget, no taste productions they've thrown money at over the last 15 years. Lastly, I think a repertory program with Tudor's Romeo & Juliet on it could sell if the entire program was stellar. During the 90s, Kevin McKenzie mentioned that he would love to stage an all-Shakespeare program consisting of Ashton's The Dream, Limon's The Moor's Pavane and Tudor's Romeo & Juliet. If that can't sell, then ballet is truly doomed to obsolescence. OK, I need to stop before I depress myself further. Here's the latest game tally: The Corpse Isn't Dead! = 3 Mikhail Baryshnikov = 2 conservative audiences/the public = 2 ABT board = 1 cowardly administrators = 1 Martha Hill = 1 Kevin McKenzie = 1 Antony Tudor = 1

Week Seven Ratings: Performances -- 4th -- 17.1 million viewers Results -- 6th -- 15.8 million viewers Out: Susan

No harm/no foul if you choose not to play. The whole point of the original post was to provoke a reasoned discussion, which it certainly has accomplished. But if you do want to play, just specify who or what you're voting for. Here's the revised tally: The Corpse Isn't Dead! = 3 Mikhail Baryshnikov = 2 ABT Board = 1 cowardly administrators = 1 Martha Hill = 1 Kevin McKenzie = 1 Antony Tudor = 1 Using Inflation Calculator, I determined that the 1992 cost of reviving Tudor's Romeo and Juliet would have been a not inconsiderable $1.3 million. Certainly a number to give pause (even then) but with so much possible "upside". In a globalized world where everyone is converging around the same trends (Balanchine Night! Forsythe Night!! In the Upper Room!!!), how refreshing it would be to have a work that is unique to ABT (or New York Theatre Ballet) and to New York! Almost like a delicate flower that only comes into bloom for a few days each year . . . As to whether or not Tudor's Romeo and Juliet is truly dead, I believe it was Mindy Aloff who wrote that dances don't have theoretical existences -- they only have performance existences. At the moment, I would have to say that Tudor's complete Romeo and Juliet is dead since it has had no life over the last 32 years other than in theory. The tragedy of it all is that the "death" is not a function of a lack of knowledge. As others have mentioned, a nearly complete film exists, the work is notated and there are still plenty of people from 70s-era ABT (including, among others, Fracci, Makarova, Nagy and Prinz) who presumably remember some or all of it and would be willing to help. But without the will to reconstruct it, the $$$ will never materialize to utilize all those resources.

Interesting theories. Here's the tally so far: Mikhail Baryshnikov = 2 ABT Board = 1 cowardly administrators = 1 Martha Hill = 1 Kevin McKenzie = 1 The Corpse Isn't Dead! = 1 (bart -- I went w/ your major suspects.)

Brilliant so far. Keep them coming -- Police Commissioner Denby and Lieutenant Croce are anxious for the results of this investigation!

With both ABT and New York Theatre Ballet resurrecting a pas from Antony Tudor's Romeo and Juliet this year, there has been much discussion to the effect that Tudor's Romeo and Juliet (last seen in its entirety in 1976) is unrevivable as a complete work. Assuming this is so, I want to take a page from the board game Clue and challenge Ballet Talkers to solve the following mystery: Who Lost Antony Tudor's Romeo and Juliet? Clue enthusiasts try to solve the mysterious death of a "Mr. Body" at (appropriately enough, Tudor mansion) by sifting through a list of suspects, weapons and rooms to determine the who, how and where. For the purposes of this game, we will be more concerned with the "who" rather than the "how" and the "where". Clue features six possible suspects -- Mr. Green, Colonel Mustard, Mrs. Peacock, Professor Plum, Miss Scarlet and Mrs. White. The Ballet Talk version of Clue will replace these six suspects with the following list of suspects (in descending order from the serious to the ridiculous): 1) Antony Tudor -- Tart-tongued choreographer fails to establish work outside of ABT during his lifetime; thereby consigning it to dustbin of history. 2) Tudor Trust -- Dithers around for 20 years since namesake's death; failing to muster appropriate resolve and funds to restage it while memories are still sharp. 3) Mikhail Baryshnikov -- Former artistic director of ABT (1980-89) who replaced the Tudor version unique to ABT with the MacMillan version, which can be seen anywhere in the world. 4) Kevin McKenzie -- Current artistic director of ABT (1993-Present) who claims poverty as a reason for failing to revive the Tudor version but manages to find funds for gaudy, big budget revivals (Sleeping Beauty), big-budget star vehicles (The Pied Piper) and ill-advised attempts to chase contemporary dance trends. 5) Balanchine Trust -- Quasi-religious sect spreads the gospel of its founder all over the world; thereby diminishing interest in other approaches to ballet. 6) Peter Martins -- NYCB artistic director had perfect opportunity to revive Tudor's abstracted version of Romeo and Juliet and cover himself in glory; instead stages ill-advised (and expensive) new version. 7) Mark Morris -- No reason he should be on this list other than he strikes me as the kind of person who would love to be a character in Clue. 8) The Swamp Thing -- Supernatural being given to displays of evil and malice. Ballet Talkers are free to add their own suspects and, unlike regular Clue, have -- Murder On the Orient Express-style -- multiple culprits. The "how" and the "where" are not crucial for the game's purposes but, if you want to keep to the spirit of the original board game, you can add those elements. Here are examples from the original game and our game as guides: Original: It was Miss Scarlet with the wrench in the Billiard Room. Ours: It was Antony Tudor with perverse neglect at Lincoln Center. Obviously, I'm being more than a little tongue-in-cheek with this. But I'm hoping the sleuths on this board can put together some reasoned deductions as to how this great work got to the point of being lost and who -- if anyone -- is to blame. (And if you can't get into the spirit of the game -- DON'T PLAY!!!)

I'm in the process of converting my Colby's [Note: Dynasty spinoff from the 1980s] VHS tapes to disc and I can't help but marvel at the way Barbara Stanwyck [who played Constance Colby Patterson on the show] spoke. Most of the time, she sounds like she just rolled out of a speakeasy. But every so often she'll bust out this affected 30s studio system "voice" -- "paht" for "part" and "cahn't" for "can't". I keep waiting for her to say, "I'm from Ba Ha-buh!"

Regarding reconstruction of the original Graham Episodes, didn't Sallie Wilson dance in the original? (I could be imagining this.) If she did, I hope she was at least asked whether she remembered anything before she died this year.

So, I was leafing through a retrospective of Halston's work and I came across a picture (from 1980) of Graham dancers wearing the costumes Halston made for Graham's Episodes. The picture features three dancers in character; two of whom (Elizabeth I, Mary, Queen of Scots) are reaching for a crown held aloft by a third character. The picture is very Expressive and I got to wondering -- has anyone ever seen this work and, if so, what were your impressions of it? (I'm only interested in Graham's Episodes -- not the Balanchine Episodes which accompanied it at the premiere back in the 1950s.)

Week Six Ratings: Performances -- 3rd -- 18.9 million viewers Results -- 4th -- 17.4 million viewers Out: Cloris

Hmmm. The only point I was making in my prior post is that Macaulay finds a way to include Balanchine's name in many of his reviews no matter how tenuous the connection to the subject at hand. I don't believe I said anything negative about the overall quality of his reviews, which are a big step up from those of John Rockwell and Anna Kisselgoff. At the end of the day, I don't like the constant namedropping of Balanchine. Sorry -- we'll just have to agree to disagree on that score.

I like Macaulay's writing but he drives me up and over the wall by including a reference to Balanchine in what seems like every review he writes. He did it again today in his review of ABT's all-Tudor bill. (He mentioned Balanchine's enthusiasm for Tudor's Romeo and Juliet.) I know he holds Balanchine in high regard but it's starting to become a cliche that some reference to Balanchine will occur in every review he writes.

I would love to see a 'Final Flowering' Limon bill consisting of some combination of The Unsung (1970), Dances For Isadora (1971), Waldstein Sonata (1971), Orfeo (1972) and Carlota (1972). Alas, I doubt I'll ever get to see that bill even though all five works are completely stageable.

An evening consisting of accidental strangulation (Isadora Duncan), suicidal strangulation (Judas Iscariot) and homicidal strangulation (Desdemona) would probably be a bit much but the sheer morbidity of such a "theme" night would be a brutal riposte to all those pretentious theme nights dance companies indulge in (the New York City Ballet being a prime offender.)