SandyMcKean

Too bad about Coppieters.....I was hoping to go and see her in this amazing Juilette role. As far as Pantasico goes.....she will handle it. She was already prepared to do 8 of the 9 performances once Carla Korbes had to drop out last Tuesday (just the day before the dress rehearsal ). Everyone I've talked to says that Neolani is a trooper, and if anyone can do it, it is she. The killer has to be doing both the matinee and the evening performances on Saturdays. I know she can handle that too because I saw her do it last night! She was magnificent in spite of the unbelievable task of doing that role essentially 3 times in 24 hours (Friday evening (7:30), Saturday Matinee (2:00), and then again Saturday evening (7:30)). Yes, she is drained after the performance, but I say not from physical exhaustion, but from emotional exhaustion. I doubt I've ever seen any ballet dancer put as much emotional energy into any role as Neolani does here. I believe this to be the apex of her career. What she does with this ballet, in this part, is a once in a lifetime thing. I believe on some level she knows this and she will reach down and find whatever she has to. This ballet demands that the dancers truly act and become the character -- much as they would if it were a play. Noe IS Juliette while she is up there -- the transformation is electrifying. There is no Noe on that stage, there is only Juliette. Juliette falls in love for the first time, only to discover him dead, and then finds the courage to follow him into death. Noelani isn't performing that, it is actually happening to her. I've seen it. I still can't believe it. Frankly, my prediction is that Noe will just get better and better as next week plays out. I've never been so motivated to see a ballet. I've seen it 3 times already and have tickets for twice more. I will see her last performance on 2/10 -- a Sunday matinee and she will have just done it twice the day before! I sincerely expect that last performance to be her best in spite of exhaustion. These 2 weeks will not be forgotten: not only by Neolani Pantasico, but by every member of the company, as well as the audience. I'm here to say that this run of Maillot's R&J done by PNB with Noelani as Juliette is an historic event in the world of dance.....and I don't care how far I stick my neck out on that!! As a woman at the Q&A said last night: "This was the most moving theatrical experience of any kind in my life". I have to agree with her. P.S. I haven't sat relatively far from the stage (and I don't plan to), so I can't say it for a fact, but to get the full impact of this production, I think one must sit relatively close......as if it were a play. One needs to see the expressions on the faces and the subtle hand movements. This production is as much about acting, maybe more so even, than it is about dancing.

Re: Rosemary Ponnekanti's review in the The News Tribune (Tacoma) http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/updates/story/272185.html I think Ponnekanti captured the essense of this production, except however her last paragraph....on which I couldn't disagree more. Yes, she does mean that the "pratfalling henchmen" are Friar Laurence's acolytes. She says the 3 of them "get tiresome". Friar Laurence tiresome?? My God, Friar Laurence is the backbone of this visionary production, and arguably the more exciting part in the ballet. If the reviewer didn't get that, I don't know how she got so much of the rest right. Much later edit: I don't know what happened here. The msg I responded to here is now missing; as are some of my words in this reply. It seems someone is editing stuff without any notice. Perhaps there is another explanation; I hope so, because nothing pisses me off more than unannounced censorship.

Ditto and ditto. I've been thunderstuck all day.....so much so that I just got off the phone having purchased tickets for my wife and myself to go again tonight, and for a third time next Friday to see "the other cast" (Miranda Weese as this Lady Capulet is something I've got to see). A word of warning to any would be "go'ers" out there.......for both these other nights, the only way I could get non-nosebleed seats was to get single seats and separate us. You better get tickets now if you are thinking of going.

"It took me back to a first love defined by scent and touch, run by a wild heart that a chest could hardly contain....." So says Peter Boal in his program notes. Amen. I hardly know what to say having seen Jean-Christophe Maillot's "Romeo et Juliette" last night. Like Boal, I was taken back to my late teens when passion was everything; when discovery of touching another's inner being, all the while being supercharged by for-real sexual awakenings, makes one's life a game where you now must play for keeps. It was a night I won't soon forget. It's Prokofiev's score I kept telling myself as tears welled up time and time again, but too it was Maillot's choreography, so brilliantly danced, that took me by the hand (hands are important in this ballet) and showed me how all of Shakespeare's play is there in that music -- every event, every emotion, almost every word. If you are a PNB fan, don't miss this production. Our company has taken yet another quantum leap under Peter Boal's leadership. Even Maillot himself proclaimed his pleasure (in the Q&A after the performance Boal said that Maillot's stagers called him in Europe and told him he had to fly out because "you've got to see this"). He told Boal on the way to the airport after the success of opening night that PNB found the spirit of his ballet like no other company, other than his, has ever done. Our dancers swallowed his vision whole and rose to heights of artistry that must have astounded not only themselves but Boal and Maillot as well. I have never felt more proud of this company. Magic is happening here in the rainy northwest. The casting was perfect. I have never seen a ballet at PNB where every character was so perfectly cast. Neolani Pantasico so became Juliette last night that there was nothing left of her but a shell to take the uproarious standing ovation. I've heard the expression "out of body experience"; well, I think I saw one of those last night. Brava Noe. I hate to just list names and parts but one just can't say enough about how Porretta nailed Mercutio; or how Postlewaite used his massive dramatic talent to throw his every emotion my way; or how about that Casey Herd!......he's a terrifically talented and powerful principal dancer, but I've never seen him dominate a role as he did the malevolent Tybalt. Louise Nadeau gave us grief incarnate with an electrifing performance as Lady Capulet. I'll stop now even though I could go on and on about every single dancer in every single part, but before I do, I have to mention the brilliance that Olivier Wevers brought to the crucial role of Friar Laurence. In this production of R&J, the Friar is no incidental plot device. Maillot tells the familiar story as a sort of anguish of memory in the Friar's mind as he attempts to deal with the tragedy, and his responsibility for enabling it in spite of his best intentions. Oliver's Edvard-Munch-like screams of horror penetrated into every soul in that crowded house last night. I didn't go last night expecting to love this piece. I had seen the dress rehearsal 2 nights before and couldn't decide whether I loved it or hated it. As Doug Fullington said just before the performance "That's the beauty of an audience, you get to decide." Well, I decided all right: I love this ballet, and I love this company doing this ballet, and I love the new balletic landscape Maillot's contemporary choreography opened up to me. I didn't "get it" the first time, but I sure did once the dancers threw caution to the wind for a "real" performance before a "real" audience. I'll never see dance the same again. P.S. I couldn't agree more with glebb's comments above. Apparently I wasn't the only one who found themselves transported to the sublime by this production.

I saw the Seattle Dance Project's (SDP) inaugural performance last night (Friday 1/25). What a superb treat. Congratulations to all involved.....and especially to one of my all time favorite dancers: Julie Tobiason. The SDP is the brain-child of Julie Tobiason and Timothy Lynch: both retirees from the Pacific Northwest Ballet (PNB). The new company consists of 9 dancers -- all professionally trained as classical dancers. Most have been associated with PNB where they were dancers (most principals or soloists) or attended the PNB school at some point in their careers. The beauty of this new company is that it does contemporary works, has a modern dance outlook, but whose dancers are all classically trained with years of big stage experience. They had retired due to either age or injury, but wanted to dance before an audience again, and to have the freedom to call their own shots as to who they danced with and as to what they danced. The company consists of: Julie Tobiason (PNB), Timothy Lynch (PNB), Michelle Curtis (Connecticut Ballet), Alexandra Dickson (PNB), Oleg Gorboulev (PNB), Dana Hanson (NYCB), Linnette Hitchin (PNB), Kory Perigo (Dance Works Rotterdam), Melanie Skinner (PNB). The compnay was originally 8, but unfortunately Dana Hanson broke her foot not long before these performances, and Julie Tobiason pressed Linnette Hitchin into extraordinary service on a compressed learning schedule (Linnette's career at PNB as Principal was cut short by injury in the 90s). The program, appropriately titled "Project One", consisted of 4 World Premieres (cool!): "Still One" by PNB's Olivier Wevers to music by Arvo Part; "Castor" by Molissa Fenley, music by Harry Partch; "Tatum Dance #2" by Donald Byrd, music Art Tatum; "The Intimacy of Strife" by Pat Catterson, music Quentin Chiappetta. I thought the company, the program, and the idea were a complete success. I don't know how many small companies there are out there that dance contemporary works based on a fusion of modern and classical dance where the dancers are primarily classically trained professionals retired from major ballet companies. There can't be many! I simply loved the freedom of the choreography, danced by such highly trained and competent dancers, all with gifted "standard" ballet bodies. I'd never seen anything like it. I loved all the pieces with the exception of Catterson's "The Intimacy of Strife" which strayed too far from my prejudicial ballet tastes. There were just too many "organic" convulsive movements for my narrow tastes. The remaining 3 pieces were a tie, but rather than ducking the issue, I can say that my favorite was the Byrd piece. It was set to Art Tatum on piano and done with a ballroom dancing style which told a story of quarreling lovers. Julie Tobiason was terrific as she so often was at PNB in sultry roles. The Fenley piece has to come second with me. I had never seen a Fenley work until seeing "State of Darkness" several times at PNB last season. I loved that piece for its energy and emotional power. This new piece grabbed me the same way. Interestingly, Fenley choreographed this new work on the SDP dancers last year in a week while she was in Seattle staging "State of Darkness" for PNB. Next was Wevers "Still One". This is the piece that most haunts me. In the Q&A after the performance Wevers said he was inspired by those moments in life when all is still. He said he crafted the ballet by picking a particular aspect of each of the dancers to focus on -- each part was customized specifically to that dancer (which made an even bigger challenge for Hitchin when she had to substitute for Hanson at nearly the last moment -- Olivier said he and Linnette were changing things to suit her style just the day before). His "story line" for the ballet was to present many of the injuries that dancers have to deal with; both the movement and the simple costumes highlighted different parts of the body and how injury there can affect the dancer. I am going back to see the program again tomorrow (it only plays Fri, Sat, Sun(m) at the wonderfully intimate ACT Falls Theater) to enjoy this unique dancing again. It is Wevers "Still One" I am most interested to see again. Clearly his choreography can not be as mature as that of Byrd or Fenley, but there is a raw power of imagination in Wevers work that I'd like to see again. The work might be a bit rough but there are gems of brilliance sprinkled all through it -- gems I want to see again. In the end, the credit must go to Julie Tobiason and Timothy Lynch. They are the ones who stuck their necks out to become the Artist Directors of this brand new company. Julie in particular has the presence and commitment that has kept this enterprise from crashing on no doubt dozens of shoals over the last year (between each piece excellent video interviews were shown with most of the dancers chronicling their labor of love). My admiration to the entire company for having the guts to not take "impossible" for an answer. Once again I am thrilled to live in Seattle where dance is such a happening thing. P.S. Credit must also go to Seattle biotech magnate Glenn Kawasaki who provided the significant seed money without which a venture like this would never have seen the light of day. You "gave back" to me Glenn.....thanks!

I've got to go with bart. Movies so reflect the times in which they are made, and the technology available at the time, that it may be foolish to compare these great movies. For example, Bettie Davis is not my favorite Elizabeth. I don't say that because others have been better actresses, or because some other screen play was better, or what have you. I just find Davis too, too much in the role. To my modern tastes she over-acts; she is not enough "ordinary human in extraordinary circumstances" for me. I greatly enjoy watching Davis in that 1939 (I think) movie, but if I saw a 2007 movie with that performance I would pan it like crazy; but in its context, I find it wonderful. Today my favorites in order are: Mirren, Anne-Marie Duff, Blanchette, Jackson, Davis. Nicely reflects chronology, yes? So at least I'm consistent. Now it be inconsistent :blush:.......I think Mirren is simply the best actress. Her performances are big like the rest, but she adds a stublety of detail that I find unsurpassed (but then I am heavily influenced by all the other characters she has done -- all of which I love). I marvelled at Anne-Marie Duff doing QE1's entire life from a young flirt to a dying crank. Maybe I just plain fell in love with Cate Blanchette......hard for a male not to do......the spectacle of the movie's production value was outstanding too. Jackson was powerful and had 6 hours to do it in; I admire what must have been a break-thru performance at the time -- that Jackson series was way ahead of its time I think.

dirac, I've been around, just not very active :blush:. I should let miliosr speak for him/herself, but I think he/she was referring to the 1st Blanchette movie "Elizabeth" (1998), not to the most recent one, when he/she said the previews were too campy. I eat up just about anything pretaining to QEI (she is definitely one of my heros -- if history is to be believed at all), so I will get "Golden Age" on DVD and watch it regardless (out in a week or so I think). Even if it is bad, I will enjoy it. I won't be disappointed either because, altho Blanchette was my favorite since Jackson and Davis, she was surpassed in my pantheon first by Anne-Marie Duff, and then in short order both were upped by Helen Mirren. I guess I just love them all (with the crown going to Mirren).

Thing is that EQI is known to have said things like that. Is it campy to be historically correct? (Not that Shekhar Kapur doesn't take liberties with history from time to time because he does.) P.S. I haven't seen this film (yet) but I did see her 1998 "Elizabeth" where she played Elizabeth in her earlier years.....IMHO, she was fantastic in that film tho not as good as either Helen Mirren (but then, who could ever be??) and Anne-Marie Duff.

PNB has not posted the casting on its website yet. This is unusual being this close to the opening on 1/31, so I called to check it out. I was informed that the cast posting is late because of changes to the cast required due to injuries. They didn't say when the casting decisions would be made, but suggested to keep looking at the website.

I will comment a bit more about the opera. I don't "know" my voices well enough to comment on the singing, so I leave that to Helene, but I will comment on the drama. As is not too unusual, I see it differently than Helene. Of the added pantomimes in this production (the pre- and post-opera antics of 2 clowns: "Comedy" and "Tragedy", and the interlude btwn Acts 1 and 2 where we seen Nedda and Canio's early relationship), I preferred the Comedy/Tragedy bit to the interlude bit. The Comedy/Tragedy pantomimes setup and concluded brilliantly this opera given the brutal murders and the Commedia Dell'arte referrences as well as the ending line "La Commedia e finita". It made the opera for me into a sort of a Hegelian dialectic where Comedy and Tragedy combine to form real life (verismo opera). OTOH, I think I could have foregone the acrobatic interlude. It was interesting to see the back story of Canio and Nedda; and like Helene, I thought the "hanging bodies" was a very powerful "omen" device; but I found the interlude as a whole to be "off-putting" in the sense that for some 12 minutes no one is singing, and we see such "foreign" action as Cirque du Soleil type rope acrobatics. I was also a bit uncomfortable watching the real singers prance around as if they were true pantomime actors -- which they most certainly are not. OTOH, I give Seattle Opera and the stage director great credit for attempting something like this. Kudos to the singers too for being willing to stick their necks out doing something that could not have come easy for them.

bart, last Sunday afternoon I saw something slightly different than Helene (or perhaps she just didn't mention it). When the 2nd Act opened Canio was at the table with his head in his arms exactly as he was at the end of the 1st Act (as Helene said). However, I was later taken aback to see the actual Canio performing in the later parts of the pantomime (yes, there were no words). Clearly (unless I was seeing things), they had substituted another person for Canio at the table. We the audience were easily tricked because we never saw his face, and he wore a bright red costume which helped the illusion. When the pantomime was over, the real Canio was magically back at the table -- I figured they did a switcheroo in a brief moment when the lights fell black on stage. Perhaps I am making all this up and indeed that was not the real Canio I saw in pantomime, but that's what I thought I saw. I see the "gold" cast tomorrow night, so I'll figure out who's tricking who then .

SanderO, I've already given some idea of my answer to your question, but since you asked, I will expand. First, it seems to me that users of binos must be considered in at least 2 groups: one, those who typically go only to a single performance; and two, those who typical go to the same performance multiple times. As I've indicated before, I fall into the 2nd group. As such I use my binos in a very different manner compared to those in the first group, I would think. If I only saw a performance once, I would be very relunctant to spend much time looking thru the binos for fear of missing the very essence of ballet. There is no question that looking thru binos greatly restricts one's ability to "get" what's happening on stage. Obviously you lose the width of the stage so you only see part of the action, but as someone else said, binos foreshorten everything, so you also lose the depth of the stage. Being in the 2nd group, I never worry about these things. I've either already seen that portion of the ballet, or I will next time. I love the freedom to use my binos as much as I like, for as long as I like. (And since I do view thru them so often, and for so long, that explains why I am probably more particular about the quality of my binos than most.) I normally sit in the orchestra, maybe a third of the way back. This means that with 8x binos my field of view is very nearly head to toe of a PdD couple. I love to watch singles, duets, and triples this way. As I said before: it's like being in the studio with them. As others have said, I also like to watch the corps on the sidelines for stage business. If I happen to sit further back, I often need the binos to identify a dancer I am less familar with and can't recognize simply by how they dance. Sometimes I will pick a corps dancer who has "grabbed" me, and whose career I have become interested in, and watch just that single dancer for a large portion, of even all, of a single piece. Watching expressions is interesting; and in particular, I like to "get close" to watch a talented dramatic actor (like Carla Korbes, or Arianna Lallone here at PNB) pour as much into her acting as into her dancing. Sometimes I will even watch the conductor; or if I am sitting high enough, even a soloist in the orchestra (watching the piano soloist in Rubies was an unexpected treat last year). One thing I avoid is trying to keep up with fast movement......that will drive you crazy and end up being counterproductive.

Barbara, I'm glad you found the binos you like. Looks like you made an excellent choice at an excellent price (I notice that they list for $115 and are usually sold for $99, so $85 is a sweet deal -- likely hard to get outside of NYC). You were likely able to keep the price down and the quality up by buying a quality brand (Leupold) at a lower power that uses porro prisms (give the binos that traditional "shouldered" look) instead of roof prisms (straight look), and you probably gave up fancy lens coatings (which you don't need anyway in a dark setting with a well lit subject). I sometimes watch half a ballet thu my binos. Since I see each performance more than once, I can indulge my bino-habit on the 2nd or 3rd performance without missing the overall ballet. A good pair can open up a whole other way to "watch" a ballet rather than just using them to occasionally glance thru to check something out. Sometimes if I watch an entire PdD thru the binos for example, I feel like I'm on the floor next to them, in a studio, like a ballet master might be. Have fun!

But.....but.....but....you don't understand..... I have a wide stance.

Haglund's, how were you struck by Orestes and Iphigenia in that pool of light at the end of Act II (that is, at the start of the one and only intermission).

Now I know my leg is being pulled!......... P.S. BTW, when I said previously "Thank God for New York City...................the cultural hub of the world!" I was perfectly serious. Only in NYC could 2000 Nutcrackers be done, especially at the high level that NYCB must do them. You NYC dwellers don't truly know how lucky you are (culturally that is ).

Am I reading this right? NYCB has done 2000 (two thousand) performances of the Nutcracker????!!!!!! Thank God for New York City...................the cultural hub of the world!

The answer to this question (the generalized question) seems to depend more on the city than on anything else. Seattle, for example, is fairly causal. But you see all sorts of dress at any Seattle ballet performance. I see full black and white formal and evening gowns, and at the same performance even shorts, tee-shirts, and sandles, and everything in between. We even have a lady here in Seattle who is known as the "Rainbow Lady" (I think that is correct). She is quite a culture lover and attends many performances. She always dresses in a floor length, flowing costume made of brightly colored scraps of cloth...literally in every color of the rainbow hence her nickname....along with various wild hats. I agree with Helene; for the Nutcracker one does see more "dress up" going on than ususal. I am a VERY causal dresser for the ballet, but for the Nutcracker I attended last week, even I dressed up a bit because it adds to the holiday spirit and I think it helps to make the kids in attendance feel they are at a special occasion.

I think Drosselmeyer "ought" to be a friendly, mystical, wizard of a character who has the power to basically "control" all the events in the story. I like the idea of humor in the part (but more the witty type, than the "clumsy, prankster, mad scientist" type I saw last week in Kent Stowell's version). I have no problem with Drosselmeyer being in all acts. The whole ballet can be thought of as a dream that Clara has, so that her Godfather Drosselmeyer might play multiple roles in her dream makes sense to me. Moreover, I prefer to see Drosselmeyer not scary or foreboding to children, but rather always a reassuring character. This was another "problem" I had with the Stowell production at PNB: Drosselmeyer is a clumsy trickster in the 1st half, but a friendly "master of ceremonies" in the 2nd half. In this production's 2nd act you need to see his eye patch to "get" that it is Drosselmeyer. In the PNB production, Drosselmeyer frightens Clara on several occasions while she is still a little girl in the 1st half. I see no reason for that. Let Drosselmeyer always be a comfort to the children albeit a mysterious and witty one. The Rat King can be all the "badness" required for the kids in the audience. (Poor rats, like wolves, get a bad rap in children's tales! )

I'm a pretty enthusiastic guy. My comments on the performances I see usually reflect that enthusiasm. I tend to love everything . Not so the PNB Nutcracker. Sacrilege I know! I haven't seen a live Nutcracker in many years. I figured I must have seen the PNB Nutcracker sometime during my 25 years living here, but apparently not. I took my best friend's 11 year old son to PNB's Nutcracker last Friday. This kid seems to love ballet -- I took him first to an all Stravinsky program where he was captivated by both Rubies and State of Darkness (Rite of Spring). So since I started him at the "wrong end of the spectrum" so to speak, I figured I had better take him through the door most kids first use as an introduction to ballet. I too was excited since it had been so long since I had seen a Nutcracker and I had such good memories of this classic. Well, it turned out my memories were formed long ago when I lived in San Francisco and saw SFB's Nutcracker several times. Altho my young friend had a great time, and I enjoyed the evening, I was basically disappointed. My reaction probably has its roots in the fact that I have never been a fan of Kent Stowell's choreography -- not 25 years ago when I first moved to Seattle, and not in 2005 when Kent retired. I'm surely not saying Kent is a poor choreographer (I would be wholly unqualified to make such a statement), but his style has simply never appealed to me -- just as, I suppose, Forsythe or Wheeldon might not appeal to someone else. There are ballets of Stowell's I like (e.g., Carmina Burana, Silver Lining), but generally I don't. Somehow I always seem to be expecting the dance in his choreography to be doing something else given the music at that moment. The music climaxes, but the dance is subdued; the music calls for fast expressive dancing, but the dancers are doing pantomime; the music has me wanting an intense PdD, but dozens of dancers are moving quickly on and off stage. With Kent Stowell's choreography, I just don't get the magic when music and dance blend into a unified whole.....which is what I live for when I go to the ballet (I will admit I am always very strongly driven by the music). Stowell's Nutcracker gave me this same unfortunate feeling. Perhaps too harshly, I often say after a Stowell ballet that "some music was wasted".....and this production had me say the same thing. Too much gesturing; too many dancers moving on and off stage for reasons that seemed out of place to me; too many times the music "said" one thing but the dancers did something else. I guess one can't be a fan of everything and everyone. I'm sorry Kent that I have failed you; but frankly, I find myself harboring another sacrilious thought.....what would a newly commissioned Nutcracker look like under Boal's leadership? Could it be a bit less smaltzy? Could it be a bit less traditional? In the first act, could we drop some of the boys getting in trouble, and the girls whispering, and have a Drosselmeier that is less a buffoon but more an inventive sorcerer? I think that not only am I ready for a new Nutcracker in Seattle, but I'll bet today's kids are too. Today's kids know more about the world, and can digest more at whatever age, than their counterparts a quarter century ago could. Just look at my young 11 year old friend. I started him off with Stravinsky and he loved it!! Later edit.....to be fair, I did very much enjoy Stowell's Peacock (superbly danced by the incomparable Arianna Lallone). Here the music and dance blended beautifully for me with wonderful and unusual "Balanchine-like" experiment to the movement.

I hope we will read at least a mini-review from someone who has seen this production at the Met. Come on all you NYC dwellers!

4mrdncr mentioned that he/she missed the Charlie Rose segment where Robert Gottlieb, Georgina Parkinson, Joan Acocella, and Julie Kavanagh discuss Nureyev. I too missed it (I had it recorded and then accidently deleted it ). Well, I checked out the Charlie Rose website today, and one can use the following link to view this segment on one's computer: http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/11/2...-rudolf-nureyev

In my PBS station schedule (that I get as a member), the documentary is listed as a wholly separate offering. It is not part of "Independent Lens" or any other series. Perhaps that is unique to Seattle since the film makers make Seattle their base, but I sort of doubt it.

Sure. It's called "Maria TallChief: America's First Prima Ballerina" It is not part of any series that I am aware of; rather it is a new independent documentary that has been briefly discussed on BalletTalk before: http://ballettalk.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=25979 Here is a short blurb about this film from Wikipedia: "A one hour documentary titled Maria Tallchief was completed in November of 2007 by Sandy and Yasu Osawa of Upstream Productions in Seattle, Washington. The documentary will air on PBS stations at various times from 2007-2010. The film features 180 archival photos including some from Ms. Tallchief's personal collection covering the time period of her marriage to George Balanchine and her early years growing up in Fairfax, Oklahoma. In addition, clips from her performances include Swan Lake, Pas de Dix, Le Baiser de la Fée, The Nutcracker, The Firebird and The Black Swan." Later edit: OOPS...maybe I should have simply added this info to the existing thread instead of creating a new one.

This documentary is finally being broadcast on the Seattle PBS station (ch 9). It will be on 12/13 at 9pm.....with a re-broadcast on 12/16 at 2am. Maybe other venues are doing it this month too???