papeetepatrick

Helene, thanks for that extra link, and it does help. Very strange how much less obvious the new pm mechanism works than the old. Mainly, we have to remember our 'clogged mailboxes' are indicated on the side, whereas they used to always stare at us, and we'd know to empty them.

Those were all good, spectacular. I heard 'Semiramide' on Classic Arts Showcase a few years ago, yes, that is wonderful too. Of these just posted after 'Sempre Libera', the Offenbach is the most impressive to me, and her technique in a certain virtuosic way is incomparable, as well as it's a beautiful sound. But I do prefer Kiri's 'Let the Bright Seraphim' as she sang it 29 years ago (!!!) in the wedding of Charles and Diana--the sound of the voice itself was richer (she was still at the height of her vocal powers), and she rose to the occasion (by staying alone at the Savoy for a couple of days.) That's not to find any fault with Sutherland's, though. I read something in one of the obits about her 'Turandot', and I can easily imagine her being majestic as CHINESE PRINCESS (she already had the hair almost naturally the way it was styled), although I am not a big fan of 'Turandot'. I also liked the Tomassini's article called her 'flawless soprano', because she certainly sometimes was (someone on a blog who likes music and opera a great deal put a 1960, I think, youtube of Alcina, but that had lots of pitch problems, possibly not fully polished at that early date. These are totally absent from these we've posted here, which is why I got so knocked out by the 'Sempre Libera'.)

mmmmm....yes...as Kate Bush would say ('The Sensual World'). Great clips, very amusing with the campy song on top. Love the cigarette scene, and she and Garfield do make a hot duo. Do you think Lana was a Closet Heterosexual or something? Oh my god she is gorgeous. She and Stompanato should have made a movie instead of getting involved with the violence. Just think how much more immortal than a seamy murder trial! http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.chicagomag.com/images/2008/April%25202008/features_stomp1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/April-2008/American-Gigolo/&h=375&w=600&sz=47&tbnid=CnlgBaxnoB5nBM:&tbnh=84&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djohnny%2Bstompanato%2Bphotos&zoom=1&q=johnny+stompanato+photos&hl=en&usg=__QrGppr5TLcyupCOipwkDaXJm3HM=&sa=X&ei=OCm3TJGTGYr4sAPMgdmcCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CCIQ9QEwBg smokin', eh? You can see why they both had some trouble 'just saying no'.

This is close to perfection. I don't know if she'd be my favourite Violetta in the whole opera, but out of context and sung alone, it's hard to imagine any improvement. I think this sounds as superb as anything I ever heard her do--and to think that it's 1965. Just glorious. Not to mention that this piece never gets old, no matter how famous it is!

abatt--there are some hip-hop/rap elements, but it's mostly salsa/meringue/bachada, although there are some real 'pure Broadway show' sounds and a more traditional ballad or two. I was expecting to love this, but you have to see it to know how much. I haven't ever enjoyed a Broadway show more. With 'Urinetown' a big hit in 2001 and 'In the Heights' even bigger, I think I have some sort of theory of how something of what some of us loved about Old Broadway will continue, and we can live with the fact that we are now in an era of post-Sondheim/, post-Lloyd Webber/Schonburg, and post-Disney (to a lesser degree)--although all these have hauntological powers that satisfy various demographics. My interest in Sondheim is pretty much limited to 'Funny Thing Happened', 'Company', and 'Follies', and his lyrics for 'Gypsy' and 'West Side Story' earlier, and then it goes into a realm that I find neurotic, whiney, often pretentious, and even limp. But he dominated for 25-30 years in a certain niche. The other two major forces I've never paid any attention to, but people like those too, and they bring in tons of money, esp. from tourists, and run forever. During the years since we had lots of book musicals, I liked a few things, in the 80s 'Nine', and in the 90s, Cy Coleman did a wonderful end-of-career explosion, with 'Will Rogers Follies', 'City of Angels' and 'The Life'. 'In the Heights' is the most miraculous imaginable show, libidinally driven with fantastic energy from start to finish. I think it's the work of a genius, and that something so totally unexpected--in a small theater with only one set (which is perfect, and the corner stores look exactly like the ones in the real Heights do) on a smallish stage. I don't think the theater (the Richard Rodgers) is any larger than the Roundabout. It used to be the 46th St. Theater, I hadn't known that, and had worked there for 6 months in 'No No Nanette'. All the songs are good, full of energy, they are from the heart, the characters are all genuine, they are like the Puerto Ricans and Cubans and Dominicans I know in the real Washington Heights, I totally love this show. And you don't have to wait long before there's another song and a big dance, whether 'Barrio', or 'The Club'/'Blackout', a delightful song called 'Tell Me Something I Don't Know' by the hairdresser girls, a love song 'Sunrise'. It's like a fantastically contrapuntal tapestry of life in a neighborhood, a living assemblage or hacceity, as Deleuze might say. Along with 'Urinetown', it makes me know that the Broadway musical is no deader than when first proclaimed in the late 60s, early 70s, but there just will be these unexpected 'biological sports' to happen when somebody has an idea in some remote place and figures out how to turn into something huge. And 'In the Heights' really IS a phenomenon. I'm sure it will make a great movie, and expanding it shouldn't take away from the divine local colour, esp. if they do some location shooting. Anyway, Mr. Miranda will be in charge of a lot of it, and will star, so it's going to be worth it to see on a movie screen; film adaptations of B'way shows I usually skip, even when they go to dvd. The box office said they're only taking orders through a couple more months, so I advise anybody who wants to see this original production to do so this fall, the house was well-populated but not packed. There were at least 6 whole classrooms-full of kids there: This must be a popular kind of thing to do, and this show is so adult-friendly, kid-friendly, sophistication-friendly, populist-friendly, tourist-friendly, native-New Yorker-friendly, that it was a kind of festival, and I didn't even care if the kids made some noise (and they loved the show so much that they were never annoying at all, just added to the joy of the whole occasion.) But you can sit in the cheap seats and be still very close to the stage here, unlike in the theaters where we see ballet and opera. It's on a continuing big tour, so go wherever it is, although it's going to probably be best here.

I think this is easily Lana's best film, she's perfect for it, and sure, Oh definitely, Lana always had a taste for all kinds of trash (including some good trash...), and is nevertheless totally glamorous. I think the movie is great too. Lange can't possibly convey the half-dizziness and nymphomania that Lana can--she's too work-ethic and Midwestern and proper in her own way. Lana is mainly proper in her hair and her clothes (at all times, too! Bette Davis always claimed that Lana was the only one who had to look perfect onscreen and off, and she truly was one of the most incredible creatures I ever saw in real life.)

deleteed

I have to agree with you bart. I haven't fallen in this trap yet (at least I hope not), but my age is rapidly getting to the level where I am at least susceptible . I've often wondered why older people seem to indulge in this "the world ain't what it used to be" or "the younger generation has no respect" type of world view. It seems a pretty common occurrence. Fear of loss of control perhaps? Hindsight only remembers the good stuff? I'm going to try to resist this particular pitfall in the coming years. Wish me luck! I did this in reverse, was 'old-fogey' when young, and now am enjoying a kind of controlled-hysteria older-youth number. Nice work if you can get it, but not necessarily a bed of roses either. I think it's only a year now that I've started getting more tolerant of youth-culture--even cellphone poseurs don't bother me as much as they used to.

How about the Salzburg Festival? Here's some shots of Don Giovanni http://operachic.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c83e69e200e553db04118834-500wi http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRv4AnPIcdIBvGzAQTIgdKQkcUiGyGI-7IiKg451cpD7lixobU&t=1&usg=__MUChu7mqPybjdRqDgHsn-5FM0UI= It's not easy to "rank" opera houses to determine which is the "very biggest" but how about ticket price? I think Salzburg is about the most expensive ticket you can buy. At least for general seating, some house now "package" special premium tickets at astronomical prices, similar to what's done at big stadium events and that skews the "most expensive" threshold. But Salzburg Festival prices are very, very high. I think it's pretty clear that a lot of what Sutherland was complaining about is seen quite commonly in European opera productions. And certainly in "mainstream" opera houses. Richard, I was asking a question, not trying to argue further about the Sutherland comments--I frankly don't care what she thinks about these matters beyond noting how archaic I find her attitudes--she's not supposed to be a great thinker, that doesn't always happen with artists. I know that you know more about opera than I do, and the information has been interesting; I didn't know a lot of it. Maybe somebody else will answer this regarding the specific houses I was asking about. I assume you meant that those were conservative too. Those stills of the Salzburg Don Giovanni don't bother me at all, in fact they don't seem at at all stupid as some of the others, like the men on the toilets--although they do look sort of 'metrosexual-friendly'--but they make sense in the context of 'Don Giovanni'.

What about La Scala and Covent Garden or at the Paris Opera? I suppose if you find such things at Glyndebourne, you'll find them anywhere. Thus far, you've mentioned some mainstream houses, but not the very biggest, or so it seems--although Glyndebourne does seem to tip the balance even though it's not a metropolitan house. And Bayreuth? I also wonder if Wagner has anywhere ever been subject to these carnage/sewage treatments. If they'll do it to Mozart, though, I would think it even easier to 'go for it' with Wagner, and even some of the conservative productions have Siegfried and Brunnhilde madly passionate at the end of the 3rd act, as I recall (although quite clothed.)

Thanks for extra information on the European houses. I only hope that we get a chance to see these here. I think it's pretty logical why I brought up the major ballet companies, since i'd mentioned DeFrutos, and you were talking about pornography. Dance, with near naked, and certainly obviously revealed bodies, is much more obviously a place where the porno-saturated culture we live in would 'find a new home'. And I haven't noticed it at RB, NYCB, ABT of any of the Russians either, so maybe that will happen too. The guys on the toilets are not very arresting, they remind me of Slavoj Zizek, the tedious faux-Marxist philosopher, being photographed sitting on a john--but with jeans on, which makes no sense. This at least makes sense, if they're going to use a tacky scene, reading the paper with their pants down. I didn't find this esp. compelling, nor did I find it 'vile'. It's acc. to how delicate your sensibilities are. Yes, Sutherland was personally known to be unflappable, and there are many amusing stories of her repartee with Bonynge that I've heard over the years. She was charming and beautiful in a strange way, I remember catching her up close backstage at the Met around 1979. Okay, sure, lots of people MUCH YOUNGER object to these unrespectable images in theater, dance and opera, but they're here to stay. Pornography is not going to go away, and probably some of the uses of it do work, even though some will never accept even the 'milder' explicit things, as we discussed when Ms. Kaufman went on and on about 'crotches cranked wide open', which is far worse written than anything you might have seen in one of those Balachine ballets--which was just beautiful female bodies overly extended in certain ways. Most of those attempted-shock productions don't interest me personally, but they're certainly relevant to the obscene times we live in. But I don't think that they pose any threat to the 'noble and beautiful', and after a number of failed experiments, may sometimes even contribute to the furtherance of those same. To take it out of the sex-talk, many objected to the 'blood buckets' in the POB 'Medea', which was in the film. I thought these were extremely effective, and you wouldn't have seen them in the old days.

But so what? That's still experimental opera to a great extent, not the big houses Sutherland sang in. Naturally, there's going to be pornographic imagery in all forms of art, dance, opera, you name it, and why not? Okay, she has a right not to like it even so--but those are never the big prestigious serious productions, and even in the experimental 'young director' things, it's not necessarily just to 'concentrate on the vile'. But that is still not a decent generalization about the most mainstream opera houses anywhere in the world, the most prestigious ones, at least on a regular basis. Not anymore that Kirov, NYCB, ABT, or POB or RDB has 'gone porno'. Yes, more details if you want, although I didnt' watch that yet. On the other hand, the thing about young musicians not mastering their techniques is not a matter of taste and opinion. It's just incorrect. She's picked out a singer who was temporarily famous, and left out Renee Fleming (nevermind her pazz/jop stuff. There are a lot of STUPENDA technicians out there, more than ever before. Wow! Watched it, Mrs. Bengtsson is so HOT both vocally and looks-wise, I could deal with it, although I wasn't interested in the mess personally. I just don't find sex 'n' sadism stuff more offensive in general that other forms of 'updating', whether modern dress Shakespeare, Pelleas and Melisande, what have you, and they're usually some director's ego's brainchild, last a season, then everybody wants to see a real period performance of something. And what I meant about pornography and scatology is that it's still going to have to be soft-core, not hard-core, that doesn't happen onstage in opera or ballet, and only occasionally in mainstream movies (as 'Pola X' and 'A Serbian Film', quite the scandal right now, and it's good.)

bart--i definitely give her a pass, and don't think it's an important matter when compared to her artistry, to say the least. It's just that some older artist DO say 'wise words'. Some here thought they were, I just don't there was anything wise about them. It had nothing to do with what I feel about her superb gifts, which are stellar.

They jumped out at me too, but I didn't find them wise, but rather exaggerated and not at all representative of opera as it exists today. Not so different from Norma Desmond's loss of silent pictures, as I see it. In a general sense, there certainly is not, and I've never seen a single opera that had such scenes (which would be , at worst, indicated, mimed: There's no such thing as people actually 'masturbating and defecating onstage' in any Establishment opera house (or any other short of a brothel, I'm sure, and that's not opera). She's just talking about one production of 'Faust' here, and if she means it in a general sense, she's just inaccurate. Even if one does like DeFrutos ballets as Simon described to us in detail, those aren't representative of dance trends. For the rest, she just talks about a production of 'Il Trovatore' at the Met that she doesn't like, which is cool. Decades ago, people didn't like those sparse, scraped-bare sets of Wieland Wagner at Bayreuth. And yet she does seem to be talking about 'the world of opera as it exists today', having used that phrase, and then giving two examples, neither of which is that serious, even if they aren't especially good (I've seen the 'Trovatore' she's talking about, and thought it was fine; I don't want to see any production of 'Faust', because I can't stand it). I find it more disturbing to hear a great singer so inflexible about contemporary developments, because I've seen a lot of new opera in the last 20 years, and much of it is better than the productions she was singing in in her heyday. It reminds me also of film stars looking back on their careers and talking about 'before the X rating, when women wore pretty clothes', etc., meaning the 50s. And then she comes up with this: Making more generalizations out of a few examples, she sounds pretty dotty to me, old-fashioned in the truly archaic sense. And not surprising she doesn't 'long for' Maria Callas, whose personality was so much more interesting than hers was. In fact, even though her colorature singing was the best you could get, better than Beverly Sills's, she was not to me an especially charismatic performer as actress. I always liked her, and she was, along with Leontyne Price, probably the first opera singer I because familiar with because of frequent appearances on Bell Telephone Hour, but with her, it is mostly the brilliant and flexible vocal technique. The big square-jawed face is very theatrical and effective too, though. And that's really unbelievable about the 'young musicians not perfecting their techniques as they used to', given that in all fields of classical music and dance, they perfect them MORE, if anything, than they used to. This goes for opera as well as ballet and concert performers, and is so obvious it is incredible to read this. What they are not doing is embodying 'auratic personas' as artists the way they were, and that is because this age allows very little of that. There is still some, but it's a small and shrinking population of artists. In ballet, there is Osipova, Hallberg, Gomes, Vishneva, but there are all the more Somovas and any number of other purely showy types of male dancers as well. Or better, since Somovas techniques is not considered exemplary (as well it shouldn't be), you have Ashley Bouder but no Suzanne Farrell, and you don't have Soloviev or Sizova. Something has been lost, but it's not fine technique, and it's not in opera either. But all singers who manage to get onto the Met stage, and all pianists and violinists who get onto the stage at Carnegie Hall have first-rate and highly-schooled virtuoso techniques.

From the NYReview article: Whatever he said about 'the Machine', it only made it more attractive to me, and was the main reason I'd like to see it. However, I do not want it to malfunction, because it makes the capitalists have to give in much too soon. We all want to see them 'live it up' even with all that unpaid mortgage, not 'slinking sheepishly into the wings'. I rarely think of wanting to ask for my money back for something, but that is a kind of major offense. I frankly think they should have seen if they could repair it and re-do the scene! How grotesque! Makes me think of all I read about the preparations for 'Antony and Cleopatra' to open the Met at Lincoln Center, a few years before I got here--lots of fights and things falling apart, as I recall. Must have been great theater, though.

You've probably got some points there, although I wouldn't say TeKanawa was 'marking' either of those 2 performances, and I did hear them from the Family Circle, where I've always loved the sound. It could be so that she didn't by the 90s always project throughout, but then again, even she admitted that, while she had become by that time identified with 'Arabella', that it is 'in some ways a boring opera'. That is true, it is. But the energy level was sporadic within one performance, because I didn't change seats, and sometimes it did come full force and gorgeous. In 'Boccanegra', she was filling in last minute for someone who'd been fired, I think, and one critic said she couldn't get that very ornate trill, another said she got it perfectly, and when I heard it she did also (probably ratcheted up the energy for that). I wasn't especially interested in that opera, either, though. But it's obvious she was much hotter in the 70s, and that can still be seen in Losey's film of 'Don Giovanni'. But there will always be off nights and on nights when the voice begins to age and get ready for retirement. But, generally I like the Met sound too. That 'Meistersinger' production in 1995 or 1996 sounded stupendous, and everybody in it as well, but that production was so glorious, period. I think I was in the Family Circle for that too. And, more recently, if on a lower level musically than the opera orchestra, I've commented on the pleasure of going to ABT at the Met because the sound is vastly superior to the micro-sound you hear when you go to NYCB. I don't know how NYCO can survive with such wretched sound. Have you seen anything at NYCO since the theater has been re-worked? I don't recall anybody even talking about an NYCO season, although I could have just missed it.

Thank you for this insight. I almost always find that the early part of an opera is the least audible for me. As time goes on, I always seem hear things better. I never thought about this process before, but I suppose I AM making adjustments in the way I listen. As a result, I can hear what I could not easily hear before.. It's a very interesting idea. In the modern world, maybe this is something that has to be taught. Maybe, but part of the matter of audibility at the Met has to do with that particular house. Someone wrote that it was often the case that a voice that is usually considered rather big won't sound that way at the Met, 'which was built as if made for Birgit Nilsson's voice'. I heard TeKanawa in two performances in 1994, I believe, at the Met, and there was sometimes (but not always in either performance, so it had to do with the house) this problem, even though she was still in very good voice then, if not at her peak. I also heard her last opera role as 'Vanessa' at LA Opera in late 2004, and there was never the problem of fullness of sound at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, rather some of her notes were not pure anymore (not necessarily the high ones, btw. It was a good sound anyway, and the right one to go out of opera on.) But I remember in 'Arabella' even more than 'Simon Boccanegra' (those were the two, and SB was the later one) that there were times when she sounded a bit smaller than was right. And I don't think it would have sounded like that in a smaller, more intimate opera house. http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2010/oct/08/robert-lepage-rheingold-met/ This article was interesting, I don't think anybody posted it. Made we want to see it, though, and I might, although not this season.

I didn't notice this at all in 2001, just after 9/11, when I heard him read at the 92nd St. YMHA. I'd just finished reading 'The Feast of the Goat', which is superb, and this was one of the best readings I've been to there. If he's short, it's not unusually so, and he's extremely handsome, elegant and correct; if I may say, that is not what you nearly always get at those readings, even though that's not the point, of course. Shortly after that, I saw him on Charlie Rose, they were discussing the attacks. I also read a series of essays by him, mostly from the 90s and early 00s, but can't remember that too well right now. He's had that famous feud with the other Latin American author, is it Gabriel Garcia Marquez, who I've never read? Will go look up...yes, that's who it is. I think Vargos Llosa is a master, and must read more. His descriptions of Peru are incredibly vivid. Marvelous choice, I'd say, and may spur him onto further fine works. Edited to add: It's just been pointed out to me that the 'short guy' was Peter Englund, and indeed I hadn't read carefully (this is a trifle disturbing). Oh well, at least I got to describe that excellent reading evening of Vargas Llosa, having had the hardest time imagining him on a platform there, at least. Thanks for pointing this out!

I'll finally be getting around to seeing this next week, after listening to the CD dozens of times. They've told me they're not still seling out, but they're selling through about February here, I believe. It's been on National Tour since spring, 2009, I didn't even know that. Just looked at the wiki entry and they are doing a film of it, so we can have a thread on this as with 'Sweeney Todd' and 'Nine', except it won't be controversial as with casting stars, etc., this show stands on its on, and I think it's good it's going quickly to film. I'll actually shell out to go see the film as well and see how the two compare, but am much more excited about seeing it in the theater, and in this case, I do prefer seeing the NY show. Usually I like seeing the LA Pantages productions just as well, it's more relaxed and they're much cheaper, but this is the rare New York Show, unlike 'Hairspray', which was just fine out there. I've mentioned this show in a number of places on the board in the last year, but I don't recall anyone saying they'd seen it. Here's the wiki paragraph about the upcoming film, which I just heard of, and it's remarkably far along: "On November 7, 2008, Universal Pictures announced that they plan to adapt the musical as a feature film for release in 2011. According to Variety, Kenny Ortega will direct the musical and Mark Klein will modify the script.[10] Original Broadway cast member and creator Lin-Manuel Miranda will reprise his role as Usnavi in the future release of In the Heights. The feature film is set to begin principal photography in August 2010.[11] In a recent video interview with Broadway World, when asked about the current status of the film, Ortega said: "We're pretty far along, we've been working on it for about a year now, transitioning it from a Broadway musical to a film musical, having a lot of fun working with Lin-Miranda, and I'm hoping that, y'know, that we're just weeks away from being given an opportunity to start pre-production, maybe early next year. That's what my hope is, I really wanna do the movie".

Good post, Mashinka. I liked the first photo best. Would be interested to hear more about 'The Persuaders' and his British career--I wasn't even aware of any of it. I think I stopped thinking about him after the mid-60s. (Just looked up the Persuaders, it was just after the Saint and pre-Bond by a few years. Sounds like it must have been a good show.)

I put this here, because the obit uses the term 'Hollywood's golden age' and it's a marvelous story. I never heard of her, but people who saw 'Titanic' and keep up with the Oscars will have. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/movies/28stuart.html?ref=obituaries There is something to be learned from some of these people of great longevity. This is very reminiscent of the account of June Havoc's life in the obit about 6 months ago. Both continued to develop new interests and were constantly curious about all aspects of life. That's an obviously wise characteristic for anyone, regardless of how long they live, of course; but it would seem that, if the constitution is basically strong, this keeps one happy and healthy. What I liked about Ms. Stuart in particular was that she taught herself painting first, and then 20 years later was taught by someone else and became a designer. Anybody like her 'Titanic' oscar-nominated performance? or see any of her old movies from the 30s? I don't recall any, this is the first time I hear of her.

Correction of my above post about the musical based on 'Some Like It Hot'. I guess that was 'Sugar', from the early 70s, by Styne and Merrill and starring Elaine Joyce. The Marvin Hamlisch show from 2002 was The Sweet Smell of Success, which was not quite a flop, but not a big success either. I think I had a hard time imagining that making a good musical, so the songs by themselves probably didn't tell much about the show for a change. I might listen to 'Sugar', never have thought to and didn't know it was Jule Styne. Did anybody else think Tony Curtis was Italian? I can't believe I didn't know he was Jewish, and I believe one of the articles said his last little role was as 'Mr. Schwarz'.

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/09/30/obituaries/20100930-CURTIS-4.html This still captures the fantastic ugliness of the Curtis and Lancaster characters in 'sweet smell of success'. This is still an amazing film, not least because of Barbara Nichols as well as the leads. There's also a beautiful shot of Janet and Tony with their two kids, that's the second one in this NYTimes slide show.

Mashinka, what a lovely idea! I agree, Tony Curtis was the antithesis of the "cut and paste" movie star. He was quite a character, interested in everything and honest about his foibles and strong suits. I can understand that if you loved that movie (I can't remember if I even saw it as a child, so I'll take a look at it). I don't think most people remember him in that film primarily, though. His greatest performance for me was 'The Sweet Smell of Success', maybe tied by 'Some Like It Hot'. In the first he was incomparable (and so was everybody else in that movie); in the second he was flawless, so I won't choose. Also, that marvelous early Gigolo number in the noir 'Criss Cross' with Lancaster and De Carlo. One of the handsomest of all Hollywood actors when young. Marilyn esp. clearly responds to it onscreen, although she made him and everybody else miserable during the filming. I just looked IMDb, 6 wives and 6 children (and here I'd thought he and Janet Leigh had been married for at least most of his marriages...) and this quote, which is hilarious: "I ran around with a lump in my pants, chased all the girls. This is what I reflected on the screen. There wasn't anything deeper or less deep than that." Witty the 'not less deep' part, reminds me of when David Bowie said he 'learned that beauty is not skin deep, it's deep skin'. Hate to see him go, he was pretty special. Edited to add: Just saw this: "In 2002, he toured in a musical adaptation of “Some Like It Hot,” in which he played the role of the love-addled millionaire originated by Joe E. Brown in the film." That would have been the Marvin Hamlisch show, and the score, at least, wasn't half bad. Also remember his appearance in Mae West's campy, and usually considered horrible 'Sextette', but which I found enjoyable in a low way. The obits have made me decide to watch a number of these I've inadvertently missed, like 'The Defiant Ones' and also 'Mister Cory'.

Lange not at all right for Lea, has strictness and too much all- Americanism, but Joan Plowright much better than Judi Dench. Lange is beautiful enough, but not pretty enough.