papeetepatrick

I doubt she would have been a great actress in any medium, although she did improve. It is hard to understand why nobody at MGM in her early years thought to do anything about the voice. Later on I suppose she was too big a star to stoop to voice lessons and I imagine Burton was tactful enough never to bring up the subject. I think Liz's voice is perfect for her young-girl roles, as in 'Cat on a Hot Tin Roof', 'Last Time I Saw Paris', and later in 'Butterfield 8', as long as it's not too deep a character. It runs into trouble with 'Cleopatra' (I;m not aware of that ever being done that superlatively, even by Claudette Colbert, who really is a fine actress, and Edith Evans talked about the Shakespeare play being nearly impossible to get right, it was not one of her successes on stage, maybe it's been done somewhere and I just don't know about it) and 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf' (arguably), and some others. But even after that, the voice is exactly right for 'Reflections in a Golden Eye' (her best performance IMO) and 'Secret Ceremony'. She did very little stage work, but Catherine DeNeuve did none at all, and she's become a great film actress, which is interesting proof that they just aren't the same things; although I wouldn't say that it follows that Liz ever became a 'great actress' (neither did Joan Crawford, good a couple of times, but no artist). The voice doesn't bother me until she gets into mature parts, and that might be why she became this big personality, and the acting stopped (among other reasons.). But it hadn't bothered me until she began to get into middle age. Same with Lana Turner, who was only good at youthful roles, or later frivolous ones, as 'Imitation of Life'. I don't really think she would have been good in silent films, though, as that was a technique all its own, as Lillian Gish is peerless, and Garbo's silent work still shows in her later talkie roles. Also actors like Joseph Schilldkraut and Bobby Harron. Liz just not capable of that kind of subtlety of gesture and facial expression. I'll take another look at 'Suiddenly Last Summer' though, because these are interesting perceptions about that film. I do think that may have been Kate Hepburn's best period of film, if you included 'Lion in Winter', because her Ms. Venable has something of the quality she brought to 'Long Day's Journey into Night', doesn't it? although nowhere near as great (but then, if I had to choose a single greatest actress performance, it would probably be that one. She was in good form during those years, even though she lost her beauty rather early on, to my mind, you just have to look at 'morning glory' to know how ravishing she had been.) Cristian, definitely watch 'Sweet Bird of Youth' if you haven't. Not only Newman, but Page is stupendous as Princess Kosmonopoulos in it too. But 'Fugitive Kind' is a must-see.

kfw- I now remember that I did read the play a year or two after seeing the film of The Night of the Iguana, and hadn't noticed that much difference, but that was probably at least 35 years ago, so I might not rememberl. I used to do that with plays-become-film when I was in high school. It only came back to me when I remembered that (I think, but not sure), the play ends with Nonno's finished poem about 'the orange branch, observe the sky begin to blanch', but not sure if that's the literal end or not. I know that in the movie Deborah Kerr says 'Oh, it's a beautiful poem, Nonno'. and then he dies, which may be followed with a bit of dialogue between Gardner and Burton. I think the story I'm remembering focusses on the Deborah Kerr character and the Burton character. I don't know if Ava Gardner, here known as 'Mrs. Falk', was in the play with her 'beach boys' or not, though. that does sound sort of 'cinematic-expnasion', and might have just been mentioned or implied in the original text.

I think it's even extremely good, and could be truly thrilling just as it is. I was startled I thought this, as it's the only Martins work I've ever even liked. While i can't see the things that the most knowledgeable and purists see, and do love the Petipa, I think this is a fine piece. The problem with making this a thrilling performance is the SOUND--and it's not just acoustical problems that make you think you're hearing a chamber orchestra and start thinking of Faure, because sometimes it would even soar. But only the Wedding Scene was sustained throughout, to my mind. In this, even the orchestra sounded rich and bonded to the choreography and dancers. And the Rose Adagio also sounded marvelous, it was as if the conductor's energy to pull something out of the orchestra was determined by the 'best parts' onstage. The opening music had no fullness to it, no passion, it was small-sounding. The dancers were uniformly neat and good, with one possible bit of sloppiness in some corps work very briefly. The sound of the orchestra just often didn't have any energy. Ashley was sublime in the Rose Adagio, but the prima ballerina is not really supposed to provide the conductor with inspiration he hasn't had up until her appearance. Or so it seemed. I had noticed when Karoui conducts 'Nutcracker', that it's the small, more childlike charming pieces, like 'Miniature Overture' that he does perfectly, and there were moments like that in the divertissments here. I recall the way he made the orchestra speed through the Waltz, and i was seeing Mearns as Dewdrop--I wouldn't have ever recognized her as the same dancer, tonight dancing the Lilac Fairy, and always lovely. But it was Bouder that was the wonder, as everyone says. The balances were perfect, and indeed very long. I like only Sizova's slightly better, because the arm movement was a little more leisurely and elaborate still. I also was not quite as struck by her entrance as I'd expected to be, but as time went one she was superb in every way. The last variation at the end was incredible, it was so musical and full of delight. But I was expeecting her to be great. I was much more surprised to find that I think this could be a real piece of major distinction, but then maybe I don't really know. I just think it's good, while I do not like much about his 'R PLUS J'. The beginning of the Processional (is that what it's called) of the Wedding has such gorgeous costumes, they reminded me a bit of Liebeslieder, and the whole scene would go from this glinting elegance to funny divertissments that were like Nutcracker's. And as I said, the orchestra sounded marvelous here even. The whole piece could be really great if there could be more attention paid to getting the music expanded into a big imperial sound. I just remember now that at the Kirov in 2008, even when the pianist in ballet Imperial had some difficulty with some of the passage work that day, well, that happens, but the orchestra never sounded worn out. And this one proved it didn't have to be either, because of the times it didn't. But most of the first act made you feel sorry for the dancers, because sparks of energy in the conductor and therefore the orchestra, would have made many scenes magical. There was one point early on in which I had the impression of watching a big D.W. Griffith silent movie, with the spectaculat sets and the tinny orchestra sound reminded me of those old piano bangings for silent films. Also sometimes reminded me of those old Hollywood orchestras in things like 'The Broadway Melody'or 'Hollywood Revue of 1929'. It could be that I got used to the 'reduced scope and superlean size' that Martins sometimss has, but somehow everything worked in the Wedding, and that was a beautiful piece tonight.

The film's great, but it sure differs a lot from the text. I suppose that's not unusual. And I think that the play itself may differ from the short story, which I think was the first version of this, but under a different name. I read it only a few years ago, but can't remember it. I'll try to find it when I have time, although I think someone else may know it, and possibly also have read or seen the play as you have (I've done neither.) Yes, we're always finding out how film is so different when a theatrical or book adaptation takes place (it's usually lesser, but not always--the film of 'The Shining' is the most extreme example of a major improvement over the oruiginal that I can think of), but there's nothing like when Deborah Kerr and her old father Nonno the poet walk up and Ava Gardner says to Richard Burton something like 'No, I'm not going to rent it to them. I'm not going to rent it unless it's someone special' and Burton replies 'If they're not special, tnen who is?' I'm glad you pointed this out, though, because not knowing myself and thinking this is such a great and authoritative film, it hadn't occurred to me. If you have time, kfw, would you tell us something of what was changed (if radically)? Cristian, you've probably seen 'Cat on a Hot Tin Roof', and Liz is heaven in that too, especially when she talks about her in-laws' children as 'no-neck mon-stahs'. She is just a natural, and one of her best if 'Butterfield 8', for which she supposedly got a sympathy Oscar (but I think it's a great performance). She herself describes it as 'trash', but I think her talent and beauty have always been greater than her masterful critical judgments...

Liz great in Tennesse Williams, and Kate Hepburn amazing. 'Baby Doll' one of the best, Williams wrote the screenplay, and even his severe and somewhat unforgiving father told him it was a fine film. My favourites are two you didn't see in this retrospective, 'The Night of the Iguana', which has almost the greatest cast ever assembled, and 'The Fugitive Kind', which Williams also wrote the screenplay for. Magnani, Brando are great, and Joanne Woodward is fantastical over-the-top at the end, doing this business about 'bein' faithful to the FUGITIVE KAH-ND!' I just looked up 'Suddenly Last Summer', Gore Vidal wrote the screeplay, yes, that was a good one. 'Summer and Smoke' has great moments, but a ruined ending, but 'Sweet Bird of Youth' was Paul Newman's best for me.

Sizova/Soloviev SB, McBride and Baryshnikov 'Tchai pas de deux', Lezhnina SB, Evening with Royal Ballet (all of it except not too crazy about Blair/Fonteyn pairing, but love all the preceding SB in that), Davidsbundlertanze w/Martins, Farrell, Von Aroldingen, etc., Mezentseva Black Swan, RDB 'La Sylphide' with Nikolaj Hubbe, RDB 'Napoli' with Arne Villumsen, Farrell and Martins in 'Diamonds', 'Marguerite and Armand'.

I'd like to see this if I get a chance, as those are two of my favourite actors. Firth was marvelous as Richard Herncastle in an old Masterpiece Theater based on J.B. Priestley's 'Lost Empires', a brilliant adaptation of the book about WWI era music hall in England. I wouldn't object to everybody being attractive (I frankly don't find that a problem in contemporary movies), it still sounds way beyond 'American Gigolo'. I like Julianne Moore in everything I've ever seen her, even when I didn't like the movie itself much or at all, and I thought her performance in 'The Hours' was exquisite (the scene with Toni Collette was extraordinary).

I was about to start a 'Favourite Ballet Score', but this old thread is good, and ought to be revived, since many have joined since 2005, when last post was made. Mine are 'Sleeping Beauty', 'La Valse' (especially as with the Balanchine, when 'Valses Nobles et Sentimentales' is included), Prokofiev's 'Romeo and Juliet' (all of it), Black Swan Music (the 'party-sounding one' that is usually used, once I noticed its absence and the whole production lost much of my respect for that omission), and 'Davisbundlertanze' (which, I must admit, is a beautiful piece whgen played alone, but much better with Balanchine dancing). Since Mel wrote 'The Pas d'Action from "Scenes de Ballet" (Glazunov), which is 'not a ballet, but should be', I'll also include 'Appalachian Spring' of Copland, which is not a ballet, but is called one anyway. Also, Tchaikovsky's 'Romeo and Juliet' when it's used, although that's not yet produced an enduring popular ballet, even though some nice ones. Also 'Emeralds' and 'Diamonds', love both of these, especially 'Diamonds', which is so noble and is only enhanced by the choreography.

What a couple of days for deaths of important writers. I don't know if I'd quite call Auchincloss a 'great writer', but he was a very fine one, and he is another who 'owned' certain milieux. He 'owned Park Avenue' and New York old money and Wall Street law firms in superb prose and in many novels. The most famous is 'The Rector of Justin', most likely, but my personal favourite is 'A World of Profit', which gives more of an insider's view of the Upper East Side than Tom Wolfe's 'Bonfire of the Vanities', as much as I admire that book in its meticulous detailing of styles. Certain attitudes--the 'bumpkin mother-in-law' arriving without phoning first at her daughter-in-law's opulent apartment laden with fresh vegetables from her Long Island garden, only to be told that this was 'not the thing to do, that even her own mother called before coming over' has always remained with me as a particularly searing image of a clash of classes. It's like random remarks I've read in various places since such as 'Real WASPS don't take much food. A few roast potatoes, a piece of cold meat'. Or even after the Clintons were out of office, some East Side scion wrote 'well, they're very unpolished people, you know', when they were just setting out to live in New York. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/nyregion...?ref=obituaries

I didn't see it, but this sounds much as how I would have perceived it, and what I'd even want to see sometimes, if the balances are that good (and they aren't that often, with the over-anxious arm letting us all know the fear we're not supposed to react to). The 'bit of pride' is a nice addition, if it's smug in this case, I'd tend to find that amusing and deliciously mischievous even. I only wish I'd seen it, though. It sounds like the best Aurora since Sizova.

I always liked Joan Didion's use of the phrase 'owning a place' by a writer, as she said 'Faulkner Owned Oxford' and 'James Jones owns Honolulu'. Lots of writers 'own' New York and Hollywood, but still, within that, there are specific 'ownerships'. And, in 'The Catcher in the Rye', J.D. Salinger 'owns' the Museum of Natural History. I haven't read book but once and that was in high school, but every time I've gone to the museum (including working there for about a month in 1992), especially when I'll be on one of the stairways up to another floor, I think of that book, and how Salinger put the literary stamp on that place.

Yeah, that's why over the last decades I wouldn't be sure if he was still alive or not. 'The Catcher in the Rye' not only seems older than 'Peyton Place', it really is older. I like them both, but the Metalious better, even if these two books have never been compared. Just looked at the wiki entry, and the works were very few, I just realized I'd read them all. They stories are weird, but when you're young, they're the sort that make you think you smart if you 'get them'. As with 'franny and zooey' and their 'jesus prayer', which I haven't looked at for over 40 years, or 'Perfect Day for Bananfish'. Occurs to me that this kind of story is one kind of 'New Yorker Magazine story', and that Donald Barthelme must have been very influenced by him. Maybe Woody Allen as well, although that doesn't actually interest me one way or aother. But certain of Barthelme's stories in the collection 'Unspeakable Practices, Unnatural Acts', like 'The Balloon', have a Salingeresque mawkish-weird atmosphere to them IMO>

I'm glad you're getting to go, Cristian, and it should be marvelous. One thing that interests me from reading the whole thread, so I'm for FNB, but on-topic for Finland and talks of travels there. The thread reads as though Helsinki is a much more frequentv vacation choice that I would have imagined. Even my European friends have never talked about it, only Sweden and Denmark and sometimes Norway. I'm sure all of those places must be marvelous if you can get there, but is it usually after you've been to Oslo, Stockholm and Copenhagen that you go to Helsinki and Tallinn? Or is it because they're so close to St. Petersburg, which, of course, I know is a frequent destination? Would be interested to know, if Cristian doesn't mind, how it turns out so many people go to Helsinki, included from Cristian why he chose it as the city for his holiday. I hadn't even heard mention of their ballet, and although I've lived in NYC for 42 years, I never met but one Finn, and didn't know her well (not that that means anything, but I met everything else, short of Lichtensteinians and Luxembourgians). Okay, sorry, I'm just fascinated at how many people have been to Helsinki, and wonder if this is a recent choice as a holiday place. I did know that the language, like Hungarian, is not from the Indo-European family, which interests me. Anyway, have a great trip, Cristian, I know it will be. also like to know if FNB is newish, or if has been around a long time. I remember watching Swedish National Ballet's 'Swan Lake', and then finding that it had a long history, but it's by no means one of the companies people talk about frequently, as they do RDB, of course.

Fascinating, all of it. Love the descriptions of the Opera House. This opera is never perfect, is it? I don't think I've ever seen a live or recorded version that I have ever found satisfying, although I'm sure they exist. I think there is a Welsh Opera with Boulez conducting that isn't quite either, even though Boulez knew how to get the orchestra as it must be. As I read your account, I began to realize that this opera needs the kind of care thay Bayreuth gives to Wagner, and maybe such a thing does occur or has occurred, but I think it needs something electric going through it, somehow a concentration that is nearly impossible to sustain. And yet without this concentration and 'buzz', you get the sense ot tedium that the inexperienced or even ignorant and musically illiterate listener can easily determine is 'all there is to this'. Okay, so those of us who are familiar with the opera get beyond having to think that way, still...it almost never works. Have you ever seen a production that you thought had this focus and Bayreuthian concentration from beginning to end, so that even intermissions didn't break it? I haven't. And I am sure it needs that, plus I think that the tempi need to be sped up, and the orchestra must be absolutely flawless, the singers impeccable. As I write this, I think what I am writing seems extreme and ridiculous, but it was because of reading your review that I am now 100% sure that this is one of the most extravagant and demanding works ever made: It needs almost a special small opera house just for its own performance. It is nearly impossi8ble to get a good Pelleas, although I have seen and heard good Melisandes. Golaud is usually adequate in productions I've seen. And I don't like Yniold most of the time. All that 'mon petit pere' is so precious and silly as to be nearly unbearable sometimes (and it's lengthy too), even though I adore Debussy as much as any composer who ever lived. But I've never seen this Yniold business done well but once, and believe it or not, it was the New York City Opera that got the Yniold that literally stole the show in that production; although Patricia Brooks was extremely good as Melisande in that long-ago productions. Did you see that, Helene? I do confess to not seeing the Met's production from the 70s and 80s, which was supposed to be excellent. That NYCOpera production was in general surprisingly good, I saw it a couple of times.

He was an interesting and funny man, I worked with him briefly at Juilliard, when I thought I might change teachers (from Beveridge Webster) for my Master's Degree year. I didn't, and I'm glad I didn't, but he was quite loose-tongued and gossipy about everything we talked about. He told me, re Charles Ives "oh, I consider him a PRIMITIVE". He taught later at Manhattan School of Music, which is not quite so prestitgious, and told everybody he did so because 'they pay'. Long before I ever knew I'd know him, I was crazy about an LP with his 'Concerto in F' of Gershwin, which I thought full of energy and brio. Later, but before I ever met him, I'd hear concerts at Carnegie Hall, and he was always big on the encore-charmers. My teacher at the time, Ilona Kabos, a marvelous Hungarian, said "Oh, dah-link, I left. I couldn't STAHND eet!" and so I reported the rest of the program. Ilona said "oh yes, he al-vays likes to do zee leetle bonbons" He was much older than I thought he was, having had silver hair, somewhat like Steve Martin, at an early-ish age.

Thanks for posting this, Makarova Fan, my first hearing of it. Recently, a friend and I seem to always be talking about 'the old stars who are still with us', and she usually comes up. One never knows, of course. Yes, she was wonderful in many things, both as a child in 'Great Expectations', and as an adult, in everything from 'Hamlet' to 'The Grass Is Greener' (this is good, by the way, with a stellar cast along with Simmons, that is to say, Deborah Kerr, Robert Mitchum, and Cary Grant). Very beautiful, but not quite a big star so much as a fine actress. May have to do with the slight quirkiness in the sound of the voice, there are some people who confuse her with Audrey Hepburn (as in a fiction story I once read about 'Desiree'), but Audrey is the bigger star, although as an actress the range was smaller (Audrey got stuck in all those Givenchy fashion-show stupid movies by the 60s). She reminds me perhaps or Vivien Leigh more, though, although I much prefer Simmons. Marvelous also in 'Elmer Gantry' and 'Desiree', of course, and I liked her in Agee's 'All the Way Home' and also 'Until They Sail' and 'Angel Face', just to mention a few. She's got a great body of work. Just read the obit in the Times--I hadn't known that whole story about Howard Hughes and Steward Granger, fascinating that Hughes tried to ruin her with bad movies, and yet it didn't work.

Jane, that was GREAT! Not only was I right about, his Bluebird , as you say, "He went on to be the Bluebird of his generation", but I was right to be bewildered that nobody ever mentioned him. Your whole article was wonderful, filling in all the gaps, although I am sorry to hear he's gone--I don't know why, it just never occurred to me that he wouldn't still be with us, although that Nureyev documentary I mentioned may be 20 years old. I make the best medieval-style Yorkshire Pudding in town, always at Xmas, and usually one other time in the winter, so next week I will make it for someone, and we'll toast to all these Yorkshore lads (can you say 'lads' if it's still in England? I've never been north of Liverpool, I don't think they said it.) Thanks so much.

All of these reports from London and New York about Blair very illuminating. I think I can understand what he must have been good at, and tried to Google something about his 'Pineapple Poll', but found nothing, not really expecting to though. Some kinds of roles probably require imposing presence by a certain kind of dancer, and another kind may have these comedic gifts, which is something I hadn't thought about very extensively before. So what about Shaw? I know he's not a 'danseur noble' type, and once read he often had these 'character parts', whether animals or other 'cute parts', maybe that was what he was best at. Is he good in that Bluebirds video like I think? Nobody has ever responded when I mentioned him before, so I imagine he's considered a minor performer, although charming. One of the Nureyev TV documentaries has a lady from RB (can't remember who, it's been a few years) talking about Nureyev being like Shaw ('one of our teachers') in his natural gift for teaching--I'd never thought about Nureyev as a teacher, and most of us who are not real insiders don't. Is Shaw still a teacher at RB?

Well, you'd know, of course I mean that, about the 'accuracy of classical technique', but I've only seen the film of 'Sleeping Beauty' and I just don't find much charisma, if that's what you meant by 'projection of personality'. Maybe if one saw him live, I didn't get anything from that film, although I know that's not enough to judge from. Might be hard to judge on 'Evening with Royal Ballet', because there are two Nureyevs on it, and two other Fonteyns as well with Rudi, so maybe I'm comparing unfairly. I do like Brian Shaw in Bluebird on that same video, and I never hear anybody say much about him. I thought he was a charmer, and he does the 'winged hands' the best I've seen.

Glad you stayed on this one, because it was vivid despite my dislike of the heroine's 'crisis' (this may be my problem with Marie Riviere, though, I don't care for her in 'Automne' either, she always seems petulant and rude--isn't that the one where she tells her gracious hosts how horrible they are for not being vegetarians?). So now returns the memory of that Swedish girl Delphine meets in Biarritz. Well, my impression is that she is supposed to be vapid and insensitive according to Rohmer (after all, the film is about Delphine's near-nervous-breakdown about not being able to get her vacation right--shrinks in Bruce Wagner novels never had it this bad), but then I thought this 'suedoise' was the normal, healthy, plucky girl who knew how to have fun at the beach. Terrible to be non-neurotic, eh? Helene- I just realized I saw 'L'ami de Mon Amie' but had forgotten the name of it, and well, the later Rohmer 'young people movies' really do start blending together. I liked this one too, but still remember primarily that it was the nicest possible way to see Parisian banlieue real estate of the nice sort. And sometimes this does bring unusual characters that might never be emphasized elsewhere. In Tale of Winter, that hairdresser 'second husband' with whom the heroine moves to a smaller city (Nivers? can't remember) is especially odious, as it is only days upon their arrival that she is being treated like a mere employee in the salon. The sensation is very stifling, and Rohmer executes that part of the film perfectly. I think that, ultimately, I like 'Claire's Knee' the best, it's just been so long since I saw it, I have a hard time remembering it, except that Claire is somewhat enigmatic, but always summery and desirable, not some little tedious scold like that girl in 'Rendezvous de Paris' (although she is a good Swiss character, no question--and perhaps Rohmer really 'likes' her little more than I do.) 'Claire's Knee' stands out in my memory as being more than 'just another Rohmer film'. I respect 'Ma Nuit Chez Maud' and some of the others too, but I suppose 'Claire's Knee' actually does have a pastoral loveliness that moves one, a bit like Delius, say. But also, the charm of Laurance de Monaghan as Claire, who says very little, as I recall, and it is her secrets that you want to know. Strange, it just occurs to me that this actress would have been just right for Eula Varner if a real film of Faulkner's Snopes trilogy were ever properly made (they call the Lee Remick character in 'The Long Hot Summer' Eula Varner, but I think that's based on a short story.) Eula was the character that shook up the entire town, everybody worshipped her as a kind of Helen of Troy beauty. Mlle. de Monaghan exuded some of this kind of sensuality. Thanks, all, for your comments.

These are literally keenly interesting, Quiggin. Thanks for posting them. They have made come to the surface what I really feel about Rohmer: I like the weather, I like the 'pretty Rohmerish young people', and I think the whole body of work is important, and I even like some individual films quite a lot. But he never quite moves me, except in the visceral feel you can get of either urban or rural landscape, in the way that Resnais or Techine or Truffaut or certaintly, to go earlier, Carne do. It is always a recognizable 'Rohmer world' and there have been those who have said the films are indistinguishable one from the other. Well, that's not true literally, ir only because of 'Percival' (which I can't stand, which is rare for me) and 'Marquise of O'), but in fact, the ones I do like most are in that atmosphere, which becomes (I think, not exactly sure of this) a little more defined after 'Ma Nuit Chez Maud' with 'Claire's Knee'. There's an annoying over-politeness about rudeness and meanness that he always infuses his characters with. Can you imagine Deneuve in one of these, all of a sudden bursting out in a rage of the sort you find toward the Auteuil character in 'Ma Saison Preferee', or the passion in 'Les Voleurs' or even in 'Indochine'. and certainly in the 2004 'Les Temps Qui Changent'. That's just an example. The characters seem to be bourgeois in the extreme, like the girl from Geneve in the 'Les Rendezvous de Paris' segment in the artist's atelier, she walks around in this condescending way, clinically evaluating his paintings, his literal life-blood, and while pretending to be 'realistic' by refusing to even let the boy kiss her as she is leaving, is even miserly about that, saying 'For what? I have my man, I am going back to him'. She is humourless, mediocre and yet appears to have 'won the point'. But she hasn't. She is the conclusion of the scene, in which she has been dismissive and ungracious in every possible way to the artist, and yet she feels as though she have been 'sensible'; but knowing that is was obvious they'd never see each other again was why anyone with real refinement would have allowed the little kiss on the cheek, not the reverse. I suppose my much-delayed annoyance at this scene (although I always disliked her) might never have occurred had she been the receiver of the epithets that would have been perfectly justified by the young man. If Deneuve calls her brother in 'Ma Saison Preferee' (played by Auteuil) "cold and contemptuous!", you still don't believe he is beyond redemption for some of his failings. This girl is like a contemporary automaton, and you know that one day if she has any sensibilites at all, she will regret such truly contemptible and stingy behaviour--if she ever reflects at all, and it's hard to imagine that she would. In the same way, in 'A Tale of Winter', the 'second boyfriend', after the young woman who's husband is still missing has left her 'second husband', is subject to constant insults by her, and he just sits there and takes it, as if this is a 'civilized' way of disccusing things. Rohmer has his great talents, but he is stuffy and stingy in his way, and i can't think of a single film which has even one moment to compare with what Techine achieves in every film I've seen of his. There was something in 'Chloe in the Afternoon', perhaps--Chloe at one moment lectures her boyfriend for 'trying to destroy someone else's pleasure', I've always remembered that line--and Chloe IS a stronger-profile female character than Rohmer's usual 'little-girl types'. But there's that snitty, whimpering girl in 'Le Rayon Vert', who is unable to figure out 'how to do an enjoyable holiday', this was a beautiful movie (esp. the Biarritz section and its sounds), but looking back, the premise is a little silly, what with her harsh judgments of every young man she meets until she finally meets one who will act as her analyst/parent/matinee idol/right-on-the-beach-like-in-the-movies, as 'the green ray' appears to them and turns it into a fairy tale (and someone pointed out that Rohmer does like the 'winning male' to be the best-looking as well; that's not a bad touch, and he does that in 'Tale of Winter' too.) I did once use 'Ma Nuit Chez Maud' for practising French once. I had been out of practice for many years with my French, and I watched the film with subtitles first, although I could understand much of it (my problem with French was always in understanding the speaker and the speed of it, not in knowing the grammar and in being able to at least form some comprehensible sentence), then turned the television around and just listened to it. It worked to a degree, but not like going back to French-speaking countries did, of course. I used some Robbe-Grillet novels for the same purpose, reading first in English, then easily sliding though the French and hearing it, but somehow Robbe-Grillet's coldness and serialization doesn't annoy me the way Rohmer's bourgeois attitude does, and I don't think he ever goes beyond it. Robbe-Grillet is using his techniques to open up new fields of play and sensation and creation and writing and skewed narrative, but Rohmer always seems stuck in certain kinds of characters as being sympathetic when they're merely whining. And he's self-righteous about some of them to an absurdly precious degree. In 'Le Rayon Vert', in Delphine's first attempt at a sojourn, she meets this ever-so-slightly racy boy and refers to him as being 'a sort of hustler'. Well, you know, nobody else who ever heard that term before, and knows what it means to most people, would have ever recognized him as such--he just wasn't going to be a good shoulder to cry on, and that's all that tiresome character was looking for. You find this mountain-out-of-a-molehill 'emotional crisis' in a lot of Rohmer's characters. Thanks again for putting these up, Quiggin, and it looks like you had to type them in as well. Although I've veered from some of their themes, they are responsible for making me go into this reverie about Rohmer. I suppose I probably see him as an important filmmaker, but ultimately way too precious for my taste. I never think of wanting to see any of the films a second time, although I have known people in real life very much like Rohmer's characters (my publisher's girlfriends are almost all straight out of Rohmer, which is to say--a bit spoiled. And he had to get over several of them the hard way)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/movies/1...?ref=obituaries Eric Rohmer died today. This was a unique and special film director. I've seen most of the major films, perhaps some 15 of them, and many of them have made a strong impression on me, esp. 'A Tale of Winter', 'Rendezvous de Paris', 'Summer', 'Chloe a l'Apres-midi', 'Claire's Knee', and others. I like very much the sound in some of these films, in which he makes sure that you are hearing the real city sounds, as in 'Rendezvous de Paris', which is later, I think about 1996. Rohmer was also very important in the French resistance to certain cultural aspects of the GATT agreement. This was couragepis and good stubbornness, and may have made it possible for certain French filmmakers to do films they wouldn't have otherwise, as Hanneke, Techine and others. I always saw it as a defiance of homogenization, and it worked.

But they COULD have done at least one Balanchine (you tell me which) even on the Joyce stage, couldn't they have? Looking back now at the responses to something we'd all expected to be dazzled by, I'm in slight disbelief at such programming. I don't believe this program--again if there had been at least ONE Balanchine--makes since on any level. Because even 'Three Movements', the best of the works, is no masterpiece. But I agree with Leigh and Tobias on Korbes as she appeared here: She was not charismatic or outstanding in any way in these pieces, just very good like the rest. I saw nobody but Poretta who somehow looked like he could transcend these mediocre works--and that IS the mark of a star. I can definitely see him as very fine in 'Rubies', he is noticeably short, but not too short. I can't imagine Boal not taking heed of these complaints about the program, because it was a real miscalculation. We were expecting electricity not only because we'd heard about it, but because it was certainly possible. And the opportunity was lost for the moment. mimsyb would probably not have said 'PNB is beginning to look like a lot of other companies' if one really good work had been put on. 3 Movements was good, but not great, and IMO the other three were worthless. A less important angle, but automatically occurring to me since I have become this sort of 'Friend of the Joyce' is that not only that stellar Chinese group from Taiwan I saw back in November, but even the Ballet Hispanico came across light-years better in this space. I never got a chance to write much about BH, but their 'couples dances', that generic sort of 'entertainment ballet' with a few couples out there being charming, were so much more inventive and charming and engaging than that Tharp business I cannot even tell you. And there was excitement in some of their pieces (although one was awful), not just in the excellence of their dancers (and theirs were too.) If Ballet Hispanico does a program that much better than PNB at the Joyce, maybe something needs to be thought about--esp. if even 3 Movements seemed too cramped at the Joyce. Well, I think we all could have stood for some 'cramped-looking Balanchine' more than we could stand for that absurd 'Fur Alina', which looked like something you'd see in an experimental space back in the 70s, derived from old modern dance programs, except that it was fresh then. 'Fur Alina' was like a simulation, it had no flavour or real colour.

Perfect post idea, bart. I thought Darci Kistler was great as the Siren back in the 80s, I thought she bristled with wicked energy. I like Von Aroldingen in the video with Baryshnikov because of the statuesque look she seemed able to achieve there. I also saw it several times at NYCB in the last few years, but can't even remember who did it. But young Kistler was good in this.

Of course not slavishly, but neither does 'L'Apres-midi d'un Faune' follow Mallarme's poem slavishly, while still convincing some of us as having at least derived much more than superficially from it. That's because if you use the label 'Proust', it's hard to avoid not looking for Proust's original characters, especially if they are named. I suppose you could do a ballet called 'Petipa' where the Black Swan and the White Swan 'make peace' with each other and become friends--the lion and the lamb, etc. It might work better if the ballet title were just kept, but not the character names. It might not matter so much if you haven't read it, but if you have, there really is no way not to look for more specific qualities in certain characters. If they seem reinvented, there's a conflict, IMO. If he's doing a free adaptation of Proust, maybe the 'Saint-Loup and Morel' ought to just be a pas de deux, and maybe suggest possible connections to the text that aren't going to seem pre-fixed. Although that's neither here nor there, the ballet is accepted as it is, or it woudn't be at POB. So that, even in France, probably most of the balletgoers won't be familiar with all of the characters in the novel, and they would be able to judge it in purely balletic terms. The Crisp review had some interesting things in it.