ksk04

It wasn't about superstars doing tricks, but it was all in service to the dramatic arc of the story. The company danced beautifully and the mime, port de bras, and epaulement all had meaning. They showed that you don't need tricks to get the audience on your side. Yes, some of the dancers looked a bit uncomfortable doing it in the old-school style, but it's important for them to try rather than be stuck at where they are.

Totally agree with this. I think this style is also something that will settle into some of the dancers over time, hopefully. Changing instincts about the way you've been even standing onstage, for your entire career, is something small that really requires on-stage practice to get right. For now, they all have to be extra vigilant about hitting it all properly and that will ease with time.

I agree with Josette that Boylston stood out badly for me as the Diamond Fairy; her solo seemed to mark a jarring stylistic variation from almost everything else we saw. I will be interested to hear if she looks better and softens up as Aurora, so I am glad you'll be able to report.

Volcanohunter: I really don't remember, but I'll watch for it on Friday for you.

And to be clear, I think the style of the production is great; it just seems at odds with the flash-bang-whirl of the Met Season, fly-in guest artist schedule, especially when there does seem to be little rehearsal time and, in the past, a lack of emphasis on blending styles. I hope it is something that isn't lost in the rush or discarded when it becomes too hard to schedule the time for fixing it--that's my only point.

Thank you so much for the report! And thank you for offering to answer our questions.

The grand pas de deux is vastly different from the text we are used to, and vastly different from even the 1890 Mariinsky recon (I watched this morning for verification).

Was the pas de deux similar to what Doug Fullington presented with dancers from Pacific Northwest Ballet at the Guggenheim? (Starting about 1:05:30).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=6xpOVN3cfGc#t=3931

I'm also curious whether the "long" or "short" version of the Bluebird's variation was used.

Yes, very similar to that with the addition of fish dives (which were fantastically snappy) in place of the developpes seen in the video. But still, lower passes, lower arabesques/attitudes, and honestly it seemed to me like the dancers started with a slightly modified fourth position for pirouettes--rather more open than crossed. By the way, I forgot to add the Desire variation is FIENDISH. It's almost entirely very fast, petite allegro. Gomes handled it like a champ, but it looks like a real killer and will definitely expose anyone who has been slacking.

What would I be looking for with the Bluebird variation? The Male solo seemed essentially like every other Bluebird solo I've seen, but I do not claim to be an expert. Or do you mean the pdd?

I don't think I have it in me to do a big review but here are my overall impressions (and if you have a question, I'm happy to try to answer):

That's enough to make my mouth water! Thank you so much for posting, and can't wait to hear more from you and all others who were there.

BTW how long did the performance end up lasting? Did it come in at 3 hours? It sounds like there was a LOT of dancing.

I had to leave after the first round of bows (before individual ones front-of-the-curtain ones, I assume) and it was ~10:35 when I walked out with a 7:30 start time. Notably, I did not see McKenzie come out on stage; though again, I left a bit early. I thought he would have been out after the creative team (Ratmanksy, Hudson, etc.) took theirs. So someone correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Pleasantly, I think the third act was sped along by the fact that there wasn't a stop for bows after each variation (except during the two big pdd to allow the dancers to catch their breath).

edit to add about the tutus: They weren't particularly floppy as they appear quite heavy and weighed down. But there's very little extreme movement, I think, with an eye toward that. I think I only saw the "bloomers"/crotch of a tutu a handful of times throughout the night, really.

ksk04: Do you know who these dancers you listed are-for bluebird, porcelain princess (and down that list), as they are not with ABT so am just curious. Were these dancing roles? Young/old?

They did a little walk-stylized movement around in the entrada and apotheosis, but no real dancing. They could have been older dance students, perhaps? I didn't recognize their names either, but they are listed individually on the casting sheet so I wanted to include them in case I wasn't up to date on the apprentices/etc.

I don't think I have it in me to do a big review but here are my overall impressions (and if you have a question, I'm happy to try to answer):

- The costumes are gorgeous. Really. I've never seen an ABT production where people were compelled to applaud a dress (or the woman stuck wearing the dress--poor Tatiana Ratmansky; it looked so heavy), but the people did. It was hard to focus on the dancing whenever someone new came on the stage as I had to get the binocs out to see all the costuming details.

- There is a clear turn away from the way today's dancers perform "classical ballets". Low passes (very few done at the actual knee), chainee turns on demi-pointe (making it revelatory when Aurora ends her 3rd act solo with chainees on full pointe), saute arabesques with softly bent knees and low legs (for all--men and women), back foot on demi-pointe when standing in B plus (rather than arched over--even the bows are done like this). Soft soft soft, pose pose pose seems the mantra, which is what makes it jarring when a dancer isn't able to quite do this. Which leads me to my next point...

- How/why this production was made for a company that imports a lot of its "star" dancers is very unclear to me. The grand pas de deux is vastly different from the text we are used to, and vastly different from even the 1890 Mariinsky recon (I watched this morning for verification). A dancer has to completely subsume all the training and style they are used to in order to blend into this production. I don't see how it comes with a few short rehearsals. Does this indicate a shift in casting? Doubtful--isn't Osipova cast in this for one performance at the Met?

- Vishneva acted her butt off through the Rose Adagio which I've never really seen someone manage (since they are usually gripping for dear life); she had a whole storyline of surprise and playfulness at being the center of attention: one moment totally serene, the next unable to help herself from a quick stealing smile to her parents. Both she and V. Part often danced (and Part mimed) with a mischievous, playful twinkle in their eyes and I don't know, yet, whether this is the dictate for the production or just how they decided to play it. Part is the quintessential Lilac Fairy for me (though she had some trouble with a pirouette in her solo), and she has a warmth, grace, and humor that shines through (Desire to her: what do I do to wake this girl up? Lilac: think you stupid boy! [big sly grin])

- Other Stand-outs: Cassandra Trenary--wow, wow, wow. Not sure if I've seen her dance (certainly not in a solo), but she was fantastic. I'd love to see her paired with Cornejo (since she's small enough to dance with Simkin) in some classics. Could easily see her as Aurora. Lauren Post as the Silver Fairy--so precise and on form. Stella Abrera as a sterner-than-usual Violent. V. Part's giant feather headdress for Act 1 onward. The Hop-on-my-thumbs kids, what they lack in accuracy is made up for in attitude. Nancy Raffa (though the weird long fingers look a little floppy and might be best left off the costume). The sheer number of people packed onstage for the Garland Waltz.

edited to add: Vishneva's wig in the 3rd act was so, so, so terrible. Put on totally poorly; I hope they figure it out. No one else seemed to have such a bad wig application. Really heinous, especially on the opening night when these things are still in mint condition.

Just to get us started, here's the biggies for opening night casting:

Aurora / Desire : Vishneva / Gomes

Lilac: V. Part

Carabosse: Nancy Raffa

Florestan / Queen: V. Barbee / T. Ratmansky

Catalabutte: A. Agoudine

Fairies:

Candide (Sincerity): D. Teuscher

Fleur de farine (Wheat Fairy): M. Copeland

Miettte qui tombent (Breadcrumb): S. Lane

Canari qui chante (Canary): S. Brandt

Violente (Temperament): S. Abrera

Suitors: Hammoudi, Forster, Hoven, Zurbin

Galifron, Prince's Tutor: C. Salstein

Countess: Leanne Underwood

Precious Stones:

Diamond: I. Boylston

Gold: S. Williams

Silver: L. Post

Sapphire: M. Hamrick

White Cat / Puss in Boots: Isadora Loyola / Sean Stewart

Florine / Bluebird: C. Trenary (wow what a discovery for me) / Simkin

Lil Red and Wolf: Adrienna Schulte / P Ogle

Cinderella / Prince Fortune: Gemma Bond / S. Baca (yes they do their actual variation)

Ogre / Ogress / Hop-on-my-thumb (and brothers): R. Bowman / B. Travis / area students (they also do their variation)

Bluebeard / Ariana: L. Estrada / D. Clemente

Porcelain Princesses: B. Geoghegan L. Higgins

Mandarin: K. Kodama

Scheherazade: L. Miller

Shah and his brother: R. Thierry / I. Ochoa

Plus what seemed to be an infinite supply of corps dancers, extras, and dancing children.

I am sorry to see that so many tickets for the Segerstrom run remain unsold. Am I correct in thinking that Balcony seats are not on sale for the weeknight performances? We ballet nuts may be dying to see the production, but filling 3,000 seats in the Southland is a tall order. Hoping great reviews will give the box office a boost.

The balcony (the highest level, ex-Tier 3) hasn't been put on sale for dance performances all this season, I think. So there's only three levels open (orchestra, orchestra terrace, and loge--or whatever they recently renamed them). I am a bit surprised given the article that says 60 local dance students are performing in the production--I thought that would certainly fill the seats.

It's one of those sad, self-fulfilling prophecies: you reduce the dance offerings because the "whole house" doesn't sell out, and then people don't want to come to your reduced offerings because they aren't seeing enough dance to get properly excited about it (and the crappy Ardani productions have certainly put off a lot of casual viewers, I'm sure).

I will be there for opening night (Vishneva/Gomes), Herrera/the guy they are borrowing, and Seo/Stearns (with Gomes as Carabosse).

There's an interesting article in the OC Register about this: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/ballet-642535-school-abt.html

The director of Southland (the school California mentioned) is interviewed, and McKenzie appears to respond to some of the issues the article raises.

Called again yesterday; they said that they only can refund by credit card for "special circumstances" and it requires individual approval from a manager (luck you, Giannina!). Then she said, "well I'd have to get your cc info all over again! We don't keep that on file!" Oh the horror. Still refused a credit card refund. Check still not processed or sent out yet. After they fumbled around for a few hours trying to get an eta on the check, I received a call back estimating it in another two weeks.

In contrast, I bought some tickets for National Theater Live broadcasts at the Irvine Barclay and missed the (very small) byline that said if you bought three for the series you were eligible for a discount and reduced fees if you clicked through the special link. I called them up and asked if it was possible to retroactively receive the discount; they volunteered to cancel the order and redo it. Their machines were down and could not process a refund through my credit card at that time and so they sent a check refund that I received by the end of the week, for a mistake that I made. I offered this example to the SCFTA staff as a contrast and her only response was that they are a non-profit so it's very complicated. The Irvine Barclay is a non-profit that operates under the UCI campus, a public institution.

Really? I was told by the person I spoke to that a credit card refund was not possible and that I could only get refunded by check (1-2 months out). Even more irritated now...

Just to be clear, I did not contact SCFTA about a refund; however, the date change was not something they even made the slightest announcement about to the subscribers suggesting they felt no qualms about changing the date once subscribers paid for tickets (but before they received the tickets).

As another anecdote, SCFTA completely cancelled a program from this season's subscription packet and subscribers were informed about it when tickets were finally mailed. The letter read that the ticket amount "will be held on account." When I contacted them, a bit pissed, about what that actually meant they said they could refund it but they just "didn't know what each subscriber would want to do with the money." Um, get it back? Without having to take time out of my day to contact you to get it back? They won't refund my credit card, so I am now waiting 4-8 weeks for a check in the mail. I am less than impressed.

Don't regret it for a second. What a mess. (BTW the dates were also moved from January to mid July at the performances in CA with no formal announcement; subscribers did not get a chance to return tickets though if the dates were no longer viable which seemed like a big oversight to me as many plan vacations in mid-summer).

I understand why critics -- and especially why critics from London, where (especially) Cherkaoui's work is widely known -- could be positive about the program -- but I'm not clear on why audiences in London and California disagree.

Because it was an insult to a paying audience, both in time and effort put forth by the pieces. And I didn't buy the tickets with this programming; there was a distinctly different announced program for the CA engagement--I've been to enough Ardani schlock to know what I am walking into when the program suddenly changes into modern experimentation and this was the worst of it. I also don't buy the argument that because choreographers have done good work in the past, this is probably good too for their specific vein of work. Or that dancers who have done good work in the past will probably be good too. I thought Vasiliev, especially, looked uncomfortable in the choreography and Osipova seemed to relish in looking unattractive and being extreme for extremes sake.

Thanks for the reports, I was on the fence, now I'll save my pennies for the upcoming Mariinsky NY season. However, the LA Times has a more generous review: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-osipova-vasiliev-in-solo-for-two-20140726-story.html

So the whole show finished in 75 minutes including intermission? How's the reaction from the audience?

No, there were two intermissions: one was 20 minutes and one was 25 minutes. So that prolonged the torture.

The audience at SCFTA will give a standing O to anything (including this and when Diana Vishneva cut up lemons onstage and passed them out to the first few rows a few months ago). Not the best arbiters of taste. One woman near me was heard loudly complaining about the second piece. People around me seemed grateful by the time the Pita rolled around that something somewhat tangible was occurring though. But yes, what Buddy said seemed to be the general reaction.

Yes, to what Andre posted. See 2:09 for duck walk except Osipova and Vasiliev bounced more and held their hands at nipple height producing a much sillier effect.

Not a full orchestra, no. However, Ardani has never balked from large swaths of recorded music.

The umbrella of contemporary dance is really abused by Ardani in presenting these shows. I have seen modern dance and modern ballet, and contemporary dance and contemporary ballet, that I like. This is not that.

Just a bit more in brief:

"Mercy" joins the hundreds of revolutionary works to explore domestic violence through dance. The piece begins with Vasiliev beating Osipova in silence. The music then comes in (which featured live singers, a small blessing) and is operatic in nature and then shifts to Indian Classical music with a local male vocalist. There is a "pas de deux" of the beating, a "solo" for Vasiliev, and then another "pas de deux" with their relationship mended. My boyfriend commented that most of it looked like yoga. I agree.

"Passeo" begins with noise and a lot of posing and preening. Then English traditional music kicks in (Greensleeves, I kid you not). There is a lot of really silly choreography including a sequence where Vasiliev and Osipova crouch down, walk like ducks with their hands folded up their chests like birds (imagine it over the chorus to Greensleeves), and then right themselves and beat their chests. There was a lot of flummoxed laughter around me.

Both of these are a maximum of 10 minutes or so, I believe. Empty stages. Dark lighting.

"Facada" is the only coherent piece. It's explained as being a possible back story to Myrtha from Giselle. There is live music as well in the form of a Portuguese-flavored guitarist (who plays a viola or violin at one point and a drum) who also plays during the preceding intermission. There is also a set (wow!) in the loose form with some potted plants and watering components. Osipova and The Lady in Black (played by Gay Storm) prep for the wedding (Osipova has a little real dancing for about 40 seconds); as Osipova stands with Vasiliev to say the vows, he looks nervous and screams and literally runs out of the auditorium via a side door. Osipova, comforted by Storm, cries buckets of tears (for about 5 minutes, not overestimating this) which are then used to water the plants. All the buckets are hung off of her arms and she walks around the stage despondently in heels multiple times. End scene. Vasiliev enters and does a solo (actual dancing again) and removes his tux so that he is down to his underwear. He struggles with a bow tie and gets a knife to cut if off. Osipova walks on and tells us "Faca in Portuguese means knife." Then she comes back on and puts a new bow tie on him (I guess the Chippendale's look is in?). She has a dream sequence where they are on their honeymoon. She then burns her bridal dress and gets down to her underwear as well (what a surprise). She then squishes or squeezes him to death??? The mode of death is not clear. She and Storm then put a table over Vasiliev's body and Osipova does a dance on top of the table and then walks away. I mean the fact I can even actually write about a plot is a considerable step up from the rest of the show, I do agree. If this were on a different bill, it might be more palatable but it's still not ready for prime time or the ticket prices they are charging for this type of event.

This was awful (just back from today's matinee). If you are determined to see it in NY or London just to see Osipova/Vasiliev, I wouldn't pay more than $15-20 for a ticket (and that is pushing it immensely). I didn't think Ardani productions could get worse than Reflections, but this really takes the cake.

Just for the record, there were about 45-50 minutes of dance in total. No piece was immune to the muted-colored underwear-as-costume trend. Having "agreed" to this as a subscriber when the program originally included the Kingdom of the Shades, I would really like some of my money back from Segerstrom.

Another problem that has become apparent is that they have two short principal men (Cornejo and Simkin), but they have not taught certain leading roles to their own short ballerinas. Other than Boylston, they did not have an inhouse short ballerina who could dance SL with Cornejo, so when Cojocaru did a last minute cancellation, there was nobody left to fill in. Sarah Lane would have been a great choice, but ..... Now they are teaching O/O to Copeland, who presumably could dance with Herman in the future. (Not thrilled about the proliferation of short people in SL. SL looks better on long limbs.)

The thing I find weird about this is that Lane HAS performed O/O--with Corella and his company. Granted it was awhile back at this point, but there's no reason she (an longtime soloist with the company) shouldn't have been able to fill in there with a production she has been dancing in for probably a decade now. Baffling.

I didn't even think to look inside the program, considering how awful DCP's programs usually are! Thanks. I swapped my tickets to opening night before seeing the cast and am glad I did since Cote is doing Romeo. I admit to not being familiar at all with NBoC but I quite liked him in a gala excerpt of Onegin at SCFTA a few years back.

Restless Creature has been scheduled for Saturday February 7 2015 at Cal State Long Beach (Carpenter Center for the Performing Arts). I looked at the website today and the tickets are already on sale, and on discount for advance booking. There is a pretty large swath of center seats gone, so if you want a primo seat I would advise ordering soon (plus you get the discount through mid July). The booking fee is $3.75 per ticket and an additional $1 to have the tickets mailed in advance.

http://www.carpenterarts.org/2014-2015/wendy-whelan.html

When classical ballerina Wendy Whelan entered the world of modern dance, she was met with critical acclaim! The New York Times raved that Whelan, “exhibits the same qualities of temperament she has shown for years as a principal dancer of New York City Ballet: she’s uncompromising, generous, bold, enthusiastic, adult, at the same time decisive and investigative. Few dancers in any genre show better that a work should be a process of self-discovery!” Restless Creature is a collaboration with choreographers Kyle Abraham, Joshua Beamish, Brian Brooks, and Alejandro Cerrudo to create a suite of elegant and thrilling duets!

NBoC arrives in LA at the Dorothy Chandler Pavillion in about two weeks to perform Ratmansky's Romeo and Juliet. Anyone know of any casting for these dates, or even where/when to find casting for the NBoC? I'm pondering swapping tickets to a different show, want to know the lay of the land, etc.

Menage! Thank you. I've been trying to figure that out for ages. That is usually my favorite part of any ballet.

When the prince holds his leg out 90 degrees and spins around, is that considered a fouetté? Whatever it was, Gorak did it well.

Reyes was fabulous coming down the stairs and then upstage on point.

Fouette means to whip, so there needs to be an in-and-out movement of the working (or extended) leg. Holding a leg to the side and turning (without bringing it to the front and back of the knee in retire--the whipped part) is just a turn a la seconde.

Thanks for all the reviews and comments, everyone. I read them all!

Hard to choose for me, from ex-ABT alums. I'd say Bocca or Gardner/McKerrow (someone needs to save Tudor and bring pathos and excellent training back to ABT) top the list. Though, Bocca is doing great things with his company (as is Corella), so it's hard to say that they should leave and have those companies potentially fall apart being so new. Regardless, most of these people should be coaching regularly (especially Kirkland) if they are not part of the admin--this is the second biggest problem after the director issue.

Absolute no to Victor Barbee. He's a part of this mess right now, and while I have no evidence of whether he supports McKenzie's decisions he is certainly in the room about them and nothing seems to be changing.