Universal Ballet's Romeo and Juliet

[Alexandra]

FRIDAY, JULY 30, 2004 at 8:00 pm – Opening

Juliet: Hye-Min Hwang; Romeo: Jae-Yong Ohm; Tybalt: Jae-Won Hwang; Mercutio: Chang-Ki Kim; Paris: Andriy Gura

SATURDAY, JULY 31, 2004 at 2:00 pm MAT”

Juliet: YeNa Kang; Romeo: Jae-Won Hang; Tybalt: Rabul Seo; Mercutio: Semyon Chudin; Paris: Jae-Yong Ohm

SATURDAY, JULY 31, 2004 at 8:00 pm

Juliet: Seh-Yun Kim; Romeo: Andrei Gura; Tybalt: Rabul Seo; Mercutio: Chang-Gi Kim; Paris: Jae-Yong Ohm

[Hal]

:shrug: I attended the Saturday Night 7/31 performance of Universal Ballets Romeo & Juliet on some free tickets for the "press" so I feel compelled to write this review. Some disclaimers: 1) I don't like story ballets in general. 2) I have never seen another full version of Romeo & Juliet. The closest I've come is Lavery's version for NYCB. 3) I have never seen the Univeral Ballet before.

The company seems to be dominated by Soviet era folks and Vinagrodov formerly of the Kirov seems to be in charge as AD. From the program it looks like he has brought a lot of folks from Russia with him, particularly as teachers. The ballet was choreographed by Levrovsky and Radlov in 1940 and staged by Vinogradov. The program notes that he added some dancing. Hard to believe. To quote the program: "...R&J is the first time he has created new choreography for the company. Incorporating over 40 years of creative experience and lifts...."

Well lots start with the positives: great set, great costumes. The lighting was bit dark but ok.

The choreography barely existed. A lot of walking around and huge group scenes with various sword and other fights. None of it very convincing. There was nearly no real dancing in the first two acts. And minimal dancing in the 3rd. The lifts were there and some were quite fantastic. The ballerina barely touched the ground in any dances until her solo in the 3rd act. And that was not riviting. I have no idea whether this ballerina was any good. She didn't do enough to show much other than a lot of emoting.... which I don't particularly prefer to begin with.

The Romeo role was even more disapointing. I was expecting lots of huge leaps and some super bravado dancing from the men. Never happened. Nada. Zlich. Zero.

One thing that cracked me up was the scene in the 2nd act where there is a little stage set up for a play within the play. The little stage acted like a sounding board, and every jump sounded like a thud and drumbeat. And it was at the very back of the stage with dozens of dancers spread on the ground in front of it. It was just so stupid it was hard to believe. And this at NYState Theater with its know muffling of sounds from the stage.

The lead dancers look like they have some talent ... but that is just a wild guess as there was not enough dancing for any of them to be sure.

It felt like an opera without any singing. I got my moneys worth, but just barely.

I am very curious if any others have seen this and have other opinions. Mine might be clouded by my disdain for these kinds of work to begin with.

[Juliet]

I attended the Saturday Night 7/31 performance of Universal Ballets Romeo & Juliet on some free tickets for the "press" so I feel compelled to write this review

I got my moneys worth, but just barely.

Well, I must say, that "free tickets" and "money's worth" rather cancel each other out.

I'm sorry that your first Romeo & Juliet had to be this one, though.

Vinogradov's choreogrraphy has always left a great deal to be desired, I think. He is talented in many ways, but he is not a good choreographer. (I am trying to be kind.)

Given what they had to work with, the company did a fine job. It's really hard to dance beautifully when you have nothing but posturing, overblown melodramatic movement, and a chopped-up score. It was awful, simply awful. This sow's ear could not by any means be made into a silk purse.

One thread of very beautiful, and strong silk, however, was Seh Yun Kim, who danced one of the more intelligent and emotionally sound Juliets I've seen. She didn't have a lot to work with, and what she had was bad, but she left no one in doubt that this was a girl who knew her own mind and was not afraid to act on her beliefs Her dancing is delicate, yet strong, her line is simply lovely, and I'd very much like to see her in other choreography.

The production is very grand. Heavy-handed theatricality, but costumes, sets and lighting were arresting and creative. The costumes for the ball scene were magnificent, richly coloured and imaginative. The first act fights were bloodless in all respects, and there was rather a surfeit of bronze and silver tissue lame, but if the choreography was heavy handed, one could look at the costumes (please lose the nasty crepe-hair wigs----blonde=Montague, brunette=Capulet. I kid you not.)

Vinogradov obviously worked to incorporate Italian Renaissance images into this production, but for every visual quotation from a fresco or tapestry, there was a lamentable, almost laughable, death throes struggle taking center stage and completely ruining the moment. Mercutio as a crucifixion figure; Romeo doing floor gymnastics in the crypt......you get the idea.

What could this company do with the resources and dancers at their disposal if they did not have to contend with dated theatrics and overblown effects? I have seen them perform other works and it is regrettable that Vinogradov's taste imbues everything and mires the company in the past. There was certainly enough money spent on the production, and the workmanship was stunning. Now they just need to get another choreographer.

[Hal]

Well, I must say, that "free tickets" and "money's worth" rather cancel each other out.

That was the point. Even for nothing this was barely worth it.

I am glad that you agree with me that the choreography was awful (or non-existant to this NYCB fan). I was hoping I wasn't missing something. Thanks for your response.

[Leigh Witchel]

I'm afraid the most special moment was at the end where twelve couples in street clothing came upon the scene (which up to this point had been in sumptuous period costumes) bearing candles to do slow earnest partnering. I felt as if I had been magically transported to an International Youth Jamboree ca. 1964 in Bucharest or perhaps Havana.

This production was probably dated even before it hit the stage, but to make a serious point out of a silly observation, how do we deal with the idea of avant-garde in another culture? The same question with Eifman; are we seeing ideas that are simply 30 years behind what we're doing or discarded - or have they struck down a path we're not taking and it needs to be judged by another standard entirely?

[Hal]

Leigh: I don't think that calling it classical ballet and then providing minimal dancing but lots of "acting" qualifies it for unique treatment. I think it is possible to evaluate different form of classical ballet, its done here everyday. Even some classical ballet vs more modern renditions. And if this performance was labelled as "Spectical" rather than "Ballet" it could then be evaluated in different terms. "See the magnificent Costumes", "See the fantastic Sets!" "Hear the wonderful Music" "Includes some dance".

And although I am not a fan of full length story ballets, they can have tons of exquisite dancing. They do at NYCB and ABT. I never leave feeling I didn't get to see much dancing.

[Leigh Witchel]

But Hal, there was no less dancing in this version than in any other production of R&J. In fact there was more: Several scenes that would usually be done as mime (like Juliet's first scene) were recast as dance. In fact, that's what Vinogradov was attempting to do (from his own notes). The Lavrovsky Radlov production (that most western versions of R&J were based on) was considered to be too heavy with mime and Vinogradov's version was a response to that criticism - to attempt to pare at the mime and replace it with pur dance expression. After seeing this, it will be a long time before I disparage the macMillan. I would have rather seen more mime and less dance in this version, or at least an attempt at plot and character development. I think it was a problem of quality rather than quantity.

[sandik]

This production was probably dated even before it hit the stage, but to make a serious point out of a silly observation, how do we deal with the idea of avant-garde in another culture?  The same question with Eifman; are we seeing ideas that are simply 30 years behind what we're doing or discarded - or have they struck down a path we're not taking and it needs to be judged by another standard entirely?

This is my question with Eifman as well. The work seems amazingly bizarre to me at times, so off the wall that I think I might be watching parody -- how do we see what the choreographer is trying to show us?