esperanto Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Hello, I'm new here so hope I'm doing the right thing here. I've tried for 2 days to post or to contact someone...anyone! for help but was unable to make any progress. What I'd like to know is what people think of the Bourne Nutcracker. It certainly doesn't live up to his Swan Lake, whatever you may think of THAT. More if there are any replies. Link to comment
Leigh Witchel Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Welcome to Ballet Talk, esperanto - sorry you had so much trouble posting; I hope now that you've figured it out you'll post more frequently. I'm moving your post to the correct forum - we have a forum for discussing non-Ballet dance including Matthew Bourne's work. I haven't seen his version of the Nutcracker, but Rita Felciano just reviewed the Berkeley performances for Dance View Times. You can read that review at http://www.danceviewtimes.com/2004/autumn/12/bourne.htm Link to comment
art076 Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 Saw this on first night in Orange County: I found Nutcracker amusing and colorful, if not as strong as Matthew Bourne's later work in "Swan Lake" and "Cinderella." Bourne's ballets are more theater-dance than dance-theatre, but I find that he often has his moments of choreographic inventiveness as well. "Nutcracker!" is clearly an earlier work than the later three pieces we have seen in Los Angeles (with "The Car Man" being the third of the aforementioned two ballets), but Bourne's knack for storytelling is present here as it is in all of his pieces, but the choreography doesn't all add up to the sum of its parts. Act 1 in particular is very clever, with some pretty funny choreography that tells the story quite clearly. The March is quite amusing and very well choreographed, and the antics of the orphans throughout are hilarious. But the story is basically dead by the beginning of Act II, and Act II is decidedly tedious. The divertissement dances are very over the top, made even more strange without a strong connecting through-line. The storytelling inventiveness we saw in Act I evaporated in Act II; the only thing holding the show together were the truly dedicated performers and the sheer colorfulness of the sets and costumes. The production would likely flow better if performed without an intermission (and according to Alastair Macaulay's book on Matthew Bourne, it was originally created without an intermission). If the production were to flow straight through, no momentum would be lost during intermission; the ending to Act I doesn't have much oomph, and the remaining story doesn't have enough weight to carry as its own act. All in all, though, the production is quite amusing, worth it to see a very different - and not horrendous - take on the Nutcracker. Do not, however, come in expecting your pretty, storybook ballet Nutcracker. Link to comment
Recommended Posts