Live From Lincoln Center 30th Anniversary

[canbelto]

My favorite part was "Send in the Clowns." Ah, I love that song.

Otherwise, I'm disappointed they showed the weakest part of Makarova's Odette/Odile (her fouettes), and that they showed such a brief clip of Giselle. I would have shown the pdd's from both ballets, even in clips.

Did Mr. B really have shots of vodka set outside the State Theater? I always thought that was a joke on his part and that only he actually downed any vodka.

[carbro]

Did Mr. B really have shots of vodka set outside the State Theater? I always thought that was a joke on his part and that only he actually downed any vodka.

Oh, yes indeedy! A contributing factor, I am sure, to my tripping off the curb on my way home that night!

I do think they could have included another piece of ballet. Boy, that excerpt from Contact went on for quite a while, didn't it?

[Farrell Fan]

As far as audience alcohol is concerned, Peter Martins proved himself a worthy successor to Mr.B. Little bottles of vodka with accompanying plastic shot glasses,were handed out at the end of the Balanchine Celebration and the Centennial.

[canbelto]

One thing that puzzled me about the Apollo clips is why Farrell's hair looked so dark. Did she dye it brown or something, because it looked darker than I've ever seen it.

[papeetepatrick]

Yes--and we drank shots of vodka in a toast by Martins with Barbara Horgan inside the theater on Balanchine's birthday. There was that huge cake on stage and just outside the theater were tables with wonderful pastries from Payard Patisserie. I'm sure this has been written up 2 years ago, but I wondered if anybody knew if those were Passion Fruit or not. I thought so, but somebody that night said lemon, but I didn't think so. I never knew why the balloons didn't eject. I don't care for vodka, so took sip and still have almost the whole little bottle left as souvenir.

[Farrell Fan]

Farrell's hair color has darkened and lightened at various times over the years. The headline over the review of "Holding on to the Air" in 1990, was "Blond Ambition."

[AmaG520]

I missed the first part of the show, but was able to start watching at "Simply Irresistable." (spelling?) what company was that? it was so energetic!

[art076]

"Simply Irresistible" was from the Broadway production of Contact, and that broadcast was done live at the show's final performance after a lengthy run! The company must have been energized that it was their last go together.

[art076]

Re: Goberman's interview - I'm a little concerned about this part:

DVT: I remember at a seminar at the MTR about Balanchine that when you were working on the broadcast of “Coppelia” you came up against the desire to show the dancers in a pleasing manner and Balanchine’s desire to show the choreography. You said in the seminar that, for broadcast purposes, the dancer was most important.

John Goberman: That was true. A choreographer wants to see his choreography. That’s good for the stage. But a broadcast is about performance and those are two different things. Mr. Balanchine was a great artist and we wanted to do what he wanted. So we ended up with a whole lost of wide shots and not much of an audience. An awful lot of dance on television has failed because the choreographer wants to see the choreography. This is dull. At the same time, with something like “Coppelia” there was a lot of detail. After a while you’re into a cult audience and they get all upset about something that most people don’t care about.

Yes, the dancer is important and zooming in to see details is important - but isn't the point of broadcasting something to give a TV audience a chance to see that work? If you cut out the choreography, or mangle it with too many camera cuts, you loose a) the reason why the dancer is dancing in the first place, and b) what makes that particular piece of dancing special or unique. Otherwise its just a bunch of steps.

There has to be some way to strike a balance between catching detail and giving an overview of the choreography, not just dancer over choreography. It seems like he is applying the standards of opera broadcast, when its ok to just zoom straight in, to dance broadcast, which is an artform with different demands. Especially in the era of larger TVs and high definition, the argument for needing to zoom in all the time becomes less relevant.

And regarding that cult audience - sure we're the ones who are going to care about not getting to see the choreography. But those ones who "dont care" won't get the chance to ever care if they never see why the "cult" wants to see it.

[carbro]

Cutting the dancing corps from the picture to zero in on the principal is the visual equivalent of removing the sound of the orchestra so you can hear the soloist better in a concerto. It doesn't seem like a difficult concept to me, although I concede it is more problematic.

It seems like the dance segments were chosen with that in mind -- although I would have like more wide (and high) shots of Vienna Waltzes. I felt myself grow dizzy, which never happened in the theater.

[Giannina]

I felt that the entire effect of the last scene of Vienna Waltzes was lost by the continual close up shots. You're supposed to be seeing a large group of dances multiplied by 2 (mirrors) producing a gorgeous swirling pulsation to the beautiful music. Hmmm.

Giannina

[chrisk217]

Yes, the dancer is important and zooming in to see details is important - but isn't the point of broadcasting something to give a TV audience a chance to see that work? If you cut out the choreography, or mangle it with too many camera cuts, you loose a) the reason why the dancer is dancing in the first place, and b) what makes that particular piece of dancing special or unique. Otherwise its just a bunch of steps.

There has to be some way to strike a balance between catching detail and giving an overview of the choreography, not just dancer over choreography. It seems like he is applying the standards of opera broadcast, when its ok to just zoom straight in, to dance broadcast, which is an artform with different demands. Especially in the era of larger TVs and high definition, the argument for needing to zoom in all the time becomes less relevant.

And regarding that cult audience - sure we're the ones who are going to care about not getting to see the choreography. But those ones who "dont care" won't get the chance to ever care if they never see why the "cult" wants to see it.

EXACTLY art076!!!

This is not only the era of larger tvs and high definition... it's also the era of ANGLES in dvds. Yet, I've never ever come upon a dvd that has that feature... It has been explained to me by my male friends that many adult dvds have angles for obvious reasons... Might we ever hope that the same meticulous multi-angle presentation may be used in less marketable physical endeavours like ballet?

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could, at the touch of a button, go from the dancer to a wide shot of the whole stage? As a feature it's underutilised in movie dvds (no director wants to direct the same picture 3 times, apparently) but having an angle of the whole of the stage would greatly enhance the ballet dvd experience... And everyone would be happy... directors, mainstream audience & that pesky cult audience...

Yes, the cost would be slightly greater, but as with multiple sound channels in opera dvds, multiple angles can be a marketing tool. See here how Opus Arte explains the higher quality (and cost) of their opera dvds. Ultimately, I think it comes down to a respect for the audience. Opera devotees get far more respect from tv & dvd producers than balletomanes. The evidence is in the disks...

[carbro]

Ultimately, I think it comes down to a respect for the audience.

Now, there's a radical angle!

[bart]

I finally got a chance to look at my DVR. For me, this was a nostalgia trip -- not so much nostalgia about the tv shows (most of which I'd forgotten or never even seen), but about the performers themselves. It's amazing how the same people appear again and again and again on public tv. Often in the same repertory. I really feel I've grown up with them.

It was especially great to see Horne (Delila) and Sills (Rosina) in such wonderful voice again. Pavarotti, also in excellent voice, began and ended the show with Puccini.

The suprise of hearing Balanchine speak from in front of the curtain was on a par with Garbo's first talky role ("Garbo talks!"). I loved his short scat on the first word of "Happy Birthday".

And all those Don Giovannis and Zelinas!

The final section of the Martins/Farrell/Calegari/Nichols Apollo (1982) was beautiful, clearly defined and very strong on video. The choreograph came across as clearly as on stage.

The final, Rosenkavelier section of Vienna Waltzes (2004 performances) didn't photograph so well, I thought. The mirrors were a distraction, even more than the cross cutting that's been mentioned. I never noticed this live on the stage. In the theater, the dancers are part of a larger pattern, but are also individuals -- and it's possible to focus your eyes where YOU want. Thus avoiding any sense of individuals and couples disappearing into a blurring mass of generic white ballgowns.

I WAS able to notice something I never did before -- the way the men at certain points step into the first beat with a fondu/arabesque. It's one of those elegant, completely unexpected things that makes this ballet so interesting and memorable. There are so many details like this in Balanchine's choreography. Somehow the camera brought only a few of them out.

This was a 2004 performance. Does anyone know who the lead couples were in this finale?

[Andre Yew]

I have a recording of the 2004 Balanchine centenary celebration with Vienna Waltzes. The dancers are:

Kyra Nichols, Charles Askegard

Rachel Rutherford, Albert Evans

Abi Stafford, Benjamin Millepied

Amanda Edge, Tom Gold

Jennifer Tinsley, Arch Higgins

The conductor is Roberto Minczuk.

--Andre

[bart]

Thanks, Andre. I suspected Askegard, Millepied, and Evans, but the women were either more generic or less familiar (the young ones especially).

Now that you mention it, a brief flash of someone who made me think of Nichols did appear every once in a while.