Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Fred Wiseman's New Documentary of The Paris Opera Ballet


Recommended Posts

As for people of color - I just don't look for that in every film I see.

I don't either. But in a three hour movie, I found it hard to ignore.

I noticed this as well, though it did not really surprise me. Sandy McK's comment reminded me that Wiseman does act as a witness in his documentary work, as far as that is possible for a human being.

I was taken with your idea of a behind-the-scenes documentary of MGM during the high days of the studio system. While I understand your point that the work is sometimes its own best explanation, I would love to have a "fly on the wall" view on the process that got us all there!

Link to comment
I was taken with your idea of a behind-the-scenes documentary of MGM during the high days of the studio system. While I understand your point that the work is sometimes its own best explanation, I would love to have a "fly on the wall" view on the process that got us all there!

It's tempting, isn't it? But this might fall into the "be careful what you wish for" category. I don't know that I would want to see the process if it included seeing, say, Judy Garland under the thrall of amphetamines and barbituates on the set of Annie Get Your Gun.

Link to comment

This is showing at MoMA on Saturday, and I want to see it. Can't get through to a real person to save my life, and you can't order tickets for film either online or by phone. Does anyone know it it's sold out? It was shown a couple of weeks back there too, but I'm asking this because of the popularity at Film Forum (I wasn't even aware of it at the time, November-December i usually have other things on my mind), but it anyone has info, it would help. Otherwise, I'll just go over there Wed. and see if I can get a ticket. It sounds pretty fantastic to me.

I wasn't able to see that there would be another showing of it in the near future, so I'm sure people know about this, and it may be hard to get tickets. I have no idea why they don't allow online or phone, but they don't.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Saw it this afternoon/evening. Some thoughts:

1) As to the specific remark about Farrell, I took it to mean that those dancers who came in her wake adopted the flaws instead of the attributes. In other words, they built a cult around the wrong things.

One of the drawbacks of Wiseman's method that he makes a point of not following up on remarks of this kind. You can gloss them any way you want and make educated guesses as to what was meant, but without elaboration they're less than enlightening.

Link to comment
This is showing at MoMA on Saturday, and I want to see it. Can't get through to a real person to save my life, and you can't order tickets for film either online or by phone. Does anyone know it it's sold out? It was shown a couple of weeks back there too, but I'm asking this because of the popularity at Film Forum (I wasn't even aware of it at the time, November-December i usually have other things on my mind), but it anyone has info, it would help. Otherwise, I'll just go over there Wed. and see if I can get a ticket. It sounds pretty fantastic to me.

I wasn't able to see that there would be another showing of it in the near future, so I'm sure people know about this, and it may be hard to get tickets. I have no idea why they don't allow online or phone, but they don't.

Thanks.

According to my information it is showing on Sun. March 21 at 5:00. Movies at MOMA are free with museum admission (after getting your museum ticket go to the film desk and ask for a ticket). "Film program only" tickets are also available and less expensive. They can be bought same day or in advance, if purchased in person no more than 1 week in advance. There is a $1.50 service fee. When I went with a friend last Sat. we got there about 45 minutes before the showing and had no trouble getting a ticket. It did fill up however. I hope that helps, and you enjoy the film.

One plug for MOMA membership. It is $75 single - $120 dual - $150 family. It includes admission/films and lots of other benefits. You can bring a guest for just $5. With admission being $20 for an adult and "film only" being $10, membership is a bargain. I'm a member, so for $5 I could bring a friend to enjoy the movie with me.

Link to comment
One of the drawbacks of Wiseman's method that he makes a point of not following up on remarks of this kind. You can gloss them any way you want and make educated guesses as to what was meant, but without elaboration they're less than enlightening.
You made me think of a river cruise I once took where everything was silence. We floated along with the current with plenty of time to absorb what we saw -- birds, currents, villages, bridges, fishermen along the banks, the sky. There was no commentary from the person in charge, no calling attention to this or that as being especially important.

It takes a special kind of personality to be truly comfortable -- and satisfied -- with this kind of experience. I'm one who likes the story, the information, and the point or moral of it all. I I remember feeling great frustration at not knowing what I was looking at, not being able to ask questions, not having it put in context..

But I sometimes find myself wishing that I were the other kind of person.

Link to comment

from Miliosr:

2) For all that Madam LeFevre went on and on about maintaining the high classical standards of the troupe, you would never know it was a classical troupe based on the works shown on-stage. If you didn't know it was the Paris Opera Ballet heading in, you could have easily thought it was Pina Bausch's company you were watching.

You might be interested to see the DVD, "Dancer's Dream," primarily about Elizabeth Platel dancing (and speaking about) Aurora in Nureyev's "Sleeping Beauty." Mme LeFevre says that although POB is a classical company, up to that point (at least in the 20th Century) their repertoire was primarily NOT classical ballets. She talked about how R. Nureyev changed that, setting ballets he learned at the Kirov.

Link to comment

Thanks, vipa! And so right, it's Sunday, not Saturday. I think I will go over anyway on Wednesday, just to be sure, because I read this very lengthy thread yesterday, which I'd somehow missed when it was posted. People were really talking about it in great detail and posting and posting again with much enthusiasm. Someone gave me a free admission a few months back that lasts until May, so I guess I can just go in and ask for a ticket at the film desk with it. I don't mind that it's three hours, but that does mean I probably won't be roaming around the Museum on the same day.

Link to comment
from Miliosr:
2) For all that Madam LeFevre went on and on about maintaining the high classical standards of the troupe, you would never know it was a classical troupe based on the works shown on-stage. If you didn't know it was the Paris Opera Ballet heading in, you could have easily thought it was Pina Bausch's company you were watching.

You might be interested to see the DVD, "Dancer's Dream," primarily about Elizabeth Platel dancing (and speaking about) Aurora in Nureyev's "Sleeping Beauty." Mme LeFevre says that although POB is a classical company, up to that point (at least in the 20th Century) their repertoire was primarily NOT classical ballets. She talked about how R. Nureyev changed that, setting ballets he learned at the Kirov.

Interesting.

It's just so odd. Knowing what we know about the school and knowing what we know about the company from La Danse (and photo books like In the Company of Stars and Nicolas Le Riche's book), it seems like there is a huge divide between schooling and repertory. BUT, maybe the idea is that the training at the school be of such a high quality that the students can then dance the hell out of anything when they make it into the company??? (I'm asking in all seriousness.)

Link to comment
You might be interested to see the DVD, "Dancer's Dream," primarily about Elizabeth Platel dancing (and speaking about) Aurora in Nureyev's "Sleeping Beauty." Mme LeFevre says that although POB is a classical company, up to that point (at least in the 20th Century) their repertoire was primarily NOT classical ballets. She talked about how R. Nureyev changed that, setting ballets he learned at the Kirov.

I wonder what she meant by "not classical ballets". Surely not "modern dance works", actually...

It is true that some of the Petipa classics were included rather "late" in the POB's repertory: the full version of "Swan Lake" in 1960 (Bourmeister's production), the full version of "The Sleeping Beauty" in 1974 (Alicia Alonso's production), the full version of "Don Quixote" in 1981 (Nureyev's version- but then, the director was Rosella Hightower), the full version of "The Nutracker" in 1982 (Rosella Hightower's production), the full version of "La Bayadère" in 1992 (Nureuev's production, he had already staged the Third act for the POB in 1974).

But "classical ballet" doesn't mean only Petipa... Some works like "Coppélia" and "Giselle" had been in the repertory for decades, and also there were a lot of works by Lifar. Also Lacotte had staged his reconstruction of "La Sylphide" in 1972.

Ivor Guest's "Le ballet de Paris" includes in its first edition (1976) a list of the most often performed works of the POB's repertory (until June 30, 1976). The top 15 includes:

1) "Coppélia" (741 performances between 1870 and 1976)

2) "Gardel's "Psyché" (564 performances between 1790 and 1829- wow !)

3) "Giselle" (465 performances between 1841 and 1868, and between 1924 and 1976)

4) Gardel's "Télémaque" (465 performances between 1790 and 1826- wow !)

5) Lifar's "Suite en blanc" (369 performances between 1943 and 1970)

6) Clustine's "Suite de danses" (336 performances between 1913 and 1974)

7) Staats's "Soir de fête" (303 performances between 1925 and 1974)

8) Gardel's "La dansomanie" (244 performances between 1800 and 1826)

9) Balanchine's "Palais de Cristal" (231 performances between 1947 and 1973)

10) Mérante's "Les deux pigeons" (196 performances between 1886 and 1949)

11) Milon's "Nina" (192 performances between 1813 and 1840)

12) Gardel's "Le jugement de Pâris" (189 performances between 1793 and 1825)

13) "Le spectre de la rose" (187 performances between 1931 and 1957)

14) Hansen's "La maladetta" (176 performances between 1893 and 1927)

15) Lifar's "Les mirages" (176 performances between 1947 and 1970)

Not exactly a modern dance company :wink:

Actually, before Nureyev became director, there had been a few modern dance works in the repertory (e.g. "experiments" by Michel Descombey in the 1960s), but there generally were short-lived...

Well, perhaps part of the confusion is that the expressions "classical ballet" and "neo-classical ballet" are not very precise... And for example, in France, Mats Ek often is called "neo-classical", while his choreographic style has very little to do with ballet.

And I have yet to find any logic between what Ms Lefèvre says and what she actually does :wink:

Edited to add: for information, here are the figures from the second edition Guest's book (list done until Dec 31st, 1999, the ballets with a * are new in the top 15):

1) Coppélia (826)

2) Giselle (681)

3) Psyché

4) Télémaque

5) Suite en blanc (375- so a grand total of 6 performances in 23 years !!! :wallbash: )

6) Suite de danses

* 7) La Sylphide (324)

8) Soir de Fête (269- not coherent with the previous figure)

* 9) Swan Lake (256)

* 10) Etudes (253)

11) La dansomanie

12) Palais de Cristal (244)

13) Le Spectre de la Rose (212)

14) Les deux pigeons (196)

15) Les mirages (192)

Link to comment

This was marvelous, but I missed about the first 20 minutes of it, was that where there's discussion of Nureyev? I may get a chance to look back through the thread, where people are talking about him, but I kept thinking it was going to come up and didn't.

Will maybe have more to say later, love Aurelie, Marie-Agnes of fouette perfection (she's the one, isn't she?), Mathieu, and all the rest. Ms. LeFevre marvelous--I don't have an educated understanding of what some may find as her flaws as artistic director, but she comes across her as totally competent, exemplary and always warm and firm at the same time. Some of the dancing was just stupendous. I adore this company, and that they never come to New York just seems a shame. There's not a single company I'd rather see live.

Link to comment
This was marvelous, but I missed about the first 20 minutes of it, was that where there's discussion of Nureyev? I may get a chance to look back through the thread, where people are talking about him, but I kept thinking it was going to come up and didn't.

Will maybe have more to say later, love Aurelie, Marie-Agnes of fouette perfection (she's the one, isn't she?), Mathieu, and all the rest. Ms. LeFevre marvelous--I don't have an educated understanding of what some may find as her flaws as artistic director, but she comes across her as totally competent, exemplary and always warm and firm at the same time. Some of the dancing was just stupendous. I adore this company, and that they never come to New York just seems a shame. There's not a single company I'd rather see live.

Glad you enjoyed it. I too would love to see this company live. To the best of my recollection there was no discussion of Nureyev. The first 20 minutes were views indoors and out of the Opera House and rehearsals.

Link to comment
There's not a single company I'd rather see live.
I have to agree. :) What is it about this company? They perform with an intensity, concentration and sense of style that makes the dances seem almost like a form of liturgy. No one's mise en scene is more striking, not only in divd (where such things can be contrived nowadays) but especially on stage.

As to Nureyev, his revisions of the classics remain POB's best-sellers at the box office. (Tix for Bayadere in May disappeared from internet sale very quickly. :blush: ) Perhaps the absence of reference to Nureyev in the documentary had to do with the fact that they were not doing Nureyev's work at the time Wiseman visited.

Link to comment
To be fair, he also said that he felt that captions would spoil the aesthetic effect of the film

I think he was right to never use captions, because this made it a real film, which was his interest. he wasn't doing just a PBS documentary. Some of us knew who some of the dancers were, etc, but not all, and if we didn't, we could find out easily enough (here, if nowhere else) who they were. It was very seamless that way, and I thought it brought POB to life as a film, but still let you see what POB was as a very real company. If anything, not putting the captions kept the 'magic' in a way that captions might have, if not destroyed, at least interrupted. It was wonderful to see Marie-Agnies come in with the fouilletes, and even 'in family', they couldn't keep from saying 'elle est incroyable', since they had certainly seen it before, and something that good just doesn't get old. She didn't even seem to have to pay much attention to them, much like the male dancer a few minutes later in the same segment, to which the narration added 'indecently easy'.

Link to comment
Contrary to the review, I didn’t think Lefevre was so manipulative, but rather right… rather very right… she seemed to be most concerned with keeping the quality of the POB up very high, but still going forward, not becoming a museum, while acknowledging that she still needed to work within the bureaucracy of the opera … It was fascinating watching her explaining to the guest choreographer (who was that? I hope the DVD has an ID option!) that he couldn’t just watch some company classes and ask for dancers by name… but he could ask for a type of dancer and she’d give him a few to try out…

Someone felt the rehearsal masters were being mean… I didn’t, I thought they were doing their job and skillfully. It was fascinating to see how they were trying to carve even more out of a beautiful dancer’s interpretation

[...]

Interesting at how Le Fevre is trying hard to push the modern… Confounded that the students were not availing themselves of the modern technique classes offered which would help them with just the repertoire they are complaining was difficult for them to take on… I see she took courses from Merce, Taylor, Nikolais. She has choreographed before but doesn’t now?? I couldn’t find a Wikipedia page on her, surprisingly.

Agreed, all of it, I thought LeFevre had incredible breadth of vision, extremely intelligent.

Link to comment
What is it about this company? They perform with an intensity, concentration and sense of style that makes the dances seem almost like a form of liturgy. No one's mise en scene is more striking, not only in divd (where such things can be contrived nowadays) but especially on stage.

I have little to base this on except a sensation I do get from this company at this point in time, and this company alone. I noticed it on DVD of Paquita, Don Q, and the clip of 'Wuthering Heights' especially convinced me that they were close to being on something of a cutting edge, with dynamism closer to what NYCB had in the 70s and 80s. The mistakes like 'Caligula' may not really be mistakes, maybe even if they are bad, they are worthwhile experiments. I don't know, now that I've seen the movie I'm more than ever convinced of their magnetism. You can't even imagine having such odd phenomena as has the traditionally most imperious company, the Kirov, in all this business of Somova (I liked her in 'Ballet Imperial', but I don't think that's typical, and the nonsense that we see on the clips does seem more often the case, down to those absurd non-balances in the SB clip), can you? It doesn't seem imaginable after that film that anyone like Somova would be able to enter into proceedings so well-organized that it doesn't hurt the art, and even keeps them from having to resort to gimmicks. You're not yet getting 'the new Balanchine' at the POB, but I'd wager they'll be the one to find what and who could be most truly pioneering in ballet more likely than any company in the U.S. They also have dancers as brilliant as NYCB had in the Golden Age as well, plus better male dancers; they're not modelling themselves on anyone else, I don't think, and are fully confident that they really are all those things Mme. Le Fevre told them to 'keep on with' in her marvelous pep talk (I never heard such a smart pep talk: she said their continued striving for excellence AS BEING the Paris Opera Ballet would elicit the money, pensions, etc., not quite that vulgarly, of course, but oh, was that ever clever the way she streamlined the quality of artisty and the finances of the individual dancers.)

Mel once mentioned that it was only NYCB and POB schools that have this 'secrecy' around certain traditions, I don't know quite what he meant specifically, and with secrets, one may not get to know more. But these near-religious schools may have something in common, I hope he or someone else might fill this in. I think there has been much discussion of the Royal Ballet School, but I haven't heard much about it, and somehow haven't had much exposure to the RB in the last 20 years, except for the famous dvd's which I've watched: None of these impressed me in the way that the POB dvd's did (even granting that I don't care for Ms. Letestu's 'Diamonds' at all, I imagine some of the others can do it quite pristinely from what I saw in the film.)

I'd like to hear more about the 'secrets known only to the inner sanctum' even though asking for secrets seems a contradiction in terms. But every time I see POB, I get a sensation of aliveness that I don't get from any of the other great companies to quite this degree. They seem focussed as a whole company, the way the Kirov sometimes does as in the dvd of SB with Lezhnina, but POB always seems that way. Nothing seems to be missing, but I clearly may be imagining some of this, because even if I don't always care for Macaulay, he knows and I don't from ballet. I'm not sure whether that many BTers are that crazy about POB, at least to the degree bart and I are talking about. I probably am saying that, in one of those polls I believe Alexandra put up, if I had to choose the 'greatest company in the world', I would choose this one. The fact that they are so precise that the two girls in 'Paquite' (I think) are described as 'they've done this so many times you just have to plug them in' doesn't bother me in the least. I just couldn't see much of any 'mess' anywhere.

Another way of putting this 'sensation' I uniquely now get from POB is that they seem to embody a kind of 'center of the City of Paris' which I felt NYCB used to do for New York. I do not feel that NYCB does this in any way in its current incarnation, despite magnificent dancing that one can clearly obviously sitll see. But a ballet company that seems the 'most central place in a metropolis' or maybe 'the hottest place in a metropolis' is, I think, what I think 'it is about this company', that bart asks about. In the 80s, I still felt NYCB was the most perfect metropolitan experience one could have in Manhattan, and POB is now able to embody this IMO, although for Paris.

Link to comment

I don't know if I'd call SAB's and POB's policy toward training "secrecy", but both places seem to have a tradition of an unwritten central organizing technical vocabulary (curriculum) with a detailed course content (syllabus) for each level of achievement. Systems like RAD and its immediate ancestor, Cecchetti, have that, but the SAB and POB's educational planning and execution seems to take place face-to-face, day-by-day, and with very little written down. France does have a National Conservatory Standard written down in some detail, which is said to echo the Opéra's methods fairly accurately, but who can say? Vaganova doesn't have any detailed writings by Madame, or much of any other source as a universal standard. Individial authors have published, but we are left to deduce the centrality of Vaganova's teachings pretty much on our own. Principles of Classical Ballet Technique is a pretty slim volume to act as a curriculum. And now in the US, ABT is setting out to establish a single common referent technique for teachers who have worked in what I call "International Eclectic" for the purpose of standardizing and improving the diverse languages of classical ballet for the United States. Good luck, says I, but the "free speech" tradition will prove difficult to buck.

Link to comment

Interesting turn of conversation! One distinction that jumps up fast is the practice of training and certifying teachers. A big chunk of the RAD's work (and the ISTD as well) is training and certifying teachers in their curriculum, who then can go out and hang up their own shingle, claiming the relationship to the organization and its practices -- not just to the RB School. I don't know nearly enough about teaching in France to know if there's a similar practice. While I know many teachers who are proud to include experience at SAB on their resume, they are not "certified" to teach a specific curriculum outside that institution.

Under Francia Russell, and now continuing under Peter Boal, Pacific Northwest Ballet School worked hard to develop a curriculum that starts with pre-ballet and continues up into the professional level classes. I know there's a certain amount of flexibility for individual teachers on daily issues, but they have a consistent and detailed path to follow. They offer courses for teachers in the summers, but don't imply that people who've taken them are in any way certified or official, though -- it's not at that point.

Link to comment

Many people are surprised to learn that the Royal Ballet School is not chiefly an RAD school. To be sure, they enter many candidates at every level of RAD, and many students from RAD schools are accepted by RBS, but they are not interchangeable entities. RBS has its own independent curriculum and syllabi.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...