bridiem

I've just had a vision of horses instead of swans...

I didn't get it at first either! It's a reference to Hugh Grant in the film Notting Hill, inadvertently posing as a reporter from Horse and Hounds when talking to Julia Roberts, and asking a nonsensical question... (cf why are there so many swans in SL)

Me too. In fact, I've just composed a letter to him requesting that he do just that!! (Flaming cheek, I know.)

Sorry - just realised this has been discussed above. But I hope there IS someone else available in case!

That sounds entirely sensible; but are there no 'covers'?

One of the reviews mentioned (favourably) that it had been cut. (I wondered if I'd blinked and missed it.)

Yes, I've sometimes wondered this (though not in quite these terms!). Perhaps there's a deeper 'night' during which the swan maidens are only swans. And, when Odette turns back into a swan, although she looks the same she dances differently - no human variation, just a kind of trance-like movement off the stage. So the way they look/dress is not the indication of which state they are in. And it may be that they're not necessarily swans ALL night - only when VR chooses to cast his 'night' spell and resume total control over them. Just thinking aloud here...

I was actually really impressed at how polished the performance was, given that it was the première of a huge and complex new production. Of course as it beds in any very minor uncertainties will be ironed out.

I will ensure no opera glasses at the end next time! I did in fact assume that Odette was not simply dead and gone; but we are still left with a grief-stricken Siegfried (who clearly also didn't see Odette behind him!!) and the lovers not united. So there is no resolution of the personal tragedy.

I'd forgotten that bit! It's tremendous - so moving and powerful.

I've posted something to this effect on the ROH website.

I didn't really feel the need for more background than this. History is littered with examples of advisers/courtiers/second-in-commands etc who have plotted to oust their 'boss', especially if they can catch them at a vulnerable moment. And I thought VR was really horrible and frightening, more so than in the previous production. I was looking through my opera glasses at the end so I didn't know there was a projection of Odette!! Must look for it next time.

I think that's because although he professes his love, he doesn't do the 'official' swearing of undying loyalty etc (the arm in the air gesture that seals Odette's fate). A bit like the difference between 'I love you' and 'will you marry me?'.

Yes, that's the saving grace! (Literally.) Poor old Muntagirov. I haven't recovered yet from seeing him cradling his dead Manon. (Or his dead Giselle for that matter.)

I completely agree with this, Sim. I'm happy with the choreography of the new Act 4, and dramatically it all works very well, but the denouement is not cathartic and uplifting and I think that the music dictates that it should be. So I have to push myself to find what should be there by right. Thanks to the magnificent performances and production, I can do that; but I would prefer it to be less effort!

You beat me to it, Lizbie1!! Especially the dresses for Siegfried's sisters in Act 1, but almost all the costumes were SO beautiful.

Absolutely beautiful, and magnificent performances from Muntagirov, Nunez, Gartside, Campbell and every dancer on the stage. Real dramatic coherence in the involvement of Rothbart, who is like a sinister and positively repulsive Rasputin figure - this Swan Lake is as much about the lust for power as the power of love. And the bigger role for Benno (Campbell) worked superbly (and was superbly danced). Hayward and Takada as Siegfried's sisters also feature prominently which works really well. Dazzling designs. Thrilling climax to Act 3, when black swans pour onto the stage. And I really liked Act 4 - the swans were like tears flowing back and forth across the stage. I found the ending more downbeat than that of the previous production (no reunion of Odette and Siegfried after death - Siegfried is left to mourn alone); but evil is still destroyed by the sacrifice of a human life, which is what Swan Lake is about for me. Muntagirov was so brilliant I felt positively sorry for anyone else who has to dance Siegfried! Too tired to write more, but very much looking forward to further performances.

I would personally prefer it if people did not use the word 'gush' when referring to other people's posts. I find it a derogatory way of describing the bubbling enthusiasm many of us cannot stop ourselves from expressing after a performance we have loved. And I don't actually think there are any 'sacred cows' on this forum. There are just a lot of dancers who are greatly loved.

The designs look beautiful!!

Which could mean just about anything!

The trouble is that if I stood up to applaud all the performances that have really thrilled me, I'd be jumping up regularly! And blocking the view for others who aren't necessarily quite so excited... So I leave the rest of the audience to 'decide', and on the rare occasion when a lot of people do stand up, usually towards the end of the applauding, I join in (if I feel the same).

There was some lovely footage in the Macmillan documentary, and it was very nice to hear his voice again. I also found the 'home movies' part very moving - it's so unusual to see him smiling and happy and he clearly adored his wife and daughter. But as a documentary I found it very frustrating. If I didn't already know all about him, I think I would have found it pretty unilluminating (though I hope the dancing itself would have grabbed me). And they kept showing subtitles including essential information about what you were watching, in small letters that were difficult to read and didn't stay up long, and that you had to (try and) read instead of watching the footage itself. Why not have a 'narrator' for the documentary? Leaving 'talking heads' and a few subtitles to tell the story is a very risky strategy, since people may not say anything particularly interesting, and there may be lots of interesting other things that should be said. It strikes me as a rather lazy way of making a programme - as if you don't really want to take editorial/authorial responsibility for it. It was also entirely uncritical, both in the sense that it was only positive and in the sense that there was very little real analysis of what he did and what made his actual choreography so effective. And as Odyssey has said it didn't really cover the range of his talent. (I also thought it dwelt unnecessarily and rather ghoulishly on the manner of his death, which although terribly poignant, and deeply shocking for all concerned, is not really relevant in considering his life and work.) So, frustrating, but also great to see a whole programme about him and the various excerpts from his works. (Bussell's bourrées in Song of the Earth!! Fantastic.) I had a rather similar reaction to the Yanowsky programme. Again, lovely to see a programme devoted to her and the footage of her dancing. But it didn't in the end tell much of a story. The injury aspect (which had been trailed as the theme of the programme) petered out half way through, and since the programme kept mentioning her retirement from the Royal Ballet it was a bit odd that it focussed entirely on a non-RB performance at Sadler's Wells. It just seemed rather confused. And it didn't show enough of her career before this performance, or why she was so special. And again it relied largely on her talking to the camera rather than a more structured, informative approach. I thought she deserved better.

Well if someone didn't like the performance they could just not clap, or if they thought the dancers were really abysmal (which doesn't seem likely) I suppose they could boo. I've occasionally been tempted to boo at the quality of a work, not the quality of any dancers, but I don't think I've ever actually done so since it's really only the dancers who would suffer. The trouble with leaving immediately is that it's discourteous to your fellow audience members. (In fact the dancers probably couldn't see them leaving anyway with the lights still down.)

Well unless the choreography has changed over the years, it's clearly aimed at getting laughs. Someone who is just drunk wouldn't to my mind provide 'levity' - it would just be tedious and inappropriate, especially given that Lescaut is largely an unsympathetic character. And I did usually find this solo tedious and inappropriate, until Hirano danced it. Apart from being funny, you see something of the person under the arrogance for the first time.

And unless he gets a really significant amount of dancing, is it likely that a principal would be cast as Benno?