Mary

Super news.

Hirano seems to have been around doing a great job for ages- always rock solid- I really liked him in Monotones and he was an excellent Lover in Two Pigeons-two pretty contrasting roles but he convinced in both and he has a lovely elegant line.

I feel he is a dancer who might yet surprise us with some really marvellous work.

...and Akane Takada was pretty much the best Two Pigeons dancer wasn't she?

I entirely agree mshovelt. I was skipping down Floral st so it's amazing we didn't bump into each other.

I thought Cuthbertson- whose perfomance I first saw in 2014 has really rounded out the role and got better and better at portraying the extremes of emotion, the contrasts in each Act. I have seen other Leontes but Watson will always be there behind this role. It was almost painful to watch last night- the inner writhings made manifest.

Mc Rae was on scinitillating form and I felt all the excitement of young love between him and a radiant Sarah Lamb.

I am one of those who love Act 2 and with Gary Avis stamping and swirling through it, it was elating last night

I am sorry to think  I won't see this again for some time.

I think it is a classic. Especially after seeing Frankenstein recently,  I really felt the power of the narrative ( granted this is slowed down in Act 2 ) - the special effects kept in their place- they just provide short moments of highlighting as they should. The focus on what matters is kept before us. The opportunities for dance acting so rich. The interesting varied music that works to help tell the story and heighten the emotions at the right moments..

"the sheer beauty of simple movement"  (FLOSS, post 37 above).

That's what, in the present day, I see in Vadim Muntagirov over more strenuous technicians. 

Absolutely agree.

In Fille, and in Giselle...more to come....

I honestly don't think anyone will care what we say.

Did that ever stop us? :-)

I think it's a reasonable discussion topic, isn't it? -whether anyone actively involved is listening - or not, as perhaps seems more likely.

As past choreogprahers have added their own interpolations to SL I imagine Scarlett would do the same, whilst keeping the overall framewrok of one of the RB texts. Maybe that would not be a bad thing?

I agree I hope very much he avoids any over 'psychologised' versions. This always seems to reduce the power of the ballet. It needs no over- interpretation.

I am looking forward to the naked bike ride (highlighting the problems of oil dependency and car pollution as well as the joys of cycling) on my way to ROH but the problem is where to pin my ballet forum badge...

Superb photos (esp of Gary Avis, and Muntagirov/Hayward-that is beautiful) once again sent me to the box office.

The costumes for McGregor look strange- what is the significance of the huge baggy trousers and tunics  attire?

Were you waited on by very charming young men in tail coats?

Makes it worth every penny..

:-)

Yes; he's danced Bratfish 

Yes, he was a natural!

Yes it is expensive but is it that different to West End theatre prices?

I haven't seen it but it sounds to me that Scarlett has chosen to make the central relationship the one between Victor and Elizabeth rather than the one between Victor and the Creature which distorts the story and robs it of much of its psychological drama. Without this, the story becomes a pedestrian horror story. It would be interesting to know why Scarlett took this approach. It could of course be that it arose out of the need / desire to provide a lead role for a senior ballerina.

Yes, I have seen it and thought that was the central weakness.

The problem is that there isn't really a story attached to this relationship- it is just a situation, (childhood sweethearts..grow up..she is keener than he is to marry...) which does not provide enough drama for the time allotted to it, wonderful as the dancers were, and lyrical as were their pas de deuxs......in my opinion.

I have yet to see Scarlett write a really interesting female role-the female characters are victims who get mauled and killed in unpleasant ways, or saints like Elizabeth  (who also gets killed of course).  I acknowledge that I might have missed it, as I am not sure I have seen all his work.

This is a contrast to Wheeldon who has managed to create some marvellous female roles, e.g. in Winter's Tale.

So I feel Scarlett is rather old-fashioned in this very unfortunate respect. It is an influence of Macmillan perhaps, but in Macmillan I feel there is enough complexity of character at times, to somehow make these scenarios of women being abused and killed ( as in Manon and Mayerling) less one-dimensional.

Rather shocking that there has not been a ballet choreographed by a woman on the ROH main stage since 1999. Is that really true?

I can believe it.  Good luck to her.

I hope the dvd is the first cast because McRae's performance  deserves to be preserved. It is the one thing that has stayed with me from seeing the ballet last week. A very haunting, and in fact tragic performance. As happens so often, the applause burst out before the very end, which was a great shame-  I did want to savour his walk into the flames: it was a brilliant moment.

Looks really good, plotting a trip now!

(Looks so much better than really woeful recent Radio 4 dramatic version)

 

 

I agree with you that it's depressing how many people, rather than trying to understand the work, dismiss it as 'meaningless, pretentious rubbish' - although I do concede that McG does himself no favours in this regard with the programme notes 

Well, are you sure you know that they have not tried to understand it? Most of the comments are from people who have been to several of his works after all.

...and I don't think people were saying it is 'rubbish'- they were possibly saying the notes were rubbish.

Frankenstein I think tries hard to be all things to all people: to be popular, but also appeal to more traditional viewers, to use the classical idiom, but to have some more modern subject matter. I am not sure it entirely succeeds but it's a good and worthwhile attempt.  It is certainly a serious work, it has artistic purpose; whether you like it is another matter.

But it also has an idea.

Its theme, of human beings destroyed by their own inventions, is probably more topical than ever. I rather wish the piece had spent more time developing this idea through the relationship of Victor and Creature, and much less on his relationship with Elizabeth- as others have said.

How did she handle the narrative Janet? Presumably focused on only some episodes/themes-I am especially interested after all the discussion around Frankenstein.

Would love to go but might not make it.

Yes, I agree, but, this was a major 3 act work for the company and the Opera House- would a chamber piece have been appropriate? It seems to be there is a lot of pressure to produce something spectacular.

I would agree Jenny, very much a curate's egg of a ballet and the opportunities to show emoitons so often not exploited to the full, or overwhelmed by the effects etc.

I've just seen the live screening.

What splendid performances and acting all round, especially from Bonelli whose elegant athleticism was displayed to great effect, and McRae whose sinister yet pitiful creature was really frightening. Campbell did a wonderful comic turn-what a delight he is- (the choreography strangely morphing into Mercutio complete with sword flourishes and drum rolls) but it seemed out of place in the ballet.  Morera, one of my favourite dancers,  seemed under-used to me- such a dull role for her - 'a really nice lady...who loves the  hero..' really, there is not much for her -such a powerful dancer and actor- to do with this. The whole cast acted their socks off, and again I was very taken with Gartside's acting and the regal presence of Elizabeth McGorian lent considerable tone. But ....

But so much was so predictable. As others have said there are many,many borrowings all the way through, which are hard not to notice, and this was distracting.

I was very impressed by the overll achievement, and the sets were wonderful. But it was somehow exhausting. Such forceful, unsubtle melodrama, going on so long,  was rather like being repeatedly slapped in  the face.

I detested the silly  lab scenes, (which, in technicolour close-up made the audience giggle as Victor  rummaged in a goodie bag and pulled out odd  limbs)-it  was just absurd as well as gruesome; and the hanging-so unnecessary, can we not use our imagination?

In a way this is perhaps the problem with the Creature:  too much make- up gets in the way, when in fact it should be down to the dance and the dancer to create  a creature for us, rather than this horrible prosthetic, which must be difficult for the dancers to have to act through.

Also, the  tavern scene with prostitutes in, of course, curly red wigs, lifting their skirts-please. We've seen it all before.

But I thought there were some very good pas de deux, especially in Act 3, between Victor and the creature, when the ballet started to really take fire- but a bit late for me.

I think this kind of male pas de deux is a very good area for Scarlett to explore, so much scope to do new things here. Bonelli and McRae were marvellous together. I would like to see this again without the make-up.

Maybe this will be a popular hit which is good perhaps. But it could be better as many others have said.

Glue??? it must be nasty peeling them off afterwards, ouch!

Sorry, this learned debate about choreographic style seems to have descended to a somewhat lower plane :-)

Yes-those very unattractive white vests and knickers-one of the worst ballet costumes ever seen, like something from Steptoe and Son.

Coming back to David's point about Wheeldon, there was a whole discussion in the elevator about whether the Balletboyz should be called co-choreographer, but Wheeldon said it just couldn't be done or it wouldn't be right.

 

I think the point of having 'created a role' is the same for a lot of ballets and the dancers will always be linked to the role, even with names in ballets such as 'in the middle somewhat elevated' and I believe that Wayne always uses the original names for the roles in the ballets when talking to successive dancers.

 

The fact that he always talks about collaboration, and that he always gives credit is his strength... Like a manager that always praises his people. Not many choreographers are like that...

One of the reasons I am not a great admirer of his work is that it seems to me the different roles are insufficiently differentiated. The  movement is so similar. This applies within and across the pieces.

 I can't quite see  any particular dancer's stamp on any one of his roles ( with the exception of Woolf Works perhaps).  I feel that his style tends in fact to obliterate individuality.

Whereas, for example one can see so very clearly the characteristics of some of the same dancers, such as McRae, Watson,  in Wheeldon's work.

Maybe we should let this one drop now?

I rather agree- but -if it is really so - find it strange that any company choreographer -as opposed to an external one- should find it hard to get more than one cast ' up to speed'. If it is so, one might ask, is that the fault of the dancers, or the dance?

Does this happen at BRB?

Oh you must see Muntagirov in Fille!

However, I too want to go to every night so share the dilemma really. All the casts look good.

I'm going to B&B and Meistersinger , with the best seat in the house and a picnic for the interval...at my local Picturehouse...quite a bargain, relatively speaking...

Wish they were screening MND.

According to the Evening Standard, they will not appear live; thst's where the technology comes into play; their performance was filmed in a restaurant in Willesden.

The kind of glamour we ordinary folk can only dream of :-)