Jump to content

The Royal Ballet: Anastasia, October 2016


Recommended Posts

Thought that Osipova was resplendent in Act III - which will always be 'the ballet ANASTASIA for me'.  Still ... even saying THAT ... I reflected as I walked down the stairs from the Amphi that the piece - even now - is still owned in my mind by its creator - by Lynn Seymour.  She was so full on in her emotional distress.  The last time I saw her do it was in 1989 in NYC with LFB as it then was ... They did it on a triple bill with Land and Etudes.  You can see a brief NYT interview with Ms. Seymour where she reflects on the work's construction here.  Such a shame that she wasn't employed to coach the RB's current round ... especially with the latter changes she mentions. I have a feeling she and Osipova would have got on like a house on fire. Perhaps she was asked and just couldn't do it.  

 

Was happily distracted in the other two 'pageant' acts by the entrancing Stix-Brunnell - always such a telling spirit - and Sambe - who is ever expanding as simply the joy of dance personified.  I confess my heart breaks in Act II ... not because of the act itself mind ...  on its own score I can't get all that fussed I fear ... but simply because that music FOR ME will always belong to Balanchine.  That said I'd happily be persuaded otherwise ... but MacMillian just doesn't do enough to score on that particular wicket and Balanchine was, after all, the one to introduce the music to ME ... and FOR ME he did make it sing ... more perhaps than it might otherwise have done on its lonesome.  That said i did see Farrell/Martins dance Diamonds twelve times .. Indeed fell in love with it to the extent that it still holds what I call my Desert Island PDD. ... I don't think I could ever do that with what passes for a PDD in Anastasia's Act II.  It looked - at least in the talented hands of those participants who forged it last night - to be dangerous ... Indeed it pained me to watch Bonelli grimace on several occasions knowing his own considerable history with injury.  But then Sibley/Dowell always were magicians ... I adored them both ... and I'm sure their magic was - as ever - radiantly unique.  Dowell was unquestionably one of this world's GREAT partners.  (He could even keep Makarova ON the music and that often took concerted wizardry!)  (Is there a film of Sibley/Dowell doing that Act II Pas?  If so I would love to see it.)

Edited by Bruce Wall
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 317
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It is not as if the RB does not have a wide repertory of great ballets to revive but you never know what the real cost of staging MacMillan's major works is. For all I know Lady M insists on certain ballets being given an occasional airing as part of the price of performing the "big three".Perhaps we should be grateful that it is Anastasia which is being revived rather than the full length Isadora or some of his "challenging" works such as Rituals and Playground, after all Anastasia can be made to work with the right cast.

 

When it comes to staging new works I wonder whether our expectations of new works are set unrealistically high.Perhaps the success of Alice and Winter's Tale is a reasonable return for the number of new ballets which the company has commissioned in recent years. It is certainly better than the haul the previous twenty or thirty years produced. Having said that I really think that in order to reduce the number of "Turkeys" that are staged the artistic director should get more involved in the development and oversight of new works in one way or another.Even if it is not thought to be part of the company's tradition to do.this the sums of money required to create a new ballet suggest that oversight is something of a necessity.Oversight might not entirely eliminate bad ballets but it might encourage coherent story telling and reduce the number of worthy boring ballets that are staged.

 

i wonder why it is that the ability to create choreography rarely seems to be accompanied by an equal facility for vivid story telling or theatrical flair Is the dearth of effective new narrative ballets connected to the initial recruitment policies of ballet schools, lack of sufficiently wide theatrical experience,commissioning policies,fashion or. something else?  

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I commented on my impressions of the ballet briefly last night, I didn't say anything about the dancers, except to say that they made a valiant effort to engage my interest.  Briefly:  it was lovely to get a first view of Yasmine Naghdi and Beatriz Stix-Brunell as First Soloists, although I wish they'd had more to do here as two sisters.  Olivia Cowley, as the fourth sister, proved once again that she is a prime candidate for promotion.  I enjoyed Nunez' performance in the pdd more than other people here seem to have, but I think with a partner who was on form she would have looked much better.  Sadly, Bonelli just wasn't up to it last night, and let's hope he improves with future performances....but he needs to hurry as there aren't many.  I certainly hope that he has found his form by November 2nd when this gets broadcast worldwide.  

 

Ed Watson was on great form, and is a good match for Osipova.  What a superlative Act 3 she danced;  she really conveyed the darkness, the terror and the chaos of what was Anna's disturbed mind.  I also saw Seymour do this a couple of times, and whilst I can't imagine her performance ever being bettered, this one came very close.  

 

Thiago Soares had a dark, brooding presence as Rasputin, but didn't have an awful lot to do either.  He was a sort of Jesus figure,  benign more than malign.  I kept thinking 'Ra Ra Rasputin, lover of the Russian queen'...but although this was only vaguely hinted at, the incredible and menacing power (sexual or otherwise) that he held over the Tsarina in real life just wasn't conveyed in the ballet.

 

I had a brief word with Sergei Polunin who was there, and when I said I would love it if he came back to dance at the ROH, he gave me a big smile and a wink.  He also told me that 'Dancer' will go on general release here in February.  Fingers crossed.   

 

Back to Anastasia....a huge bravo to Osipova, who came of age last night with such a deep, mesmerising, thoughtful, emotional and dramatic performance.  

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a terrible evening.  Acts 1 and 2 were so appallingly vacuous (banal, disjointed choreography given to sub-Downton Abbey fancy dress cardboard characters with a little bit of on-the-cheap Les Miserables flag-waving thrown in) that by the time the second interval arrived I was feeling so resentful that if I hadn't been meeting someone for dinner afterwards I would have left.

 

Osipova really did her best and had some great moments, but even she couldn't save Act 3, which I had been desperately hoping would be the best part.  

 

Why, when this has been so widely touted, including in the programme, as an expressionist ballet, do British choreographers always fall back on realism?  Even without the first two Acts, having seen the film (and knowing the story anyway), we know what "Anastasia's" memories are about. Why, then, whenever Osipova had built up a moment of genuine dramatic tension was it interrupted by hordes of prancing nurses, soldiers, sisters or visitors?  Why not let her movements show us her mental state? Why not trust us to see the history in our own minds so that we can focus on an uninterrupted emotional trajectory through the dance?  Why does it even matter if we know what she is remembering provided the dancer is able to convey the intensity of her emotions? This need to "act out the story" was the main flaw in Frankenstein - stolid realism seems to be a British disease.

 

And as for the ending, I literally could not believe that the 'climax' was to be a mechanical bed trundling round and round.  I have never felt more like storming to the box office and demanding my money back.

 

Kevin O'Hare's programming leaves much to be desired. Enough of these awful, lazy, dated revivals.  A taxpayer funded institution shouldn't be blackmailed into staging amateurish tosh like this or the Invitation.  

Edited by Lindsay
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Why, when this has been so widely touted, including in the programme, as an expressionist ballet, do British choreographers always fall back on realism?  Even without the first two Acts, having seen the film (and knowing the story anyway), we know what "Anastasia's" memories are about. Why, then, whenever Osipova had built up a moment of genuine dramatic tension was it interrupted by hordes of prancing nurses, soldiers, sisters or visitors?  Why not let her movements show us her mental state? Why not trust us to see the history in our own minds so that we can focus on an interrupted emotional trajectory through the dance?  Why does it even matter if we know what she is remembering provided the dancer is able to convey the intensity of her emotions? This need to "act out the story" was the main flaw in Frankenstein - stolid realism seems to be a British disease.

 

 

 

Lindsay, did you see Jose Limon's beautifully distilled version of Shakespeare's Othello called THE MOOR'S PAVANE as wonderfully rendered by BRB (especially the cast with that brilliant British artist Brandon Lawrence) recently?  It would have provided a well deserved respite to that which you aptly acknowledge above.  I so hope you did.  You would have loved it i think.  

 

Oh, and I would think Obsidian Tear might go down well with the one act Anastasia - with something light and certainly dance filled - say, an act of Ballo - pause - Symphonic Variations [or an act of Les Rendezvous] - to equal out the balance.  

Edited by Bruce Wall
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a terrible evening.  Acts 1 and 2 were so appallingly vacuous (banal, disjointed choreography given to sub-Downton Abbey fancy dress cardboard characters with a little bit of on-the-cheap Les Miserables flag-waving thrown in) that by the time the second interval arrived I was feeling so resentful that if I hadn't been meeting someone for dinner afterwards I would have left.

 

Osipova really did her best and had some great moments, but even she couldn't save Act 3, which I had been desperately hoping would be the best part.  

 

Why, when this has been so widely touted, including in the programme, as an expressionist ballet, do British choreographers always fall back on realism?  Even without the first two Acts, having seen the film (and knowing the story anyway), we know what "Anastasia's" memories are about. Why, then, whenever Osipova had built up a moment of genuine dramatic tension was it interrupted by hordes of prancing nurses, soldiers, sisters or visitors?  Why not let her movements show us her mental state? Why not trust us to see the history in our own minds so that we can focus on an interrupted emotional trajectory through the dance?  Why does it even matter if we know what she is remembering provided the dancer is able to convey the intensity of her emotions? This need to "act out the story" was the main flaw in Frankenstein - stolid realism seems to be a British disease.

 

And as for the ending, I literally could not believe that the 'climax' was to be a mechanical bed trundling round and round.  I have never felt more like storming to the box office and demanding my money back.

 

Kevin O'Hare's programming leaves much to be desired. Enough of these awful, lazy, dated revivals.  A taxpayer funded institution shouldn't be blackmailed into staging amateurish tosh like this or the Invitation.  

 

WOW, Lindsay, I take it you didn't like it then!!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see the recent BRB performance Bruce but am familiar with Limon's ballet, and yes I agree.  His dancers representing archetypes/ideas conveyed the essence of Othello's tragedy so much more clearly than these named historical puppets conveyed the Romanov/Anna Anderson's tragedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Rasputin, the Culture mag from Sunday Times 23/10 carried a review of what sounds like an interesting new biography of Gregory Yefimovitch Rasputin, showing him in a rather different light to the cliché mad monk image we think we know.

Presuming I am allowed to mention it here, the book's title is Rasputin, Faith, Power and the Twilight of the Romanovs and the author is Douglas Smith. Published by MacMillan!

Meant to ask, one of the photos shows Marianela Nunez in a tutu. This looks incongruous in amongst the other costumes, or do you have to be there to appreciate the relevance? Am undecided about the cinema now, how do people think it will come across on the big screen?

Edited by Jacqueline
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point about Anna Anderson apparently not speaking Russian was maybe a bit of a red herring anyway. According to her, the language reminded her of the horrors she claimed to have experienced and although she refused to speak it, it's my understanding that she understood it and responded - in Russian - without thinking to questions put to her in Russian. Plus the nobility's day to day language was French rather than Russian as it was considered a much more noble language.

 

The story has always intrigued me because there were many friends and close confidantes of the imperial family who were convinced that Anna was Anastasia because of her mannerisms and courtly manners, her laugh, knowledge of her German uncle's highly confidential visit to the Russian court at the height of the war - all things which it seems very odd for a Polish factory worker to have faked by whatever means. Whereas DNA evidence coming to light only after Anna Anderson's death is perhaps easier to fake.

 

I would so love to have seen Lynn Seymour as Anastasia! And I can't wait to watch the cinema screening.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the performance last night, and I was really unimpressed. Acts one and two, while pretty, were very dull. Act three was much more interesting but I didn't enjoy myself at all. I especially didn't appreciate the ten minutes where the characters were watching a video. I couldn't see the screen as I was in the slips so I was just watching the back of Osipova's head for a while. The rest of act three had a lot of characters standing still and staring at each other, and way too many random character appearances (I kind of wanted to yell, "we get it!") Like a school play where everyone needs a turn onstage. And everything before act three felt a little wooden and stilted, like a bad rehearsal.

Less staring and messing around with props and more dancing would have improved it. Marianela Nunez was a great breath of fresh air in act two and Osipova, when she actually got to dance, was of course wonderful. She danced some really electrifying parts near the end.

Edited by Tatiana
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another point. A previous poster asked if it was suitable for a 10yr old to watch.

I'd say no. There are several historic cinematic sequences of Russians being shot at close range and falling dead into open pits.

Maybe that's ok for children these days to watch, I don't know?

 There was a very well behaved toddler in the row below me who seemed to enjoy it immensely (he had a little tuxedo on and everything!) but we couldn't see the video from where we sat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the performance last night, and I was really unimpressed. Acts one and two, while pretty, were very dull. Act three was much more interesting but I didn't enjoy myself at all. I especially didn't appreciate the ten minutes where the characters were watching a video. I couldn't see the screen as I was in the slips so I was just watching the back of Osipova's head for a while. The rest of act three had a lot of characters standing still and staring at each other, and way too many random character appearances (I kind of wanted to yell, "we get it!") Like a school play where everyone needs a turn onstage. And everything before act three felt a little wooden and stilted, like a bad rehearsal.

Less staring and messing around with props and more dancing would have improved it. Marianela Nunez was a great breath of fresh air in act two and Osipova, when she actually got to dance, was of course wonderful. She danced some really electrifying parts near the end.

 

Where in the Slips were you, Tatiana? I've got tickets for the Upper Slips on Wednesday, so I'm nervous now that I'll miss an important part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@VickyPage - I was in Upper Slips Right, about halfway down the row. I'd say the only part you'll miss is the video, but it's pretty obvious what they're showing her and what it's for, so don't worry too much :)

 

I think I'm on the left in AA 4 or 5, so that shouldn't be too bad. Thanks for the reassurance! I didn't want to miss anything crucial...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a terrible evening.  Acts 1 and 2 were so appallingly vacuous (banal, disjointed choreography given to sub-Downton Abbey fancy dress cardboard characters with a little bit of on-the-cheap Les Miserables flag-waving thrown in) that by the time the second interval arrived I was feeling so resentful that if I hadn't been meeting someone for dinner afterwards I would have left.

 

 

I think that does an injustice to Les Mis... (and I didn't enjoy that that much). I NEVER talk during a ballet (tut, tut, Audience Behaviour thread and all that), but last night there came a point where out of boredom and frustration I couldn't resist turning to my friend and saying (very quietly) 'BRING ON THE REVOLUTION!'. But when it came - ??!! More like Carry on Comrade. There was actually someone at the back gently flapping what looked like a big red flannel, as if he was about to put it on a washing line. I'm afraid I had to laugh (or I would have cried, or booed). Was this really one of the most violent and definitive upheavals of the 20th century?! I really felt quite angry that it was being depicted so crassly. Real people lost their real lives! I know MacMillan can treat serious themes seriously (Gloria being an obvious example in this context) but here it seemed as if he just couldn't be bothered even to try.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish I had been sitting near you bridiem. At several points I really wanted to nudge my neighbour and say "Seriously????? This is a joke right!???"

 

On a more (genuinely) serious note, I was repulsed and concerned by the choreography requiring Rasputin to carry the small boy across the stage, opening and closing the boy's legs in the direction of the audience. I don't know whether it was intended to signal Rasputin's creepiness (I was beyond caring by that point) but I thought it was in the worst possible taste and extremely worrying that the artistic staff and the boy's teachers thought that acceptable. The programme credited RBS students/junior associates. I found this no less concerning than the RBS students who were permitted to be blacked up for one of the Russian company's Bayadere a few years ago. It takes a certain tone deafness to think that these things represent "a good opportunity" for children. I didn't want to focus on this in my initial review but the more I think about it the more it disturbs me...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindsay I was aghast during that moment too. I thought it must have been some kind of artistic expression of what I don't know (and would love to be illumintated). I didn't for one moment consider your point of view on it. Oh dear!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindsay I was aghast during that moment too. I thought it must have been some kind of artistic expression of what I don't know (and would love to be illumintated). I didn't for one moment consider your point of view on it. Oh dear!

 

Funny, I've had a goodly few of 'those' moments with MacMillan.  A goodly few.  For me Judas Tree is RIFE with them - and, quite frankly, - they have always made me feel uncomfortable ... and occasionally even taken me to a place where I felt ill.  Even Mayerling - which I fear I struggle with - and I know so many here hold it up as a masterwork - has this effect.  It's not so much the content - it's the manner in which it is thrust. 

 

I used to take the same bus as MacMillan while he was working with ABT.  It's all so long ago but I do remember we had a goodly number of very pleasant passing chats ... as you do with someone you see often and with whom you share an interest.  Still I fear there was always something at the back of my mind and it was, for me, rooted in his work - and I say that treasuring segments of his early canon.  I had always thought, of course, that this feeling was simply rooted in the back of MY mind.  I used to blame myself.  Indeed I felt guilty.  I remember I would often sheepishly smile to myself while walking away and just dismiss it.  Bless you Mousem40 and Lindsay for granting me permission to think even now that it might - just might - not have been JUST me.  That comes as a great relief.  Bless you.   Yours is a gift.  Promise.  Thank you. 

Edited by Bruce Wall
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say I saw nothing amiss with Rasputin's handling of Alexei at all, I was thinking how brilliant Rory Toms was at this moment, but I'll have a closer look tonight. My most "are you serious" mood came at the end with the moving bed, I kept imagining it would stall and Natalia Osipova would fall off.

 

Reading the programme last night I noticed that the films in the last act are longer than they used to be, there are many interesting articles to read and the only one that is duplicated from the 2004 programme is the one by David Nice on the music. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The critics are in (see Today's Links). They say pretty much what most of us say here: that the first two acts are redundant, or just time-fillers. All of them praise Osipova's performance, and the other dancers (although, bizarrely, Judith Mackrell doesn't seem to know the difference between Elizabeth McGorian and Christina Arestis). The highest ranking is 3 stars, although Graham Watts thinks that this ballet deserves to be put alongside R&J, Manon and Mayerling as a MacMillan masterpiece. His is a lone voice, and mine won't be joining it! Interesting to read the different points of view.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...