bridiem

2 minutes ago, zxDaveM said:

 

a handful of White Lodge students chained up inside, electronically spurred on by a device in Lilac's wand...

'Lilac' makes her sound like a dodgy character in a James Bond film. (Especially if she has something hidden in her wand...).  

2 minutes ago, zxDaveM said:

 

funny - we were chatting about this the other day, at interval time. The consensus was that the asterix against a debut performance has long gone. Though I couldn't tell you when they were last there. I think they still appear in casting lists in the Friends 'About the House' magazine - though as I'm not a Friend, I don't see that mag anymore, so they might have gone there as well (at the same time?)

Well nowadays there is no casting in the Friends mag - it comes out nearer the booking dates (and I think then includes début asterisks). In fact I'm just as likely to get first casting info from this Forum as from the ROH.

7 minutes ago, Tony Newcombe said:

I would advise against it. The guests on his show are there to show off his ego. I remember Dennis Hopper being on his show

many years ago and he could not get a word in at all, More recently a British star in another field altogether gave as good as she got

from him. Most of that was edited out

I would have thought that she's contractually bound to do all this publicity so I'm not sure she'd have a choice if they want her.

9 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

 

Thank you - and now I'm intrigued as to when that list was last updated: since they featured Placido Domingo at the top of it, I checked and no performance of his since 2010 has been added.

It is a very strange list, I think. I'm not sure if they mean (for example) that every performance Monica Mason danced is online and there are more than 1,000 of them, or just that there are more than 1,000 of her performances online and they've chosen to highlight her name as a link. If the former, why would they single out MM to be prioritised (much as I love her)? Perhaps she was director when the database was set up? Which would seem a peculiarly daft criterion. And why MacMillan and not Ashton? Why Nureyev and not Fonteyn? etc.

12 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

 

I'd be really interested to know what those criteria are - I'd have thought having a "complete set" for a production and correcting errors would take priority over adding new ones.

Well if you look at the right of their home page here http://www.rohcollections.org.uk/performances.aspx it lists what is now on there, i.e. the things to which they have been giving priority. Which does result in certain anomalies.

28 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

 

Off topic but I dread to think how an interview with Jonathan Ross and Hayward might have gone, given his creepy attitude on his show towards attractive young women. (I stopped watching him altogether because of it.)

Of course she may yet be on Jonathan Ross, come to think of it - nearer the time of the opening here.

34 minutes ago, FionaE said:

 

Do email the ROH collections people with information of missing performances.  They seem very amenable to getting help and making corrections.

Not sure about that. I provided evidence of an error in the database some years ago, but it wasn't corrected. And they have had a programme for adding performances according to certain criteria, so I don't think that they are unaware of missing performances.

James Hay has tweeted this:

'Sometimes things just don’t turn out the way you had planned. Absolutely devastated to have had to pull out of The Sleeping Beauty yesterday. I had been fighting a throat infection all week which developed into a flu-like virus and it became apparent that it would have been unsafe to perform. The last thing I would want is to jeopardise someone’s performance (especially someone’s debut) so I made the painful decision to withdraw, knowing that Anna-Rose, who is wonderfully quick, smart and talented, would cope with a new partner at the last minute. I’m so glad to hear Anna-Rose and Matthew did so well at such short notice. It was a really tough decision to make but I’m determined to make our next performance together. #ROHbeauty'

So let's hope he is indeed back next week.

2 hours ago, Candleque said:

Even bigger than a bus. Lovely Francesca Hayward on Jimmy Kimmel last night

And she posted on her Instagram account an image of a TRULY GINORMOUS billboard in LA with herself on it. She really must feel like (is) a film star now!

2 hours ago, Candleque said:

Even bigger than a bus. Lovely Francesca Hayward on Jimmy Kimmel last night

And what an amusing, enjoyable interview - credit to both interviewee and interviewer, especially given the limited time. Unlike the last time I saw a dancer on a chat show - Carlos Acosta was on Jonathan Ross earlier this year (I only watched because he was on) and it was cringeworthily awful, with JR (who is actually perfectly intelligent but for some reason pretends not to be) acting like an ignorant, crude idiot and reducing the idea of ballet to something weird and bizarre. (Well I know it is rather weird and bizarre, but that's not the point...). Poor Carlos Acosta was of course the epitome of style, talent and grace in the face of the stupidity.

I did get a sense that having in a sense to 'scale back' was a real effort for some of the dancers, both male and female. Huge extensions and jumps with everything done to the maximum (rather than to a defined scale) have become so much the norm that it must be very difficult for their bodies to adjust. But when they do, the rewards are enormous.

Terrific début from O'Sullivan - technically extremely secure (and very lovely), and showing real guts in the circumstances. I did feel that her natural expressiveness and exuberance were slightly more muted than usual, but entirely understandably so and I'm sure they'll break through more in future performances. Matthew Ball was very supportive, and Itziar Mendizabal a positively terrifying Carabosse (she was literally shaking with evil laughter as she went down the trapdoor). I was rather disappointed with Gina Storm-Jensen's Lilac Fairy - it's just as well she had Good on her side, otherwise Evil would have triumphed all too easily. She looked the part, but there was no real authority or individuality in her portrayal. I particularly enjoyed Isabella Gasparini and Leticia Dias amongst the fairies (and Romany Pajdak, again).

The Pause before Act III was once more marred by deafening audience noise once the orchestra had started playing again. Why on earth do they not take down the curtain lights at that point, so that the audience realises that the performance is starting again?? There have been more than enough instances of this happening for them to realise that there's a problem.

43 minutes ago, Candleque said:

Oh what happened to James Hay — hope he is ok

Kevin O'Hare came on to say that he'd been taken ill today and advised not to dance, and Matthew Ball had agreed to take over at 2 hours' notice. Really sorry not to see James Hay. And poor Anna Rose O'Sullivan. As if an Aurora debut isn't stressful enough even with the partner with whom you've rehearsed!

P.s. lots of cross-posting! Sorry for the repetition 

I never did manage to access Mark Monahan's review of Osipova's first performance, but I gathered enough to approach last night's Rose Adagio with some trepidation. But the balances were excellent (and you could see the joy and relief in her face afterwards, which was priceless!) and the whole was danced with such verve and aplomb that it was positively thrilling. Unorthodox use of the hands (throughout the performance), and a kind of physical and emotional extremity that doesn't sit easily with pure classicism; but gripping nonetheless. There is sometimes a danger of Osipova becoming almost a caricature of herself, but I think she just (only just, sometimes) manages to stay this side of that line, and what she delivers is a passionate, driven Aurora who is in as much need of being rescued by her prince as the prince is in need of finding his true love. The Vision Scene in particular was astonishing - her eyes seemed to be half closed most of the time, so you really knew this was a vision of a sleeping princess desperate to be awakened, yearning for her prince to come. And when she is finally woken by a kiss, her joy, relief and delight are palpable from the furthest reaches of the Amphitheatre. Technically she is getting more and more idiosyncratic, especially in the use of her hands and arms, which doesn't make for harmony with all the dancers around her (including Hallberg). But her turns and jumps were brilliant and her intensity completely memorable.

Hallberg remains a conundrum. I do find much of his solo dancing breathtakingly beautiful; and he seems to be reliable in terms of some partnering e.g. supported pirouettes. But clearly there are problems with lifts, and in the more virtuoso parts of his solos he does sometimes falter. The technique of the fish dives was I think very slightly adapted, but worked well and they were fast and exciting. And he was an entirely convincing aristocratic prince with the creamiest lines and noblest bearing. His melancholy in Act II (until seeing Aurora) was positively tragic; and his wonder at the beauty of Aurora and, finally, at his realisation that a kiss would bring her to him, were a joy to behold.

Bennet Gartside was a slightly sulky but effective King, with Kristen McNally as a more than usually imperious Queen. Fumi Kaneko was once more a superbly gracious Lilac Fairy (though I still dread that Prologue solo - even when done well it looks pretty horrible). I always find it quite amusing that even though she's a fairy with supernatural powers, when she wants to offer her blessings on the baby from above, she still has to be hoisted up there by two chunky attendants (and then when they put her down again, she thanks them graciously for their trouble. Brilliant!).  Christina Arestis was a suitably wicked Carabosse; I got the impression this Carabosse was actually pretty pleased she hadn't been invited to the Christening, since it gave her an opportunity to unleash her evil. (And on the subject of the Christening - could a 'baby' not be found that looks like a baby rather than a doll??! In these days of Call the Midwife, surely a more realistic baby could be procured. I know this is a fairy tale and everything, but still...).

18 minutes ago, Jane S said:

Maybe you'd find them here ...

What a wonderful collection, and what a shame it's being broken up.

3 minutes ago, Dawnstar said:

Is anyone else trying not to get too interested in this? Because based on the last year of the Linbury it'll probably be impossible to get tickets for.

Well I did get tickets for a Linbury programme last year (I'm a Friend which I suppose helped), but then wished I hadn't because of the appalling sightlines. So even if tickets were available I'd have to see how much they are for seats from which you can actually see anything.

11 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

The information is still somewhat scant, but there's now a page for this programme, with specific dates and times at https://www.roh.org.uk/tickets-and-events/heritage-by-various-dates.

Thanks, Lizbie1. I remember now that one of the reasons I was confused was because there's a Dante Project performance on 14th May so it didn't seem likely the company would also be doing a programme in the Linbury. I suppose the Heritage programme won't involve many dancers.

And yet not all dancers 'do' Instagram, stars or otherwise. Clearly there is a choice involved.

22 minutes ago, Jane S said:

Thank you - that's the same as it said last time and I thought it strange as the biography of Ivanov in the programme didn't mention Coppelia and the history of Coppelia didn't mention Ivanov - have they improved on that this time?

The programme is rather confusing, in fact... In the article 'Coppélia' by Alastair Macaulay, he says 'Petipa's 1884 Russian version, revived in 1894 by his assistants Lev Ivanov and Enrico Cecchetti, became the basis of many Western stagings'. As far as I can see the article about Ivanov by Tim Scholl doesn't mention Coppélia (which I noticed last night and found rather odd). The article about Cecchetti (unattributed) says that in 1894 he staged 'a new version of Arthur Saint-Léon's Coppélia' (it mentions that he collaborated with Ivanov on other works, but doesn't mention Ivanov - or Petipa - in respect of Coppélia).

Given my unfamiliarity with Coppélia, I bought a programme (for once) and so I was able to compare the longer synopsis there with the one on the cast sheet. I did wonder in advance if the 'wheat thing' would be understandable to those who didn't buy a programme, though as I watched I did think it might have become clear as it went on (just as the Giselle flower becomes clear, I think, even if you don't know what it means in advance) - but clearly not, here. It would only take an extra couple of lines in the cast sheet, so it would seem like a good idea to add it in. I did think that the programme (though very expensive, of course) is very good and I think well worth buying (for once...).

I thought both the production and the performances were a total joy. Glorious music, a riot of colour on the stage with the most beautiful sets and costumes, wonderful dancing and characterisation; truly 'such stuff as dreams are made on'. No doubt assisted by having the most superb cast - Francesca Hayward, Alexander Campbell and Gary Avis deserve 'all the superlatives'. And Fumi Kaneko was a gorgeous Aurora, with Itziar Mendizabal a positively spiritual Prayer. Yes, the plot is as thin as air; but like air, it transports you to other realms.

It's many years since I've seen Coppélia, and I wasn't sure how enthusiastic I felt about seeing it again. Now, it's right up there with Fille as the most joyous experience I can imagine.

Hamilton is replaced by Mendizabal as Prayer.

I don't get Dance Europe and I'd missed this completely. Matthew Ball has clearly been involved for some time. I wonder when and for how long he'll be away from the RB? I hope the film is good and a worthy tribute to Spessivtseva - the dancers involved are certainly top quality! I wonder why there's no mention of Diaghilev in the casting?

8 minutes ago, LinMM said:

How exactly does the BRB one end then?

 You see Giselle rising above Albrecht, lovingly watching over him as he weeps at her grave.

1 hour ago, LinMM said:

I think it would be very difficult to add to the pathos of today's ending with the original one somehow but would have to see how exactly staged etc but the ending as it is now seems perfect to me as Giselle disappears forever and Albrecht is left alone on stage to contemplate what has happened! 

She doesn't disappear in the BRB production, and I absolutely love that ending. This one promises to be even more radical (literally). For me, the concept is powerful (Giselle's forgiveness and love so complete that she wishes only for Albrecht's future happiness). But as you say it depends how it's staged - will be very interesting to see if/how it works.