Bruce Wall

This looks to be a tastefully simple format for a season promotion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6HhGd0X0_c#at=119 Looks too like Lourdes Lopez is doing good things with MCB. Maybe we'll get a chance to see them again one day in London. Some great looking dance(rs) too ... but then if you're being coached by the likes of Philip Neal

Thanks Barton22. That sounds even more appropriate .... Important thing is just a chance to snatch it in UK time. Bliss.

For me the afternoon was but a shadow of the FLAMES we felt the night before - but then that was only for those who had seen both. The new audience was, as reported, entirely delighted. Steps were executed certainly in the afternoon but minus the battery of that aforementioned 100% wattage wit and commitment. (As Vasiliev put it in that Telegraph interview: FIRE ... and with this lad - and I'm sorry but you just HAVE to love him (whether or not you like him is another matter) because he always splays his very guts out on the line. Nothing by halves for our Ivan. No-sir-ee. That kind of engagement was not I fear always present in the afternoon. While Lantratov's placement was always clear (over clear at times if such a thing is possible) his commitment was never (for me) dangerous like Ivan's. I fear Lantratov's performance (for me) suffered because of it. Often I thought Lantratov was 'on' rather than 'in the moment'. This historical remnant - the ballet that is - hokum as I said - NEEDS an almost superhuman commitment if its to survive. Without such it simply cannot breathe. It coughs; it sputters. Strangely in the evening for but a few fleeting moments - - and again only for people who had been privileged to see both Vasiliev performances - our hero - and he so legitimately IS in this - replete with those piercing basilisks that are his eyes - signaled (at least to me) that he was a mite tired. (Of course that would be ENTIRELY understandable and let me say that he was never LESS than ENTIRELY professional) ... Or was it just that he was missing the ease of dancing with HIS partner; with HIS Natalia. (There was after all a moment when Kyrsanova's foot almost slipped from without his copious thigh but still he he gallantly gathered her in his arms. You can I think count on our Ivan. The world now knows that he's a great catch.) Myself I will always remember those two occasions during the Friday curtain runs (and they were - it is true - as plentiful tonight) when Vasiliev picked up both of Osipova's hands and tenderly kissed her knuckles. The loving look he gave her then pierced. One got this sense from her final heart throw to the audience that this 'event' (her ONE permitted Bolshoi performance at the ROH - where both had after all first been proclaimed stars) was critically important to her. One instinctively perceived that Ivan was there entirely to in that support. 'I'm a good guy' he seems to wish to telegraph. (For me it's his generosity of person that allows us as a body - his audience in communion - to discover for ourselves the freedom of our own heart's laughter or the jointure shared in the amazement of our communal sighs.) While his gifts are spectacular, he is, himself, refreshingly human. He celebrates such. It's his hairline fracture of sensitivity - one mounted within that most unlikely balletic frame - which strides bottom up as a constant into any variation's place. We step up to bat with him. He is - as he self-proclaims - a dedicated optimist. She he says is not. His arms spread apart enveloping our hearts as one. He still has a sliver of that four year old boy who insists on folk dancing with his older brother. 'Take me' he proclaims. 'Take me! I dare you.' He is her survivor. In his arms her soul is undressed for us all to adore. There we - and she - can understand in a shared language. It roared even more loud on Friday. It blasted beyond the dizzying heights and delicacy of her technique. I suspect the latter comes easier for her while respecting that nothing's easy for either. Certainly there was nothing involving quite so much effort - or extremity of ease - for Mr. Lantratov. Oh, there was nothing wrong with what he did ... but it was skillfully applied rather than sourced. Therein the difference lies. Funny: The same thing - the knuckle kissing and loving glance that is - occurred in March during the Osiliev curtain call for their shared Mikhailovsky Giselle. On that occasion it was as if she was saying to him: 'You see. I told you. I was right. I can be at home here now.' They must have known - or at least been discussing - the Royal's offer. 'Is Ivan joining you in London,' one interviewer asked her later. 'Ask Ivan,' she quite sensibly replied. Ivan's answer? 'I'm coming to London.' It as immediate. He didn't need to hesitate. Their affection is so poignant it stings. Tonight - and maybe it's just me - but It seemed almost a tad cruel to separate them; especially in a work which had been expressly built (like Daisy's bicycle) for two; for them both; for their combined magic. Without that FOR ME it was, I fear, a much more hollow entity. It is as I suggested hokum ... but then so too is the Bolshoi's Don Q ... and that FOR ME - without them - will I fear never be the same. There can be no doubt but IN THIS they put more flesh on the Vainonen bones via Ratmansky than anyone else has. Those bones they were built ON them. As the Hochhausers' insisted: This tour would not happen without them. Grinning in her royal box regally wrapped tonight, I'm sure Mrs. Hochhauser knew they had been right to insist. The Osiliev performance was the only ONE to sell out within an hour of its general booking opening. They ARE - let's face it - the face of the peoples' ballet for the moment in this country .. if not beyond. I say: 'Oh, lucky us'. Agree that Denis Savin, the original Jerome, was again outstanding in the role he had originated both in the matinee and the evening performances. Also preferred Daria Khokhlova as Amour in the afternoon. Don't know if Kristina Kretova and Artem Ovcharenko had never actually danced their respective roles in FLAMES before this stint. It looked to me as if they must have spent the entire day rehearsing and found so much MORE extraordinary detail as variously Antoine Mistral and his Mireille de Poitiers. I am SO sorry you did not see this cast LinMM I think you might have felt quite differently vis a vis the divertisement; especially as pertains to Kretova. (I agree it was anonymously disjointed in the afternoon.) Her 'performance this evening was a revelation when compared to Friday's .... It was, I promise, tellingly stellar. His only inflated his already established balloon. In its total historical involvement it was thrilling. Won't go on .... but simply wanted to add that I loved the Mareillaise Dance trio's character make-up this evening - again one not in either previous performance. Here for the first time a trick-store bearded Alexei Matrakhov joined Igor Tsvirko (replete with his Carabosse nose - fulfilling that useful dictum: 'use it now or forever hold your piece!) and musty-chinned Maxim Surov in yet another exhibit of pure joy. Thank you, Bolshoi. We so look forward you seeing you again. It's refreshing to know that we STILL can be friends in what is quite obviously an ever more uncertain world for us all.

O.K. ..... I'll start off ... I REALLY think they should identify ALL their dancers in as personal a way as possible on their website. I would like to suggest (and I know this is NOT going to happen) but still it might be a dream to have each give a personal screen test a la NYCB. This could be quickly shot in a matter of, say, ten minutes, with two camera operators, one sound person and then a team of editors to quickly piece the material together and download. I'm sure there are a goodly number of extremely talented film school students (ah, yes those who get the discounts and now 20 additional places saved for EACH RB performance) who would do an excellent job simply for credit. To give an example what I mean ... here are two WONDERFUL principal dancers from NYCB .... both now on a truly world class trajectory ... (and, hey, - while we're at it - wouldn't it be great to have them guest just once in a RB performance of Balanchine or Robbins or Wheeldon or Ratmansky or the stunning work of that incredible artist, one Mr. Jason Peck. Both are as well a stunning Apollo): Young Chase Finlay (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf9dcKlepWY) and only slightly older - but equally brilliant - Robert Fairchild. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgCHUSb8Se4 Enjoy. Here is a (then) soloist, Adrian Danchig-Waring who we saw dance plentiously when the company was here at the Coliseum in 2008. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgRWPgZ-3UE Here is one from a current NYCB corps member to give but another example of differing rank, Harrison Ball: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CNQLRI947U I must confess sitting here that I don't know his work ... but having seen this film I feel I know him a tad and could easily pick him out of the crowd when he dances. Here's a new female corps member, Indiana Woodward: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJuROl_LAoo That personal touch could, I think, make SUCH a difference. Perhaps IF the RB were to do such a thing, Ivan could translate for Natalia. (They are always so adorable together .... .... and given that this would be a free flow personal thing ....

Well done for that, Katherine. HERE, HERE I say or as Natalia and Ivan might put it: Благодарим Вас за хорошо выполненную работ

A woman who in many ways changed the face of dance for me - one Wendy Whelan - is still at 46 seeking new avenues of dance. She is ever brave; ever brilliant. Her self-commissioned RESTLESS CREATURE programme comes to Sadler's Wells in July. In response to Judith Mackrell's Guardian request as to what her reading audience might like to see I finished my response by wanting to see RESTLESS CREATURE. 'One can dream, huh' I concluded. Who says dreams don't come true (Ref: last paragraph of Deborah Jowitt's wonderful and obviously very personal review: http://www.artsjournal.com/dancebeat/2013/08/restless-creature/)

CORRECTION TO MYSELF ... I would be most grateful if the sentence 'Adeline is seen to slap the face of her brother Jerome (an animated Andrei Merkuriev)' might be cut. That is wrong. (I would do it myself were it not for the board's time limit in corrections - which for a more than middling dyslexic like myself (thus the infamous missing words which I don't see even when I read it back(wards) which I am wont to do and the equally backwards [like my brain] spellings), -- one who even at this advanced stage misguidedly believes still that he can be a perfectionist --- HA!-- can be somewhat anxiety producing.) [My mother - the judge - used to proclaim that I was 'born to be edited'.] It is in fact the Marquis who strikes his daughter's cheek and therefore totally defeats the point I was there trying to support. Merkuriev was, however, no less skilled in his animation as Jerome who, as it happens, is brother to one Jeanne who in Osipova's hands touchingly and literally mourns for her brother's loss when the aristocratic Adeline is first betrayed by her father's minion and rapidly thereafter guillotined. I loved the fact that Ratmansky has Jeanne simply stand in ABSOLUTE bewilderment for a few seconds before she knells in front of Jerome's grieving corpse. Osipova's awkwardness in those moments was as legitimately telling (indeed brave) as it might otherwise have been mawkish. He has Vasiliev as Philippe mirror her humanely as he too stands helpless to one side not knowing how to assist his new wife in the unnatural extension of this their entirely new world order. The innocently simple childlike release of his hands - which until that point have resembled nothing less than revolutionary canon fodder - was heartbreaking in the abject sincerity of its telling and equally childlike simplicity.

Thanks so for this, Katherine. Enough to brighten up ANY day

Tonight the Bolshoi came alive in a way that we had historically come to expect. TONIGHT - for the first time on this trip in my experience - the company that was built for stars found itself lighting up in revolutionary fervor simply because it was zealously led by two FULLY FORMED members of that deservedly rare fraternity: IVAN VASILIEV AND NATALIA OSIPOVA. The audience's response was the true litmus paper to this enveloping effect. The eyes of each member (cast and audience alike) told a fulfilled tale; one crucially wrought within the framework of a production that had been specifically framed around the extraordinary virtues of our two luminaries. THEY MADE THE DIFFERENCE IN A MANNER MONEY CANNOT BUY. Of course there were her glorious feet and his earth rattling stealth but it was their combined wit; yes wit; their 110% wattage joy that stood out. It was SO wonderful to hear the audience laugh as Ivan hesitated momentarily before striding with his full-thighed zeal towards his mind blowing 2nd act first variation. There was another to come. (We instinctively knew of course what was coming even if we hadn't seen it before.) Indeed before he delivered that same outrageous display he slyly gave a telling glance over his shoulder. It was as a generous cue not only to the conductor but to the audience that they should get ready to grin and, yes, squeal. (And, hey, I tell friends I don't like fun fares. But what a ride this was.) Our collective heartbeat for the next few minutes was as palpable as the all encompassing sweat on his white shirt was real. Our eyes - like those of the 'Osilievs' at the end of the ballet - loomed enormous in their shared wonder. We journeyed as one. Of course the rest of the company responded in kind. (How could they not?) It was truly glorious to be able to witness each of their thrill at being able to interact individually with Vasiliev as he passed amongst them while yet even more members of the corps dazzled in yet another French national dance. What I truly love about Ratmansky - and there is oh, so much to admire (at least in my book --- and I know - I KNOW - many on this board disagree) are three things; (i).his ability to choreograph - both in narrative and abstract works - with a sense of entire community; one democratically distributed through an entire company of dancers (i) his ability to show wit through character in the balletic format itself and - and please forgive me here but this is important FOR ME after the assault of such works as, say, THE JUDAS TREE which you know would never happen under Ratmansky's sway (iii) his fundamental respect for human dignity, most especially when it comes to that of women. O.K; O.K., I know FLAMES OF PARIS, supposedly Stalin's favourite ballet, is a piece of contrived hokum. While I'm sure it was VERY different in its original Vainonen version what ISN'T hokey here is that dignified respect. When the Marquis Costa de Beauregard (and I didn't catch who was dancing this role as it was a replacement) first ASSAULTS Jeanne (Osipva) and then the actress, Mireille de Poitiers it is indicated THROUGH DANCE not pornography. Is that harsh? I really don't know any more. Honestly I don't. What I do know (at least for me) it is true. What do I mean?: Well, there is no flagrant throwing about of bodies or grabbing after private parts especially those of the female variety. Here too the women can give as good as they get. Adeline is seen to slap the face of her brother Jerome (an animated Andrei Merkuriev) The crimes wrought here are fundamentally against entire swathes of society as a whole not those of a sexual microcosm. Did the audience get the picture you ask? Of course they did. Certainly for me it was clear enough. That it was suggestive and not patronising came as a relief. But then - and please forgive me for this - but I am one of those odd people who simply finds it difficult to sit through, say, THE JUDAS TREE. I'm sure that separates me from oh so, so many of you and for that I am sincerely sorry. Honestly I am. There has been much quoted on this board by the understandably admired Mr. Crisp. Let us not forget what he said of the recent London performance of Ratmansky's Romeo and Juliet. (To follow the guidelines of the Balletcoforum I will quote but one sentence.) "And there is Alexy Ratmansky's choreography, sometimes determinedly jokey and needing sedation, and failing signally to explain the world of young love and feuding families that is its concern." My response to that was: 'Well, at least Romeo's banishment was made dramatically clear. Without it (as in the case of the MacMillan - and please know I am a HUGE fan of EARLY MacMillan) the last act of any depiction of this tale - balletic and otherwise - can NEVER render the necessary dramatic urgency as defined by Shakespeare.' (Will the same Mr. Crisp praise Ratmansky's choreographic skill in this presentation for the Bolshoi I wonder???? I am not a betting man by habit but if I were to be push ... ('Oh, go on' I hear you simper) ... I'd say: 'I bet he will'. It certainly will be interesting to see if he changes horses mid-furlong or courageously stays his course. What price journalistic consistency, huh?) FLAMES OF PARIS has a narrative of even greater breadth than Mayerling (and we all know that takes some doing). Still it is here rendered clear. Well, clear enough to follow. It doesn't (for example) need a back story compendium to read the synopsis. The all important class differentiations are made vividly clear VIA the styles/language of the dance itself. That is as it should be - or at least as I think it should - and refreshingly it here too respects the history of the balletic / dance art forms in and of themselves. (Anyone for a minuet?) I won't go on. I need to get some sleep. I had a grand time. I LOVED the chap who played Louis XVI. He made me giggle in a very legitimate way. He was a but a functionary who would really prefer not to have to function at all. Maybe he liked to fish? (Was it really etched by Ruslan Skvortsov, this production's original Antoine? That's what the cast list instructed.) In any case he was a delight in his TOTAL detail as was Elena Bukanova (a period Madonna) as Marie Antoinette. Was there EVER a MORE material girl? One thing WAS certain: Artem Ovcharenko - he of the supremely plush plie - was OUTSTANDING in his partnering as the Anotine Mistral of THIS EVENING. Bravo. Vitaly Biktimirov glistened in his character work as much as through his gunning dance as Gilbert, Captain of the Marseillais. What a talent he is. The trio of Igor Tsvirko, Alexei Matrkhov and Maxim Surov thrilled in their Marseillaise Dance and Anastasia Stashkevich was entirely heart wrenching as Adeline. But then, of course, there was our prism though which all else was framed and via which all was drawn together excellently as Coated suggests: there was Ivan, and there was Natalia. Just look: They kissed in the first few seconds .... joyfully got married in the second act .... and came out for four --- yes, four --- front curtain calls lasting a full 20 minutes. Indeed, one felt they could have gone on and still not pushed it. They had our hearts after all. Those, unlike the seats, could not have been bought. They were well and truly earned. Yes: The Bolshoi we knew ... and STILL love ... was back. Bless you, Mr. Filin, for letting us see this. We know it so easily could NOT have happened ... BUT it did. Bless you for your courage. We all, I think, felt welcomed by it. Sometimes a simple 'thank you' seems totally inadequate. Please know here that it is entirely heartfelt.

I don't get the point somehow ... or am I as ever just confused. Are these for 'student ROH Friends' ... e.g. one week prior to the Friends booking????? ... or one week prior to the general booking? The ROH is required by terms of their subsidy to hold 20% of ALL tickets for the general booking period for general access. Weren't students able to buy these tickets previously in the same queue as anyone else ... and didn't those same students have a special programme set up so they could buy any unsold tickets at reduced prices??? ... or has that gone the way of all good things??? If so, then this I fear looks like a rather 'poor' excuse (pun intended) for a cutback cover.

Sorry, posted on the wrong page by mistake. Looking forward to tonight.

How exciting that must have been. Do you mind one asking how you able to arrange that, mishapanda? It's something I, myself, would love to do one of these days ... and I'm fairly certain many others would as well.

While others have reported and no doubt will continue to do so on last night's main fare which I thought in many instances a fascinating insight into a 'work still in progress' - (one leaving a healthy desire to taste of the finished repast whence fully baked) - there were a few (albeit relatively minor details) that stood out for me: After somehow and strangely finding myself having been disappointed from a personal perspective with the admirable Anna Tikhomirova's second ballerina in EMERALDS (it being somewhat disjointed from the rare delicacy of Balanchine's intended arching frame) on Monday, I was oh, so delighted and relieved to see her back in truly spitfire fettle as the Spanish Princess, one ripe with Andalusian heat such as has been wafted through the Grigorovich sieve. Loved the luxurious breadth of line of Yulia Grebenshchikova's second of those ubiquitous three swans. I was relieved that it wasn't just the glittering silver of her nail polish that made the thrill of her dancing stand out. A word for Mikhail Kryuchkov's blonde bonnet in the waltz. When this production opened London's Bolshoi tour season 2013 his coiff in the same role was so rigidly sprayed it alone could have stood rock solid on the stage had it suffered the same misfortune as Anton Savichev's Magedaveya wig in La Bayadere. You will of course understand then why I felt I should heartily applaud the natural cut he now dons. Here was one which allowed his corn rows to sway in much more natural tandem with his surrounds (which last night included the ever broadly smiling Savichev in the waltz corps). As to the audience, I largely agree with BerylH's estimation ('Also think there were more Swan Laker's than ballet fans in the audience, the response was more muted after the rapturous receiption for Diamonds,'). I, myself thought we, as a group, were merely being prudent in our reserve. We were I felt wisely protecting our future anticipation against, say, those frightening fears of 'Crispian' over-expectation. We have all seen how - in the end - such can be truly harmful not only to the mental and physical health of certain dancers but to the art form as a whole. Heaven (if not the FT) forbid. Sometimes I feel - as entertaining as they are - his enthusiasms should come with due warning to the uninitiated. Whether or not that potential (or we) will LIVE to be fully fulfilled only time will tell. Still, surely that is part of the thrill of the calculated risk that is life itself. That even survives the 140 characters of Twitter it appears. Blessedly there didn't appear to be any undue Russian 'claquers' present; those leftovers from an 18th Century phenomena such as has blessedly died out it appears everywhere else but INSIDE the Bolshoi. While some traditions die hard I say BRAVA once again to the much missed Maria Alexandrova for simply telling hers to get lost. For that (in my book) the greater artist she. (Ref: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/18/arts/dance/designated-cheering-spectators-thrive-at-the-bolshoi-theater.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) I so pray she makes a full recovery. FOR ME, hers was by some distance the best Odette-Odile of the four I was privileged to see by the Bolshoi on this particular junket.

Shanghai Ballet – Jane Eyre – Coliseum – 14.8.2013 The choreographer Patrick de Bana is perhaps best remembered as a principal dancer with Bejart and then Duato’s Compania Nacional de Danza. That their influences loom large in his impressionistic take on Bronte’s classic are therefore not surprising. Especially those of Duato. De Bana calls his JANE EYRE a ‘modern ballet’, only the ballet element is given short shrift wrapped as it is within the fetchingly suggestive surrounds and gossamer costumes of Jerome Kaplan who did such a glorious job with the National Ballet of China’s RED LANTERN seen some years ago at the ROH. Here the modern dance elements took the brunt share in this depiction of betrayal wrapped in that national pastime of repressed emotion which we British seem all too readily to share with the Chinese. Sadly de Bana’s choreographic vocabulary – at least as evidenced here – is not vast. The recorded score (blessedly heard to much cleaner effect than the muddy projections for the recent Russian Seasons programmes at the same address) is a mixed blessing. It ranges from Britten to Debussy; from Samuel Barber to ye olde English airs followed by Villa-Lobos. It trips along lightly in its overwhelming dark. (Ah, yes ... that word again ... overwhelming.) Only thing is that much of this music has already been famously (and better) choreographed to. (For example Elgar’s Troyte variation was here used in the depiction of Richard Mason’s histrionic distress. For many in this country that will of course always be the property of a certain Sir Fred Ashton in his glowing ELGAR VARIATIONS. One sits there being reminded that some things are all too deservedly hard to shake.) The most effective bit of choreography I thought was the adagio shared between the glowingly innocent Jane of Xiang Jieyan (albeit in much anxiety here) and the very talented and impassioned Zang Wenjun’s as St. John Rivers. This one brief shining moment told a COMPLETE tale through its dance (with ballet intacta) and was vividly portrayed. Indeed, this was the one moment where the audience’s applause seemed fully justified (although the entry into such was understandably hesitant based on what had preceded it.). Clearly the central role in this production was always intended for Bertha Mason. In this production she is well and truly unlocked from her cell and tellingly etched (in pointe shoes in the first act and then canvas flats for the second) by the hauntingly beautiful Fang Xiaofeng. Sadly she has to struggle with choreography which is often repetitive and unnecessarily cloying. While the charismatic Wu Husheng was telling as Edward Rochester most of the men in the company (which outnumbered its women amazingly) were anonymously left to ricochet in relative dark abandonment as ghosts, rocks or flames. How one longed to see this fine company – and there were hints at what one imagines to be their considerable overall skill - in another more formally classical work. This was after all a dramatic telling where the brush strokes (and hand claps) themselves loomed large within their own frames. If one didn’t know the novel there would have been little sense in attempting to seek any. This was an evening where one was left to appreciate moments; to discover parts rather than sharing a whole. At no point did I feel for long that I could sit back and relax because I found myself rarely being allowed to be wholly engaged. One suggestion: This 90 minute production could easily have been paired with, say, the Shanghai Ballet’s production of Balanchine’s LA VALSE which is in their current rep. (In this way - and this way only - was it like La Sylphide.) That would have given a greater overall variety and certainly provide a more substantive dramatic substance/variety to an evening of obvious (and in THAT manner alone admirable) aspiration. There can be no question but that the Shanghai Ballet's intent here was ripe with noble ambition. NOTICED IN THE AUDIENCE: Kevin O’Hare, RB AD, Mikhail Messerer, AD Mikhailovsky Ballet, Dimitri Gudanov, Principal, Bolshoi Ballet

RUBIES was much improved last night over Monday's outing by the Bolshoi Ballet after (as noted above) a rocky start. This was largely due to the principals (Kretova, Merkuriev, Grebenshchikova) being much more focused in terms of their syncopated pizzazz and - in both (i) RUBIES and (ii) DIAMONDS - the male soloists [(i) Artem Belyakov-both; Denis Rodkin-both; Maxim Surov, Dimitri Dorokhov; (ii) Mikhail Kryuchov, Dimitri Efremov] dancing in a much more appropriate and unified (e.g., non-individually-competitive) performance mode than their Monday peers had evidenced. Merkuriev was noticeable in terms of his animated interaction throughout RUBIES for which thanks was extended. (While not a patch on, say, a Damien Woetzel or Robert Fairchild in the same role, his was certainly a much more present and appropriate take than Dmitri Gudanov's etching the night before in which so much of the work's inherent joy filled detail was absent and that which strove to be present was forced and unfulfilled.) Think Rodkin has shown himself to be one of the strongest partners the current Company possesses. They very much need to hang on to him. Chudin was again solid although his partnering in the home stretch was yesterday night a tad less secure/consistent than it had been on Monday's showing. Again Sirmnova's potential glowed. It needs to be carefully husbanded and I join the throng in looking forward to see where her future journey leads. As a result of the noted improvements the audience's response was much more focused in its appreciation of the latter two ballets. EMERALDS sadly showed similar deficiencies as had been all too evident the evening prior and the orchestra's rendition of the Faure remained unfortunately underwhelming.

The Guardian's four star review of Jewels has now been published. http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2013/aug/13/bolshoi-ballet-jewels-review As MAB has so generously stated it is refreshing to note that we live in a world where we can ALL see things very differently. How wonderful is that. Often the trouble for me with DIAMONDS is that I first saw it - and saw it a number of times - with its original cast. As much as I have admired other performances by many other companies/performers,- (it being as I have previously said my desert island ballet) - the memory of THAT experience (while then still overseen by Balanchine himself) has never in terms of its overall and thrilling mystery been (FOR ME) bettered. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WOwWjwm-QY (The scenery in this clip was for television only. I love the simplicity of the NYCB's original design letting the ballet speak for itself.) Will it retard me from keeping on looking at other companies/performers undertaking it? ... No way Jose ... It is just to fine a piece of art. Next up more of the Royal Ballet in December/January and La Scala in March. All best wishes to ALL.

I thought Chudin both in his DIAMONDS solo variations ... and (somewhat surprisingly) in his partnering .... (that partnering is deceptively difficult and he made a fine hand of it) .... was the real standout. Oh, THAT and Obraztsova who was exquisite in EMERALDS for which she is I think best suited. It will be a privilege for us all to see Smirnova grow as an artist over the next few years. -- I have this distinct feeling that the Bolshoi will be back in in London 2015 given the current commercial success of this season. That the potential is rich for this 22 year old must be unquestioned. (It also doesn't hurt that she is radiantly beautiful - glowing a la Audrey Hepburn - on stage.) Talking of people looking like others, I found myself laughing. Chudin very much holds his mouth on stage like a certain Nilas Martins. Indeed if his hair was more blonde ... he would even look like Nilas at a similar age ... Not that either of them could ever possibly wipe out the memory of a certain god-like patriarch in that role, its originator). Lovely to see Filin come out onto the Covent Garden lip during the curtain calls ... and to witness the affection his dancers so obviously hold him in. That single happening turned the evening from a performance into an event ... and you could hear the audience very much respond in kind at that awareness. That, in and of itself, made for much happy wonderment!

LinMM, the person selling the ticket in question is quite clear that it is for the 7.30 pm performance not the matinee. The casting you list is correct for the evening performance. The ROH website has been updated as has the Bolshoi's own site. Vasiliev will NOT be dancing at the matinee, now doing the two evenings. Lantratov (who will be doing the matinee) was the dancer who opened the production in Paris with Alexandrova after it was originally mounted by Ratmansky for Osipova/Vasiliev in Moscow. I'm sure your friend will be happy. You will be seeing Denis Savin as Jerome who originated that role in this production. London saw Krysanova and Lantratov dance the central FLAMES pas a couple of years ago at the Coliseum in a Russian gala and the audience was delighted as far as I can recall. Should your friend wish to see Vasiliev she will have the opportunity to do so in the Kings of Dance programme in March at the Coliseum. He will be dancing Le Jeunne Homme et la mort ... much as he did in a magnificent performance when he guested with ENB for no fee as a mark of respect to Petit on the occasion of his then recent death. Please reference the Bolshoi casting below: The Flames of Paris 16 August , 19.30 17 August , 14.00 and 19.30 Jeanne — Natalia Osipova (16 August) , Ekaterina Shipulina (17 August /14.00), Ekaterina Krysanova (17 August /19.30) Philippe — Ivan Vasiliev (16 August , 17 August /19.30), Vladislav Lantratov (17 August /14.00) Adeline — Anastasia Stashkevich (16 August), Anna Rebetskaya (17 August /14.00 and 19.30) Jerome — Andrei Merkuriev (16 August), Denis Savin (17 August /14.00 and 19.30) Mireille de Poitiers — Kristina Kretova (16 August , 17 August /19.30), Anna Tikhomirova (17 August /14.00) Antoine Mistral — Artem Ovcharenko (16 August), Denis Rodkin (17 August /14.00), Ruslan Skvortsov (17 August / 19.30)

Those of us who were fortunate enough to see the last Russian Gala at the Coliseum saw Obraztsova dance the central Diamonds pas de deux with Ovcharenko. The ROH website has now been updated to reflect the changes noted.

Thanks for posting this Chinafish ... I began to think it was just me. I simply couldn't believe it!! I began to wonder why Sky Arts were broadcasting this AT ALL with the sync in such a sorry state. The charity I run leads (amongst its many strands) a digital video shooting/editing training programme for prisoners. Frankly I would not allow a segment that was so mis-aligned to be shown AT ALL and insist that the editors go back and correct it. It is simply not good enough. Quite frankly, while not honouring the Bolshoi's fine traditions ... it makes I fear a laughing stock out of Sky Arts. Perhaps they can address THIS in the documentary they are making with Deborah Bull about their discoveries. I sincerely wonder how SHE feels about the state of the film as broadcast. For one It left me feeling quite angered ... and certainly made me question my subscription to Sky. I wonder do the commerical sponsors not see this before airing? Surely they must. In the US it would be against the law for a commercial broadcaster NOT to do so. Did they not realise the glaring faults that are herein evident? If so do they (Lexis et al) care? It would appear from the fact that this programme was broadcast in the state that it is in that they do not. SHAME! Surely that speaks for itself and I pray that was NOT their intent. As to the presenting organisation itself ... Well ...

We knew from the opening night that Volchkov was nursing an injury. He has been replaced by Lantratov in FLAMES as well so this is, perhaps, not entirely to be unexpected.

One guess as to the casting for the cinema relay in January 2014 ....

This is sad news indeed. Beyond his start with the RB and later NBoC David Howard was an important and vital influence to so many key dancers drawn from throughout the dance world both during the dance boom and beyond. We ALL I think owe Mr. Howard much and his weighty legacy will outlast us all. It already does.

This has already been listed under news. Perhaps one of the moderators could merge the further comments. With thanks.

While in total admiration of Mr. Sugrue's fine work, this is one area where the UK is currently rich with similar talents. I would love to see one of our extremely talented filmmakers now young in their careers be given a similar opportunity (where deserved) to highlight say one or two of our current ballet leading artists (who are, after all, themselves largely drawn from an international pool) and who find themselves resident for the moment in the UK. Trouble is that films like the fine one made by Mr. Sugrue tend to be labours of love. They are certainly not what is frequently deemed 'commercial'. What was most appealing, I think, was the concentrated focus on (i) the relationship of Ms. Smirnova with her dedicated coach - such as goes for all major dancers at the Bolshoi - (and, in fact, the same woman who was latterly coach to Ms. Osipova, soon to join the Royal Ballet) and (ii) the specific focus on her specific preparation of one role. This film didn't try to bite off more than it or the viewer could chew. It didn't attempt to be all things to all people. For me that's what made it potent. Mr. Sugrue's commercial background in this regard paid considerable dividends methinks.