Mary

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

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)

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.

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.

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

I agree it's a shame that we have a triple bill in which all three pieces are in a style that does not suit the classical virtues of some the best dancers in the company. Personally I would much have preferred a more varied triple bill.

I do agree. I recommended several friends and family to look at the R&J segment of the BBC Shakespeare 400, programme and had such an unexpectedly enthusiastic response from a lot of non-balletomanes. It seems to me Naghdi/Ball have the capacity to reach an audience- they have a presence.

Necessary? It used to be compulsory.....:-)

Just saw Cast 2 and thought Nunez/Gartside were marvellously expressive and human in their roles- especially the reconciliation pas de deux in Act 3 which was far the best performance of this I have seen. It was immensely moving, as they seemed to struggle to come to terms with what had happened, and both brought a depth of experience, a maturity, a quality of understatement to the piece that was very wonderful to watch. Muntagirov was a very soulful Florizel, and Stix Brunell a dainty Perdita, and once again I thoroughly enjoyed the music, narrative drive, many very good performances and -for a wonder on a Bank Holiday Saturday- the very quiet and very appreciative audience.

I wonder, is the running order of the triple bill definitely fixed? The Obsidian (?) Invitation/Golden Hour triple bill us the first production I haven't booked for for some time. But there are tickets left and some of the casting might be very interesting to see.. but...but....

Has anyone else seen English Touring Opera's Don Giovanni? I was very impressed. It was in an English version that mostly worked very well, and with no surtitles but very clear diction from nearly all the singers I could just focus on the singing with no distractions- what a welcome change. ETO do a fantastic job taking good productions round the country- sometimes just a few planks and a sheet or two but this is one of their bigger productions and really well staged. I do recommend it even to non- opera lovers.

Just sat down to watch Naghdi /Ball clip on this freezing wet Monday morning while doing the laundry and waiting for my shopping to be delivered: it made me cry so much I will have to tell the Waitrose man I have a cold! :-) They are beautiful together, perfectly matched, I love the way her facial expressions are perfectly suited to the dancing throughout-very difficult to do and she avoids getting her smile fixed into a rictus as can happen. Full marks.

Saw him dancing with Lamb the other day, also in Romeo and Juliet earlier this season...