Mary

I 'm not normally keen on rehearsals but watching the RB Scenes de Ballet rehearsal was almost as engrossing as the live performance- which I am looking forward to keenly. Maybe it was watching Christopher Carr at work- truly impressive. A marvellous and in a way moving experience. I could not believe, while watching a bit of Acosta coaching Muntagirov earlier- that people were posting critical comments on youtube saying things like "his arms are all wrong!" I wonder how these folk would like it, if they were to be filmed live at work, practising something-and for it to be broadcast all around the world, for all and sundry -of, shall we say, ahem, varying levels of knowledge!- to comment on? One has sympathy for the dancers who have to put up with this really. That's why I'm not keen on watching rehearsals normally-it feels as if it should be pivate- live performance is fair game of course for comment, positive and negative.

I agree. It was very good to see Pennefather back again-he gave an affecting performance ,particularly moving I thought in his solos. Shade of the young Johnny Cope in that elegant and understated style. Lamb and Pennefather make an attractive couple. Alexander Campbell was noteworthy as Lescaut: his great energy was just right for the role and he conveyed the appropriate reckless callousness. James Hay managed to shine I thought in the short moment he was in the spotlight as one of 3 gentlemen- have I got that right- was it him? I have seen it quite a few times and for me this wasn't the best ever, but I can't pin down why- perhaps nerves, understandably indeed, and the early scenes a little slow to get going. A word of appreciation for Genesia Rosato- a stalwart member of the company surely- she can glide around in a marvellous gown like noone else. I am not sure about Eric Underwood as the gaoler -why is he given character parts? He is a lovely dancer and I would like to see more of him dancing before he moves into these roles ( this must be one of the nastiest characters in ballet too!).

Yes let's talk about Swan Lake and the dancing. I was at last Saturday's evening performance and enjoyed the corps as much as others have done-they could not be better and the ethereal beauty of their work really made the evening. but some aspects of this production I ifnd less satisfying. I can't cope with the jester. The odd appearance is OK, but the way he comes in and out all the time I find distracting, and undermining of the story. That is because I have my own view of SL of course,like many of us! It is no reflection on the very talented dancer. Here's a trivial point- those flowers. I thought the garage -forecourt carnations were a bit tacky , and the way the prince picks up the SAME bouquet that has been thrown away to re-present, seemed a bit cheap! The dancing is all of a superb standard, but I do prefer the RB production, perahps because it prioritises the story and the overall emotional shape of the piece -dictated by the sublime music-while to me, Mariinsky's at times risks turning it into a "show" or almost a circus, with set pieces being applauded..breaking up the effect.. I still enjoyed it immensely though.

Yes indeed....some of us were looking forward to seeing Yanowsky! and indeed Pennefather, whom I haven't seen for about 3 years due to injury, changes etc. But I shall go with the flow...

Not MORE domestic violence- (I see Carlos has also been treating us to same) ...and as for waddling around like ducks-..and as for Greensleeves... well- no thanks, I shall dust off my old Don Quixote dvd and watch that at home on the sofa with a glass of wine and a family size bar of fruit and nut instead. Thanks a lot for saving me the money and disappointment! where would we be without ballet forum.

Thanks Coated, most amusing and you've made me feel rather less disappointed to miss a ticket now!

Knickers, Aileen,! I called them gym knickers in my review as they were excatly like the sort we used to wear about 50 years ago!

I agree Katie- the white pants were, for me, the costume disaster of the year....but so much else to enjoy.

Saw Mc Rae and Morera last night- Bonelli being injured, sadly. However, McRae would be my choice in this role (now that Kobborg is no longer with us, alas) and brought to it fizzing technique as we now expect but also a thoughtful characterisation. Morera's acting surpassed even her marvellous performance in Winter'sTale I thought- well, if she can convince us she is erotically obsessed by a man dressed in a donkey costume..and she did. I agree with an earlier comment about the corps heavy footedness at some points, which is a little unfortunate for a troop of wispy light-as-air -fairies. I tried hard to get into Connectome but could not. The music chosen seemed to me heavy, portentous, laden with a sense of its own significance.The costumes I thought a really horrible mistake. How can anyone think these beautiful dancers will look better in huge, white gym knickers?I am baffled. The dance seemed quite heavily dependent on moments from Song of the Earth and Requiem for its best effects. The scientific context did not convince me- in what way did the choreography actually embody the neurological idea? Yes, the dancers move around connecting with one another but isn't that what they always do? The programme notes were mostly incoherent waffle- the tendency to transcribe interviews is a really unhelpful one as understandably these verbal comments don't always read very well in cold print. I think this piece will date rather quickly. The 3 wonderful dancers: Osipova, McRae, Watson I thought did all they could and deserved better. I do like modern dance -e.g. Wheeldon seems to me so much more interesting in his range and able to present joy, fun and beauty in a style that can make use of lyricism and fluid loveliness, as well as the almost house-standard contortions representing angst, gloom and desperate seriousness that we get from most modern pieces. Sorry, perhaps I am channelling Clement Crisp..

Arthur Pita's Dream within a Dream was tremendous fun so his name is certainly a lure.The programme is quite a mixture isn't it!

Most enjoyable review Chris and there's nothing wrong with The Nutcracker...................in my view...

I would love to see them, but, like others, am very unsure about the content-( and like others I am finding there is so much to see this year that the ballet ticket fund is getting a bit low) ...so this is most helpful, and if anyone can advise on what these pieces might be like, all information gratefully received!

Ian, John, thank you- I understand entirely. I am not suggesting that most men would in fact enjoy such scenes, but that the ballet seemed to me to to represent them as potentially titillating- and, one reviewer did in fact mention this as if it was unproblematic I would imagine most men- and all the men I know- would find it disturbing-and if it is not meant to be disturbing, it should be. I take what you say about Sickert being mentally unbalanced ( though I think the piece rather badly misrepresents Sickert-another complaint!) but I think the piece was too confusing for this to be clear. If actions are happening on stage, how is the audience suposed to know "this is the depraved imaginings of x"?

Saw the triple bill last night-re Sweet Violets-So why make a ballet about young women being very brutally murdered? Maybe there is a good reason. I do not think it is impossible to deal with such a serious issue in dance. Many people mention Judas Tree and I have seen that-but that it seems to me, did in fact represent the actions as horrible and frightening. Similarly Manon and Mayerling do present some very disturbing scenes but in a very fully realised way such that we the audience feel the emotional pain and the moral struggles in the characters. What worries me is the representation of rape and murder in a softened and prettified way for no particular reason. Because SV didn't seem to have much point, I can't see the reason. Trouble is, beautiful young dancers being artistically murdered is nowhere near any kind of representation of what that sort of crime is really "like" -and because, as many have said the plot of SV was a muddle and the point of the whole piece hardly clear, it became a series of tableaux and in fact risked turning into a titillating presentation of attractive young women being forced into various pornographic postures- -for our entertainment. At one point the choreographer makes one strip, while the men all stay fully clothed, and one reviewer commented on how this would have "set pulses racing"-maybe Scarlett did not mean it like that, but what did he mean? Do I find it disturbing that the RB were enticing men in the audience all around me, to be aroused by this sight, in a story which was actually supposedly about tormenting, torturing, murdering and dismembering women, in the most horrible way- er yes, just a bit. If that makes me in any way odd, I can only say, the times are out of joint, in my view, and not me. I agree entirely that Scarlett shows tremendous talent . But there should be wiser heads at RB who could have steered a young choreographer away from the pitfalls of this project. Ok, enough of that.. On a happier note,DGV was great on a fourth viewing and I don't think I could ever tire of seeing it- it would have been good back-to-back with Serenade, also well danced, I thought. I have discovered Cuthbertson and think she is marvellous. I must echo all the huge praise for Zanowsky who I have been appreciating for years and years. She stood out in DGV. Brilliant. Another dancer I'd like to see more of is Eric Underwood.

Thank you for the very clear explanation. (It's only my fault if I prefer works called something like The Birthday Party, Dancing in the Park or A Jolly Day in Springtime :-) )

Second question: what does it mean?

I've had a brainwave- Jeremy Paxman! He's looking for a new job isn't he? and goes to the ballet I believe occasionally. Imagine it- "So, Mr O'Hare, you SAY the production might come back the year after next , but that's not much good to audiences is it?" :-)

Well I thought I'd add a comment on the ROH comments thread to the same effect about the broadcast being marvellous but-rather than saying the presenter was very bad,- that they need a new one!(subtly trying to be less horrible) Because actually it is important...

It is tongue in cheek and seems to me affectionate and not meant as serious criticism at all. I had to chuckle at the point about some fans who focus on someone in the back row of the corps etc -it is not unknown on ballet forum where someone always ignores all the main points and congratulates Sarah Boggins (who?) every time...... and several other types we can all recognise among ourselves ( and laugh I hope?) I have certainly been teased about my keenness to see a particular dancer-but I just see it as enthusiasm for talent and I don't mind a bit of teasing from less ballet-minded friends. However, I must say I think it is always in poor taste to bandy terms such as madness, lunatic, etc.

Bad luck Kate I feel for you. How frustrating. It is worth letting the ROH know as they have a team who liaise with the cinema chains. It is in all their interests to improve matters for next season- perhaps at least you can use your free ticket for Manon in the autumn.

I consider my ticket a wonderful bargain at £13- I can't see that as extortionate for 3 hrs of top quality ballet..! my usual amphi perch is fantastic but it could well cost £40-50 ( and the seat is half the size..) It seems to me an absolutely wonderful and marvellous and wholly positive thing that many more people can see a performance- it is never going to replace the live experience but not everyone can go to the theatre and last night broadcast the RB to 29 countries and a huge audience which must surely be good. I say- let's have many more live screenings. I do so wish they had been around when I was a very poor student as £13 is indeed more affordable than most theatre seats, and I wish they had had them when my Mother was alive as she was no longer able to get to London and would have been thrilled to go. I know quite a few people who have been for the first time- who will now go to "the real thing". Those of us lucky enough to experience both live and cinema performances have the added bonus of perhaps seeing an extra cast and getting different viewing angles -whereas whichever seat you are in at ROH-great as it is to be there- you miss something. I too cycled home in Cambridge on a cloud of joy- how great not to have to get the late train. It was unfortunate they picked a night with a higher than average female audience to close the ladies loos in our cinema though! Having to nip downstairs to the pub did very slightly take me down to earth in the interval..... :-)

I do think one needs to see this ballet more than once, because as many have said there is a lot to take in, a big cast, much detail and the fairly complex plot, as well as new music. As others have said:- credit to Wheeldon for making so many good roles rather than just going for a story with 2 leads, and for making interesting and lively work for the corps. I just had the survey from RB and they are clearly trying to work out whether a second run would be popular-surely the answer must be Yes ( with some new costumes one hopes........) It would also give the chance for a bit of tweaking along the lines suggested by wise ballet forum-ers, of a few minutes off Act 1 ( a bit less Leontes emoting) and a few minutes on Act 3- to tease out the reconciliations a little more. I agree the Leontes choreography worked better on film, but it seemed to me on second viewing the problem with it was just a little too much of a good thing. He is made to more or less repeat himself. The scene where he imagines Polixenes and Hermione having an affair is briliant because it is dramatic-when he is just shown writhing in torment, -writing rather than dancing, really, -that is less so and needs to be kept to a minimum. Watson is excellent in himself. (I really liked his final grey costume- that's how it should be- being able to see the legs does help..........costume designers who put the men in ill-fitting trousers -sometimes with skirts on top as well, should be severely punished)

Just back from seeing cast 1 in the live relay and this is just a quick note while it's fresh- I thought it was just marvellous and so, it seemed, did the audience. The piece repays re-viewing. It is more interesting than I thought at first viewing, and the close-ups allowed more appreciation of detail. I still think it works as an organic whole, the music grows on one and has more structure and texture than you can really appreciate with one hearing. Act 2 again I thought was pure joy. McRae- what can one say- he was sensational, and Lamb again dazzled with her beauty, her elegance and sweet smile. They seemed wholly convincing. The pas de deux was super- all the lifts worked which they did not, quite, in cast 2.The audience clearly loved them. I must echo all the praise for the power of Yanowsky's portrayal of Paulina- she had that quality of stillness and held the eye with minimal movements. Watson and Cuthbertson in Act 3 were so in their roles-it was very moving to watch and for me the final reconciliation scenes worked well, with poised , beautiful dancing from Cuthbertson: brava. Bussell fumbled through the interviews- oh dear, please find someone else. Florizel's costume does need re thinking. Those trousers! That waistcoat. But I admit I felt very proud of the RB tonight.

Glad I am not the only one who enjoyed all the " folk dancing"! I agree Munchkin it was tremendous fun.

...thanks Alison! that has encouraged me ....and I should have said ...... Beatriz Stix-Brunell was charming, with soft, delicate feet in particular. I also forgot to say that the prologue was beautifully staged and lit- and gave the necessary background and information very efficiently; without resorting to mime, it told a story very cleverly -yet simply somehow..for example the two little boys in red and green being replaced by two young men in red and green; the child emerging from under the couple's arms as they turned etc. I loved it. I also should have registered strong agreement with those who have admired the way Wheeldon presented Leontes' mad, imagined events versus reality- and the way the lighting and music made this work-clever, original and effective. Can't wait to see it on Monday at the cinema.