penelopesimpson Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Well, yes, but I forebore from mentioning that And don't even mention the thought of casting him in Nutcracker ... I think he would revolt at the very idea. But where has he been all these long months? He is the RB's top man, bar none, for me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted December 20, 2015 Share Posted December 20, 2015 Good question. I think he's only danced Monotones II this season, from what I remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toursenlair Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I'm only just chiming in on the cinema broadcast because we didn't see it till today in Canada. The camera angles drove me crazy, all the quick cuts from one angle to another, the closeups when you actually want to see the whole stage (or at least the whole group that happens to be dancing, or even the whole body of one person dancing). And why oh why do they keep cutting off the feet???? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewCo Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) I seem to recall that when the RB went to Moscow in 2014 a major critic whose reviews were translated into english remarked about the lack of rapport between the dancers cast as Manon and de Grieux and when I read the names of the dancers concerned I felt that she had a point. But they were the company's "best dancers" or at least the best known ones and clearly the dancers who the AD wanted to show off..I can't help thinking that while he might have shown better cast combinations, if he had done so, the same critic would inevitably have complained about being deprived of seeing the company's "best dancers" even if those other combinations proved to have real rapport. Something similar happened in New York this year Song of the Earth seemed to leave those who saw the opening night cast baffled. They had seen Nunez and were entitled to assume that her performance was all there was to the work. Those who then went to Cuthbertson's performance came away satisfied that they had seen the ballet because everything that had baffled them initially made sense in Cuthbertson's performance.. The idea that a company should show its best known dancers/stars and that those dancers are by definition its "best dancers" and they will inevitably be best in every ballet danced by the company is an idea that it is hard to disabuse people about. It is nothing new. I seem to recall that the cast for the premiere of MacMillan's Romeo and Juliet were not the dancers he wanted or indeed the dancers he had created it on but they were the company's mega stars and good box office. Off the main point you are making which I am very sympathetic to...but in fairness to Nunez: by no means everyone who saw her in Song of the Earth in NY was "baffled" by the ballet -- speaking for myself I was seeing it for the first time, and plenty liked both the ballet and Nunez' performance (which for all I know was modified from her London performances which I remember were criticized by fans--'too smiley' etc. --I saw nothing like that). I went to all three performances of Song of the Earth in NY, and enjoyed the other leading ballerinas as well (Morera and Cuthbertson)--in my eyes, each bought something different to the table. But, from the social media I saw--and people sitting around me--I know I wasn't the only one who was moved opening night ... (Nunez didn't get dinged by the professional critics either.) If anything got somewhat better between the first and third performance in a fairly clear-cut way, it was the ensemble, which, to my eyes, sometimes looked sloppy at the first performance. The main point, I follow--I remember sitting at a performance of the Bolshoi two years ago and hearing a disappointed couple behind me remark that the ballerina "wasn't a principal." The ballerina they were talking about? Olga Smirnova. And if I could go back in time and see a historic Romeo and Juliet--Lynn Seymour and Christopher Gable would be my first pick. Though I must admit I wouldn't exactly turn down a time-travel ticket for Fonteyn and Nureyev ... Edited December 21, 2015 by DrewCo 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Good question. I think he's only danced Monotones II this season, from what I remember. Wasn't Ed Watson also in Connectome and Raven Girl this season? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiz Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Katherine, this is a recurring gripe of ours whenever my husband and I watch any form of dance, either on TV or at the cinema! I wish a cameraman who understands dance could be found. It drives me crackers! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuthE Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Hope I've quoted this correctly as it came out strangely formatted in the original post: So agree with you. I am a great fan of Macrae but only for some things. He was amazing in Winter's Tale, fabulous when he danced with Osipova in Woolf Works, but his R&J, for me, was just emotionless. Interestingly, while I was not a fan of his Romeo this time around (replacing Pennefather and partnering Sarah Lamb - I missed his scheduled partnership with Salenko) when he did it opposite Evgenia Obraztsova two years ago I fell madly in love with them at the dress rehearsal and ended up seeing all three of their performances. I don't feel I've ever seen him as such a convincing and subtle actor before or since, and of course I most like to see him in roles with the technical wow factor. Apologies for going off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOSS Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Do any of us share our gripes about tricksy camera work with the ROH? Perhaps we should. A few people criticising busy camera work asking why there are so many close ups and why feet are so often rendered invisible when you want to see the whole dancer and pointing out that for sections of really brilliant footwork the dancers face is the last thing you want to look at seems to be called for. Perhaps a suggestion that older recordings seem to have better lighting (they used to put banks of additional lights in the lower slips near the stage) than the current crop and gave a much better account of the ballets being filmed would help. Perhaps the ROH needs to be reminded that a large part of its cinema audience is really interested in ballet and for them the older style of filming was more effective because there were hardly any close ups and far more close shots of the whole dancer so you could see face arms and feet. Those who are grateful for what little the ROH gives them in the cinema don't know it could be better. Perhaps someone needs to tell the powers that be. Edited December 21, 2015 by FLOSS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colman Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Well, I constantly complain to them (and the Bolshoi) on twitter about it. A suggestion for a more direct line would be nice too, but I suspect it's a lost cause: how to film dance performances is an ancient debate and the TV people - "whoosh! zoom! cut! what is this choreography you speak of? Gotta make it interesting!" - seem to have won. Edited December 21, 2015 by Colman 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Do any of us share our gripes about tricksy camera work with the ROH? Perhaps we should. A few people criticising busy camera work asking why there are so many close ups and why feet are so often rendered invisible .... etc This drives me potty too. The director/camera men probably came through the live music route (rock and pop), where they find it physically impossible just to show the musicains playing/singing, without seemingly HAVING to put in snap cuts and zooms in and out. As if when you're watching a band, that's what you see. Well it isn't, and I wish they'd stop, as it may be 'clever' but is also intensley annoying 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambros1a Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I'm only just chiming in on the cinema broadcast because we didn't see it till today in Canada. The camera angles drove me crazy, all the quick cuts from one angle to another, the closeups when you actually want to see the whole stage (or at least the whole group that happens to be dancing, or even the whole body of one person dancing). And why oh why do they keep cutting off the feet???? Agree wholeheartedly. This irritates me so much but I think it was much more prevalent in this screening. I also thought that in the wider views of the stage it felt as if the camera was in a hole looking up at the stage rather than on the same level. Aargh!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 "Wasn't Ed Watson also in Connectome and Raven Girl this season?" (Sorry, quotes still not working this end) Oops Of course he was. I'd obviously managed to obliterate that bill from my memory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odyssey Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 On a similar note, there are issues about lighting. Earlier in the thread several comments were made about how dark ithe set seemed in this screening. I had a look at the previous transmission of this production (2012?), and it is much brighter. It is the one thing that spoils the performance of the BRB Nutcracker from many years ago (on DVD)- much of act one is barely viewable and you can't see the clever transformation scene. I'd be interested to knows whether adjustments are made for live screenings - or is it prohibitively costly to design new lighting just for one performance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 On a similar note, there are issues about lighting. Earlier in the thread several comments were made about how dark ithe set seemed in this screening. I had a look at the previous transmission of this production (2012?), and it is much brighter. It is the one thing that spoils the performance of the BRB Nutcracker from many years ago (on DVD)- much of act one is barely viewable and you can't see the clever transformation scene. I'd be interested to knows whether adjustments are made for live screenings - or is it prohibitively costly to design new lighting just for one performance? Well they used to do it (as Floss pointed out) so clearly they used to acknowledge that the needs of the stage and the screen are different and felt it important to accommodate the screen when filming a performance (though this was pre-live transmission days). I seem to remember that they mentioned this in the booking details for a performance that was being filmed, so that people could choose not to book for it if they thought it would be intrusive. (Though I never found it so.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOSS Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) I have just posted a general comment about the tricksy and distracting camera work and the low lighting levels in the Nutcracker and other screenings on the ROH website. I have thrown in for good measure that I think that the Bolshoi and Mariinsky screened performances are better because they are shot as if the theatre audience and cinema audience are interested in the same thing ie seeing the dancing and the action of the ballet. I also said that I thought that the reason they get so few complaints is because most people think that there is no point in complaining.I wonder if I will get a response, and, if I do,what it will be? I don't think that it will be a case of "light blue touch paper and retire". I suspect that it will be brushed off with complete indifference. Edited December 21, 2015 by FLOSS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOSS Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Well the additional lighting at ROH for filming used to look very low tech. it was just a row of rather big lamps on tall supports about a dozen in all lined up near the proscenium arch.six on each side of it. They certainly made the area at the front of the stage look brighter. I suspect that those sitting right in front of them felt the heat coming off them. As far as stage lighting is concerned. in the past the fashion was not for gloom and darkness and sets were carefully thought out to aid visibility.It is quite possible that the lighting for the Nutcracker has been adjusted to meet the modern expectations of the lighting team. I recognise that ensuring that dance is visible throughout the theatre is a very old fashioned idea. Act 3 of the old Swan Lake which was replaced by Dowell's hyper atmospheric version was wonderfully visible. There was no danger of the prince disappearing into the floor because he was wearing black tights and dancing on a black floor. In the production designed by Leslie Hurry the prince wore black in that act but the floor of the hall in which all the action takes place was a pale colour, probably grey. In fact the whole act was lit as if the audience were expected to be interested in the dancing throughout the act. Edited December 21, 2015 by FLOSS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colman Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Thing is, high end modern cameras can more-or-less see in the dark. Maybe there are still constraints on broadcast gear but it seems strange that they can't find anything that can't deal with moderate light levels as well as a high-end consumer camera! Anyone remember the camera lingering on the seated widow while Osipova danced away off camera in Fille? Or on Lamb's Juliet on the balcony while McCrae's Romeo professed his love out of sight? Pure brilliance. I realise that, in some circumstances, the filming can be an act of making art, but in the case of live broadcasts of stage shows I'd suggest that the director's job is to stay out of the way and try to communicate the sense of being there as unobtrusively as possible. Edited December 21, 2015 by Colman 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOSS Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Should I be surprised that my comments appear to have been removed from the ROH site? I wonder whether it is permanent or only temporary?Perhaps they did not like the fact that I said that the Bolshoi and Mariinsky camera work was better and more attuned to the needs of a ballet audience. Having read the response to someone else raising questions about lighting levels it would appear that the needs of the audience in the theatre are of greater concern than the international audience, Edited December 21, 2015 by FLOSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 That's interesting. On 17 December I posted a comment about the screening - positive about the performance, negative about the lighting in Act I, and saying that I thought it was inappropriate to fund raise for pointe shoes (or anything else) in the interval. My comment was still 'awaiting moderation' two days later, so I posted another comment asking for clarification of this. Two days later again, both comments are still 'awaiting moderation' and so visible only to me. I don't know if this is extremely slow 'moderation' (in which case people will have largely stopped reading the comments by the time the first comment is 'released'), or the suppression of what I think was a perfectly reasonable comment about the ROH's fundraising practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 perhaps the bod who moderates that bit of the ROH site is on hols... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penelopesimpson Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Wasn't Ed Watson also in Connectome and Raven Girl this season? He was, but even my favourite dancer couldn't tempt me to waste money on Raven Girl again 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmhopton Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 This was my comment on the ROH site and their response. 'Wonderful production and amazing performances by everyone, especially Alexander Campbell, the fabulous Gary Avis (possibly the best Drosselmeyer ever) and Francesca Hayward, the best Clara I've seen since Alina Cojacaru. Congratulations everyone!! My only small quibble is the one I always seem to have these days with the broadcast ballets and that is the lighting. it is a pity the broadcast performances couldn't have slightly stronger lighting as it can detract from your enjoyment if you're struggling to pick up details of the set or performance. it is never usually a problem in the theatre itself as your eyes adjust to the lighting whereas the cameras can't adjust. Sarah Walsh (Cinema Account Coordinator) responded on 17 December 2015 at 3:04pm Dear Joan, It can be tricky with lighting because if the stage lights are adjusted too much (to compensate for cinema viewers) then the experience for those watching in the theatre will be impacted. Having said that, thank you for your comments and I'll be sure to pass them on to the production team. Best wishes, Sarah Quite a few others commented on the lighting also and, though the response (where there was one) tended to focus on individual cinemas rather then the lighting itself surely many cinemas can't all have been showing it darker than it should be! It's not just Nutcracker either. When I was in the ROH shop recently they were showing the new dvd of the Osipova Fille and that seemed dark too. Like Nutcracker it was fine for close-ups but when the camera pulled back you had difficulty picking out the dancers at the back of the stage. Haven't seen it at home yet asthe dvd is a Christmas treat so really looking forward to this even if the lighting is a bit murky. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOSS Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) Saying that they can't adjust the lighting for the cinema audience because that will spoil the experience of those in the theatre is ridiculous. In the past they used to warn the audience attending a performance that was to be filmed for television that there would be additional lighting and that as a result the performance you were attending would look somewhat different from other performances. I can't remember whether they charged a slightly reduced price for the tickets. You were warned and you made up your mind whether to go or not. It leaves me wondering about the priorities of the ROH and of the AD of the company.. In the past when some of the opera house staff were inclined to behave as if they were doing you a great favour by letting you into the building those in charge of the ballet company seemed to recognised that when it came to filming for public broadcast they owed a greater duty to the public who could not attend the theatre but paid their taxes to support the company than they did to the 2000 plus people in the theatre when the filming was taking place, Edited December 21, 2015 by FLOSS 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonty Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Absolutely, Floss. I remember being at a filmed performance many years ago, when I was a child. There was an advanced warning that the stage lighting would be much brighter than normal, and it could get quite hot in the theatre. The whole performace was geared towards the fact that it was being filmed. As a consequence, tickets for the audience were cheaper. It was quite strange in a way, because it was like sitting in broad daylight, and the dancers must have been able to see the people in the stalls quite clearly. Edited December 22, 2015 by Fonty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 modern HD cameras don't need 'broad daylight' type conditions in order to succesfully film. I didn't see the broadcast, so not 100% sure where the problem lay - but generally speaking I'm guessing that in order for the spot-lit dancers/characters to appear NOT overexposed and so bleached out, the background would have been gloomy (this even happened in Fille the last run I noticed). I suppose upping the background's ambient light would bring this into view, but destroy the atmospheric, sepia-tinted, candlelit effect for those paying the big bucks in the theatre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toursenlair Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 another gripe. Does anyone else find Darcey and her sidekicks irritatingly gushy? Everything is always PERFECT and FABULOUS and THE BEST. We don't need to be told that after we can judge what we've just seen ourselves. I know it's part of the current general culture of hyperbole, but it strikes me as, dare I say it, un-English. I guess I was brought up to consider it unseemly to do something and then say "Aren't I great???" 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penelopesimpson Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 another gripe. Does anyone else find Darcey and her sidekicks irritatingly gushy? Everything is always PERFECT and FABULOUS and THE BEST. We don't need to be told that after we can judge what we've just seen ourselves. I know it's part of the current general culture of hyperbole, but it strikes me as, dare I say it, un-English. I guess I was brought up to consider it unseemly to do something and then say "Aren't I great???" Yes, in spades. I find Darcey is always gushy - she does the Princess Darcey thing permanently and is, for me, always too good to be true 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Have to say - the Mouse Kings ears must still be ringing, after the clomp he got from Clara's shoe last night. Ms Maguire really gave him what for! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonty Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) modern HD cameras don't need 'broad daylight' type conditions in order to succesfully film. I didn't see the broadcast, so not 100% sure where the problem lay - but generally speaking I'm guessing that in order for the spot-lit dancers/characters to appear NOT overexposed and so bleached out, the background would have been gloomy (this even happened in Fille the last run I noticed). I suppose upping the background's ambient light would bring this into view, but destroy the atmospheric, sepia-tinted, candlelit effect for those paying the big bucks in the theatre. It is quite amazing the way modern cameras work (to me, anyway.) They are constantly filming for television in our local park, and they always do so after dark, when the park gates are locked and the normal public can't get in. We can, however, see what they are doing from the road. An advert filmed on our bandstand at midnight came out as a wonderful summer's day picnic when we saw it on tv. I just wondered if they doctored it much after filming? I think the Opera House has to decide whether its live broadcasts should be done in such a way that the film looks wonderful, but the theatre audience has less than perfect lighting, or carry on as they have been doing. As these filmed versions are sold afterwards, I would have thought they would have to go for the former option, and give the theatre audience cut price seats on those evenings. I would be perfectly happy to see R&J or The Nutcracker live with a few gloomy bits, if I am only paying half price or less for a seat in the stalls. Edited December 22, 2015 by Fonty 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahw Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 I agree it's a big problem I had to give up on whatever they showed last Xmas Day as too dark to see. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 yes indeed - would be much better to film (for the results that is) with a more uniform lighting scheme. Those cameras are incredible (if you see any outside broadcasts for example, it looks like a normal day, whne in fact its beyond dusk). What they struggle with, what all cameras struggle with, is high contrasts, which the human eye/brain sorts out almost instantaneously 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOSS Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 I think that the powers that be at the RB need to be told that their streamed broadcasts and subsequent DVDs are not as good as they could be. If they hear nothing they will think that they are doing a good job. Why not put some of the "gripes" on the ROH website where the audience is asked to say how they enjoyed the performance? If they get enough adverse comments they might do something to remedy the situation. You don't need to be a genius to come up with a solution to the problem.Dark areas and sections of action that are too darkly lit to see what is happening and tricksy camera work do not seem to be features of the Bolshoi's streamed performances which I have seen.Perhaps Bolshoi management think that the worldwide audience is more important than the the theatre audience at the performance which is being broadcast.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colman Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 I've had my annoyances with the Bolshoi too, though less so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now