The Return of Ulysses / Roundhouse

[Geoff]

I am broadly in favour of encouraging people to see things. But I will make an exception for this show: just don't go. And if you already have tickets, try to dispose of them as quickly as possible. Despite Roderick Williams (who, like everyone, is hard to hear) the evening is a stinker. IMHO.

 

Here is a slightly expanded version of the comment I have just tried to leave on the ROH website...

 

Another failed production by the untalented Fulljames. Read the Bachtrack review, that gets this right:

 

https://bachtrack.com/review-monteverdi-ulysses-fulljames-royal-opera-roundhouse-january-2018

 

We left early.

 

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by Geoff

[MAB]

Just got back from the wretched thing, truly awful.  I had gone specifically to see Christine Rice despite being warned the director had odd ideas, but with Ms Rice off sick, it was a really tedious evening, cut too, as there should be dance music and arias for the gods.  I thought the preforming area resembled a doughnut as well and for most of the first half I might as well have been watching a concert performance it was so static.  More stage business in the second half but the restricted performing area precluded any real action.

 

I totally agree with Geoff:  avoid.

[Sim]

Four stars from Barry Millington in The Standard!  

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/go/london/arts/the-return-of-ulysses-review-community-spirit-and-excellent-singing-a3739881.html

 

[Lizbie1]

7 minutes ago, Sim said:

Four stars from Barry Millington in The Standard!  

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/go/london/arts/the-return-of-ulysses-review-community-spirit-and-excellent-singing-a3739881.html

 

 

It's had mostly good reviews all round, I think. I do sometimes wonder about reviewers, but I haven't seen this show so can't offer anything beyond my possibly narrow view that if (other than in the case of large open air venues, which aren't my cup of tea anyway) a production relies on amplification then it has failed.

[Geoff]

8 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

 

It's had mostly good reviews all round, I think. I do sometimes wonder about reviewers

 

I can help answer that, I think, Lizbie1. Critics (tend to) sit in free seats issued by the venue. Needless to say managements always try and allocate the best seats to the most important critics. And for such a specific space and production as this show in the Roundhouse, there may well be (a few) seats which, to be polite, accentuate the positive and, perhaps, subtly downplay some of the weaknesses. The production team and management will be more than aware where such seats are.

 

In other words if there are a small number of seats from which one can see and hear (without amplification) the star Roderick Williams very well, as well as not be too distracted by the band, and which are close enough to experience any movement as dramatic, well that is where I would put critics (as a friend of a number of producers and theatre managers, no names sorry, I speak from a little experience in these matters). Last night I was however sitting in a seat from which one saw - and heard - this production as the majority of the audience would have done. 

 

Incidentally there are natural biases created by critics who exhibit favouritism of one kind or another. This does not have to be corrupt or otherwise out of order. I have, for example, some sympathy for the lobby which would tend to want to praise any show by Monteverdi, for fear that bad reviews and poor attendance might mean less of that sort of thing gets put on.

 

Rather more dubious - and this is mainly but not exclusively a problem with films rather than opera - is the pressure critics are under to praise the "local team": in other words, a British film might be overpraised by British critics (just as a French film might be overpraised in France). In music, it is sometimes obvious when a singer is being given an easy time by the critics because they are local. This makes sense for a number of reasons: showbusiness rides to an extent on the impact of reviews, and reviewers are not unaware of their power to help products on their way around the world. 

 

Enough. This show is still, as the widow of the late Alan Clark might say, ess aitch one tee.

[Lizbie1]

My beef with some opera/classical reviewers is usually when they display blatant ignorance of vocal technique; when they praise a singer when it should be clear to anyone with a few lessons under their belt that what they're doing is fundamentally wrong or unhealthy.  They're really not difficult to spot: there are some singers, often principally active in the recording studio (always a warning sign for me!), who it's almost physically painful to listen to because they're in such a mess, but certain critics still praise their singing.  I'll make some allowances if they're exceptional dramatically but these aren't the singers or reviews I'm talking about here.

 

Of course, as the saying goes, you don't have to be a carpenter to criticise a table, but there are enough knowledgeable people in most opera audiences that it's insulting to them for a critic not to understand some fundamentals.

[MAB]

I do wish we could see early opera at Covent Garden instead of farming it out to other venues, though I have to say the productions at the Sam Wannamaker were wonderful.  By the way, has the ROH staged any Lully in the main house?  The ENO has a far better track record for this kind of rep which is becoming increasingly popular.  My top opera production of 2017 was without doubt Hipermestra at Glyndebourne conducted by the great William Christie, who by the way has never conduced at Covent Garden.

 

Handel should be performed regularly by the RO, he was sort of British after all, but then someone wholly British, Benjamin Britten, is ignored too.  I agree about critics sometimes having an agenda and a strange lack of knowledge regarding voices, but most are too young to have seen a lot of opera, I often think critics should come with some sort of CV outlining their credentials regarding what they are critiquing.  At ROH I'm told there are blindingly inaccurate programme notes of late not to mention words mistranslated in the librettos, added to that there are productions across the board that are inappropriate and often downright offensive.

 

What do we want?  Better opera!  When do we want it?  NOW!!!

[Mary]

I was just lamenting the fact that we couldn't go because of a very nasty attack of flu in the household, so this is rather music to my ears -  that we haven't really missed much.

.

An offer from ROH for 40% off has just come into my inbox...

 

So agree about Handel, Mab. I remember a wonderful Semele: that was ages ago. We rely on English Touring Opera who do a great job but it would be nice to see a really lavish staging once in a while.

[Geoff]

Apropos my earlier point about seating critics in certain places, see the first story in tonight's Londoner's Diary:

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/londoners-diary-email-drama-stabs-critics-of-new-caesar-a3744571.html

[sanj2000]

Geoff - I am so glad this production has now finished!

 

We went on Friday 12 January, and left at the interval. I primarily went to see Roderick Williams, but was disappointed by the whole thing .

 

What annoyed me most was that I spent/wasted a fair amount of money on tickets, and should have gone to the Nutcracker instead. I am going to be more careful on what I choose to go to, in future.