Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Sophoife said:

 

I think, based on what I've seen, that they don't. All the comments here and on Bayadère about scrims/screens recently...and what a difference there is in so many ballets between a straight-line viewing and one from an elevated position.

 

Elevation: one can really see the patterns the dancers are making on stage. Unfortunately increasingly large amounts of set, backdrop, projections, and/or stuff hanging from flies become invisible. And with the increasing use of projections supposedly integral to pieces, this is more and more relevant.

 

Straight-line: all sets, backdrop, visual projections etc visible. Full effect generated. Can't see stage patterns made by dancers.

 

I actually complained to a choreographer in person once that the projection that had been made much of was invisible from anywhere except the stalls in the two very different theatres in which I'd seen the ballet. His response was that I should buy better seats.

I am very glad it wasn’t me he said that to!  😤😤. Such incredible arrogance.  

 

Well I hope that the ROH, in their new spirit of “non-elitism”, ensure that they remind choreographers and opera directors going forward that there is a whole mess of riff raff who sit above Grand Tier/Balcony level, who (despite their sheer cheek in buying the cheap seats) may just appreciate being able to see what is happening on the stage.  

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 370
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Sophoife I just cannot believe that comment by the choreographer.....honestly ....doesn't he WANT the audience to see his work!! 

 

Perhaps its its got like everything else these days ....no cohesive whole ...each department not knowing what the next is doing etc!!

Perhaps he thought well I'm only responsible for the movement mate ...don't talk to me about the lighting ..the costumes ..any projections etc etc ...not my remit!!

Talking of costumes you do have to giggle a bit when the acknowledgements in the programmes to all who contributed to the ballet say "Costume Designer"........ ..when the costumes are just basically knickers and vests ...or similar. ( could have been a job lot from M and S) 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha LinMM and Sim...the next time I saw this man (by careful arrangement on my part) I asked him again about those projections. He had the gall to repeat that I should buy better seats.

 

I presented him with my printout showing exactly how much I'd spent on seeing his damn ballet (which I enjoyed) seven times. Including costs of travel, accommodation, and subsistence while visiting Melbourne and Sydney. I also gave a copy to the company's AD who came past and stopped to say hello.

 

Both of them read in silence and the choreographer then apologised, saying "but you're an exception". The AD said "yes we really should do something about this".

 

I explained gently that I'm not an exception and that in fact it used to cost even more when travelling from Hobart.

 

This was five years ago and I've not yet seen an improvement.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Sophoife said:

 

I actually complained to a choreographer in person once that the projection that had been made much of was invisible from anywhere except the stalls in the two very different theatres in which I'd seen the ballet. His response was that I should buy better seats.

 

How arrogant of him! They have a duty to reasonably convey as much as possible to the entire audience regardless of the price of a seat. This is doubly the case and therefore inexcusable when pieces are conceived for a specific space such as that at Covent Garden.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the final performance of this triple bill on Thursday.

 

I've got mixed feelings about The Unknown Soldier.  I think the concept is good but the realisation of it hasn't quite come off.  My main quibble is with the lid on the set - I really do not see the point.  From my vantage point of the front row of the stalls I could see everything but surely (as has been mentioned earlier in the thread) people in the higher levels must have missed a heck of a lot.  My other quibble was the music at the dance - it sounded more like the roaring twenties than pre-WW1.  I thought the spoken testimonies worked really well.  I have read about dying soldiers calling for their mothers so I wasn't surprised by the Harry Patch speech that was used.

 

The performances by all the dancers were magnificent.  Yasmine Naghdi was just luminous and incredibly moving as the loved one left behind.  Similarly Matthew Ball imbued every movement with meaning.  

 

I found the moments were the soldier was dying were incredibly moving and the ending with the beautiful young men worked for me.

 

I would like to have seen this piece a second time but I am glad I had the opportunity to see it this once.

 

Without exception I loved Infra and Symphony in C.

 

Great catching up with some fellow forum members too.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jan McNulty said:

I have read about dying soldiers calling for their mothers so I wasn't surprised by the Harry Patch speech that was used.

 

The implication from the Harry Patch film that was used was, to my mind, that the dying solider had seen/perceived his (dead) mother, not was calling for her.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, alison said:

 

The implication from the Harry Patch film that was used was, to my mind, that the dying solider had seen/perceived his (dead) mother, not was calling for her.

 

You might want to read Harry Patch's testimony in the link below - 'Going over the top' includes his recollection of the dying soldier saying 'mother'.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwone/last_tommy_gallery_03.shtml

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luke Jennings sums it up rather well, although I wish he had also commented on the less than memorable choreography and the dreadful music which provided absolutely nothing.  Googling Alastair Marriott, one wonders why this important commission was given to him; his track record as a choreographer is decidly lacklustre.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found LJ's review interesting, and I can see the logic of what he says and in theory would agree with it, and with some of his criticisms of the work. But it's clearly not true that you 'can't' take the telegraph boy seriously, or that it's 'impossible' to take the afterlife scene seriously, because I (for one) could and did. I think that critics should be wary of making absolutist statements that imply that everyone responds in the same way to everything, or that everyone reacts in accordance with a theoretical position they have postulated. My requirements (for want of a better word) may be different from his, or those of others. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the Alastair Marriott choreography for Unknown Soldier desperately unimpressive, simplistic and lacklustre.

 

I'd take more notice of Marriott (no relation!) if he dedicated himself to chasing, winning and creating work for companies around the world and improved over time. He hasn't and when it comes down to it has not created much really - nice website, but thin compared to what most serious choreographers can put up.

 

RB have backed 3 professional choreographers which are all resident under various titles (McGregor, Wheeldon and Scarlett) and all are incredibly busy doing things elsewhere as well. They are the real deal. Having backed those 3, RB artistic management should use remaining commissioning dosh on professional choreographers from outside the organisation and, importantly, with fresh perspectives to bring. If Marriott wants to be a choreographer he should do what Jonathan Watkins did - stop dancing, leave RB and concentrate 100% on winning work wherever it is to be found.

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just read the review by Eva Kistrup in today's links where one of her slants is derived from the fact that large numbers of the audience quit after Infra, the conclusion being that Londoners don't want to bother with Balanchine.

 

If she had bothered to look more closely, she might have noticed the significant numbers of teenagers attending this Triple Bill, many of them in organised groups which, once their syllabus piece was over, were whisked away, doubtless because of 'school the next day'.

 

There is no end to the false assumptions liberally peddled by 'critics.'

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, capybara said:

one of her slants is derived from the fact that large numbers of the audience quit after Infra

 

Yes I  noticed this ridiculous  review too --  completely wrong-headed and actually quite annoying in terms of  erroneous inferences  drawn from  dubious observations. I have posted a reply on the reviewer's site. 

Edited by Richard LH
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bangorballetboy said:

 

Three nominations for best classical choreography at the NDAs.

But no real success.  As others have said.  I re- iterate that this should have been an important work and merited a more skilled choreographer.  Awards (or the lack of them) mean little.  Bit like the Ruinart champagne....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've lost count of the number of times people on this forum have said that a new work is disappointing, coupled with comments that they don't know why the choreographer was given the opportunity.  

 

Personally, the only new work I have enjoyed more than slightly was Woolf Works, and that was only because it wasn't as boring as I normally find McGregor offerings.  Which is really damning with faint praise!  

Edited by Fonty
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fonty said:

I've lost count of the number of times people on this forum have said that a new work is disappointing, coupled with comments that they don't know why the choreographer was given the opportunity.  

 

Personally, the only new work I have enjoyed more than slightly was Woolf Works, and that was only because it wasn't as boring as I normally find McGregor offerings.  Which is really damning with faint praise!  

 

On a positive note, I like many other have loved woolf works, chroma and infra by mcgregor, as well as DGV and Polyphonia (and middle act of winters tale) by Wheeldon, or Flight Pattern by Crystal Pite. For ENB, akram khan's Giselle and the most recent Forsythe too. I'd personally call all of those ballets a success which I hope will be revived, but then it's all mostly so subjective isn't it (although not in the case of US or Frankenstein!!). 

 

So hard to compare new works against older ones which have stood the test of time and have stayed in the répertoire, while older poor works have been whittled away, and like someone said earlier (Floss I believe) not all choreographers can be consistent geniuses. 

 

Completely agree with many other posters that some sort of control or encouraging use of dramaturge when a choreographer is tackling a narrative ballet could / should be encouraged and certain ballets eg. Frankenstein just should not be revived at the expense of other répertoire unless some substantial cutting is done. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

not all choreographers can be consistent geniuses


 

No choreographers … 

 

Unknown Soldier seems to be getting an at best lukewarm reception with very few enthusiasts, and I'd argue it's for relatively objective reasons rather than the normal "down with that sort of thing" cohort. It's a badly constructed piece of dance and dancing it well doesn't save it. Woolf Works, for instance, had its haters but it had a good number of people who loved it. I don't think I'm seeing that here. 

Edited by Colman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For my money, virtually everything about Woolf Works was fabulous.  Music out of this world, narrative just right, great and exciting choreography.  A ballet I could happily see on repeat play.  Loved the Arthur Pita last year, too.  My problem with US is that it just isn't very good, failing on almost every level.

 

I feel the same about Accosta's DQ and am amazed that it is being given goodness knows how many performances next season.  I find this staggering, ditto Frankenstein which, for me, was a dismal failure.  I applaud new work and understand the kiss a lot of frogs theory, but must we go back to kiss them again?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did say my comment was personal!   I haven't seen the Pite, or many of the other works that people are referring to.  I enjoyed the Forsythe  In the Middle, I found it quite mesmeric.  However,  I did see it with Guillem, who was a unique and dazzling star.  Never seen it since, no idea how others coped with it.  In general I like classical ballet, not modern, however brilliant/innovative/different it is. 

 

Of course we have to have new works, but I want the choreography to be according to the strict definitions of classical ballet, not "pushing boundaries", which to me is an excuse for giving us ugly contortions.  And this seems to be where the problem lies.  Those that attempt to do this seem to produce something that isn't going to stand the test of time.  That's ok if they are new and inexperienced.  But when someone continually produces a new work that is probably not going to be a keeper, then I start to wonder why so much money is being wasted.  

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, penelopesimpson said:

For my money, virtually everything about Woolf Works was fabulous.  Music out of this world, narrative just right, great and exciting choreography.  A ballet I could happily see on repeat play.  Loved the Arthur Pita last year, too.  My problem with US is that it just isn't very good, failing on almost every level.

 

I feel the same about Accosta's DQ and am amazed that it is being given goodness knows how many performances next season.  I find this staggering, ditto Frankenstein which, for me, was a dismal failure.  I applaud new work and understand the kiss a lot of frogs theory, but must we go back to kiss them again?

 

I'm very much looking forward to the Woolf Works DVD but I do have a couple of problems - one is the idealisation of suicide by drowning and the other (which I think is probably more generally shared) is the totally inadequate cast list/synopsis.  I'll be interested to see if the DVD material is more helpful.  

I'm afraid I didn't like The Wind but am looking forward to both Don Q and Frankenstein.  I've always enjoyed Don Q in the theatre as I did Frankenstein on its first outing.  I'll be interested to see if Liam Scarlett makes any changes this time - I hope there'll be much more for the Creature/Frankenstein in the animation scene but I think I'll find it very difficult to have any sympathy for Frankenstein as he does nothing to save Justine.

But I do agree with penelopesimpson's conclusion regarding the Unknown Soldier.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought The Wind was dire....it just didn't tell me the story effectively, there was no time for character development, and I didn't feel anything for any of them.  I thought Frankenstein was so bad that I am not going this time around, tweaks or no.  I quite liked DonQ and can't remember what is so bad in it that some people have taken against it.  All versions of this ballet are silly or exaggerated in one way or another, so I never take it seriously and just sit back and enjoy it for the sunny fluff that it is.  It is interesting to read what everyone likes or dislikes;  it shows how different we all are, and how art can never be subjective.  Et vive la difference!

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I didn't much like The Wind either, despite some startlingly good visuals at the beginning of it (I thought those domineering wind machines were awful). I didn't mind Frankenstein so will see it later this season, despite its flaws, but loathed the Jack the Ripper one of Liam Scarlett's - that's one I'll be sitting out should it ever return. Whilst not perfect, I enjoyed Don Q - perhaps it was the moving street layouts that folk didn't take to (which I thought was quite clever) - but will only see a few of them with casts I like, as its not one I get much out of with repeated viewings. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sim said:

I thought The Wind was dire....it just didn't tell me the story effectively, there was no time for character development, and I didn't feel anything for any of them.  I thought Frankenstein was so bad that I am not going this time around, tweaks or no.  I quite liked DonQ and can't remember what is so bad in it that some people have taken against it.  All versions of this ballet are silly or exaggerated in one way or another, so I never take it seriously and just sit back and enjoy it for the sunny fluff that it is.  It is interesting to read what everyone likes or dislikes;  it shows how different we all are, and how art can never be subjective.  Et vive la difference!

I am with Sim on Frankenstein and The Wind. I didn't see Acosta's Don Q, but will give it a go. 

For me, the best new pieces of recent years at Covent Garden have been Flight Pattern and The Winter's Tale. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the only new work under Kevin O'Hare that has been a complete success is Flight Pattern. I loved Woolf Works too, and have enjoyed aspects or parts of other new works; but there's been a lot (too much) not to like too. I hope this can change, since in other respects I think he's been an excellent director.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Sim said:

I thought The Wind was dire....it just didn't tell me the story effectively, there was no time for character development, and I didn't feel anything for any of them.  I thought Frankenstein was so bad that I am not going this time around, tweaks or no.  I quite liked DonQ and can't remember what is so bad in it that some people have taken against it.  All versions of this ballet are silly or exaggerated in one way or another, so I never take it seriously and just sit back and enjoy it for the sunny fluff that it is.  It is interesting to read what everyone likes or dislikes;  it shows how different we all are, and how art can never be subjective.  Et vive la difference!

Sim, I agree with what you say about The Wind, but there were reasons to enjoy:

 

Ed Watson's mesmerising Indian

The stage setting which brilliantly evoked the atmosphere of the mid-West

The drama of the storyline shown through some brilliant choreography

The music which resonated with and enhanced both the setting and the action in a way that the score for US failed to do

 

and, not least...

 

...it wasn't Twyla Tharp which is still the worst thing I've seen from RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, penelopesimpson said:

I should be honest and admit that nobody's DQ does much for me.  Accosta's version just seemed to make a silly ballet even sillier.  But, of course, I hadn't seen his Carmen then.....

I'm with you penelopesimpson, I can only ever manage one viewing of DQ every few years which then reminds me why I avoid it. 

 

However I do have tickets to see Kaneko / Corrales. Have loved Kaneko since seeing her in the world ballet day class video and her first Sugar Plum rehearsal with Kish. She just had that special something for me from the very start, and was unlucky to be out for over 2 years with serious knee injuries which slowed her rise! In fact I think that one of those injuries was during a DQ performance as Kitri so let's hope she has better luck this time round!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...