Royal Ballet Cinderella March/April 2023

[Sim]

27 minutes ago, Darlex said:

I understand what you are saying and love your last line.

 

Possibly Monahan is putting himself into the role of director and as director, you have to make casting decisions about dancers who you have never seen in a role. As we know, Nunez is never nothing but reliable and can be a lot more than that to many people, but I agree with Monahan, without ever having seen Hayward as Cinderella because she's never danced it, but having seen her affinity with other Ashton roles (Rhapsody, Fille, Ondine extract, Vera, Dorabella - can anyone else add to that list - perhaps it's brevity reflects the paucity of Ashton works currently performed,) I have to say I agree with him. 

 

I think my biggest sadness about this revival is that it looks like we will never get to see Hayward as one of the season fairies. I always imagined her as Summer.

There is no doubt that Hayward is an excellent Ashton interpreter.  But then so is Laura Morera, and she doesn't get a mention!  I think what we are objecting to is that he is saying that Hayward should have been given the first night, having never danced it before.  This was a special gala night, and Marianela Nunez is a famous, world-class ballerina and is currently the prima at the Royal Ballet.  This, and the fact that she has danced the role before, ensured that people would get something special (reliable?) for their financial outlays.  The other thing that I object to is the implied (meant or not) damning of the other hard-working dancers who will also dance the role.  No matter how good Hayward might be at other Ashton roles, I can't comment on her interpretation of this one until I've seen it.  As I know from experience, I never just assume that because a dancer is good at something or a certain type of choreography that that will always be the case with every role and I don't think that Monahan, as a professional critic, should either.  But that's just my own view.  

[Linnzi5]

6 hours ago, emmarose said:

 

I was wondering about the colours, I had to look at the cast list to see which ballerina was which season because I couldn't place them.

I have not seen the production yet - roll on April! However, I think I would have chosen green for spring, yellow for summer, a bronze colour for autumn and blue for winter. I think we all have personal colours associated with seasons - but this is subjective. I often find that photographs don't do costumes justice, so I'm reserving judgement. I have loved reading everyone's reviews - so thank you!  

[Linnzi5]

1 hour ago, Mary said:

It is absurd for Monahan to be reviewing a performance he has never seen by a performer who has never danced the role !

Equally, for anyone  to criticise the production before actually seeing it is a bit pointless.

 

I want to let my first viewing settle in my mind, and see it again, before saying more and I hope to read many interesting opinions on here from others  - who have seen the production.

 

Meanwhile, I think I shall respond to him by criticising his review without actually reading it.

 

 

Your last sentence made me laugh out loud! Touché 🤣

[Guest]

2 hours ago, oncnp said:

And the FT review states Nunez is " dream casting" for the role.

 

And gave the production 5*

'oh no she isn't.' 'oh yes she is!'

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Sim said:

There is no doubt that Hayward is an excellent Ashton interpreter.  But then so is Laura Morera, and she doesn't get a mention!  I think what we are objecting to is that he is saying that Hayward should have been given the first night, having never danced it before.  This was a special gala night, and Marianela Nunez is a famous, world-class ballerina and is currently the prima at the Royal Ballet.  This, and the fact that she has danced the role before, ensured that people would get something special (reliable?) for their financial outlays.  The other thing that I object to is the implied (meant or not) damning of the other hard-working dancers who will also dance the role.  No matter how good Hayward might be at other Ashton roles, I can't comment on her interpretation of this one until I've seen it.  As I know from experience, I never just assume that because a dancer is good at something or a certain type of choreography that that will always be the case with every role and I don't think that Monahan, as a professional critic, should either.  But that's just my own view.  

Sim, you are certainly right about Morera.

[Linnzi5]

31 minutes ago, Sim said:

There is no doubt that Hayward is an excellent Ashton interpreter.  But then so is Laura Morera, and she doesn't get a mention!  I think what we are objecting to is that he is saying that Hayward should have been given the first night, having never danced it before.  This was a special gala night, and Marianela Nunez is a famous, world-class ballerina and is currently the prima at the Royal Ballet.  This, and the fact that she has danced the role before, ensured that people would get something special (reliable?) for their financial outlays.  The other thing that I object to is the implied (meant or not) damning of the other hard-working dancers who will also dance the role.  No matter how good Hayward might be at other Ashton roles, I can't comment on her interpretation of this one until I've seen it.  As I know from experience, I never just assume that because a dancer is good at something or a certain type of choreography that that will always be the case with every role and I don't think that Monahan, as a professional critic, should either.  But that's just my own view.  

I agree with this 100%. Nunez IS world class. Morera is brilliant, too. Love her! Nunez is at the top of her game and with her, you know what you will get (same with Muntagirov). A self-assured, technically brilliant but sensitive performance. They have 'star power', which, when you are charging those prices for a gala, quite frankly, you need.

 

I adore Nunez's dancing. Yes, she can be understated, but sometimes, less is more in my opinion. I love Hayward too, so I will be interested to see reviews of her performance. If I only had one opportunity to buy one ticket, and had to choose between Nunez and Hayward in a longer classical ballet (even Ashton), then I would choose Nunez pretty much every time, as she makes it all look easy and I know what I would get, I can't always say the same for Hayward. 

Edited March 28, 2023 by Linnzi5

[Richard LH]

1 hour ago, JNC said:

I will reserve full judgment until I actually see it on stage but from the photos I agree with some comments about the fact the costumes appear a bit garish/Disney - ballet for the cgi/frozen era (not in a good way). 
 

I adore the old world pastel charm of Messell’s beauty designs, other designs/costumes I like are probably Coppelia, Sylvia, La Bayadere (a bit OTT but I like it and still classical), Manon, and the new Swan Lake for a more modern style. 
 

I don’t understand the hair for the fairies and the bright colours seem too much, and I wonder if the longer dresses (rather than tutus) affects how the season fairies/godmother choreography can be appreciated in act 1 (have they always worn tutus or dresses for this?) 

 

I think ROH has in their shop some backstage photos of the fairies back in the 50s and I appreciate things must sometimes innovate to give new artists a chance but I’d have loved a more “traditional” design and costumes. 
 

The sets look quite good - particularly the finale one and the act 1 house but I remain a bit sceptical of the lighting effects, it’s good to hear they seem to be well received so I’ll also keep open minded about them! 

I need to reserve judgement for the same reason, but as seen in the photos,  the fairy costumes don't look too garish to me...I think they look cheerful, bright and fresh, and if they are distinguishable from the style of the lovely costumes for other ballets, and identifiably "the Cinderella fairies" I would regard that as no bad thing.

[Tango Dancer]

15 minutes ago, Linnzi5 said:

I agree with this 100%. Nunez IS world class. Morera is brilliant, too. Love her! Nunez is at the top of her game and with her, you know what you will get (same with Muntagirov). A self-assured, technically brilliant but sensitive performance. They have 'star power', which, when you are charging those prices for a gala, quite frankly, you need.. 

 

This so much.  If you're charging gala prices you need your most reliable and top-draw stars to give satisfaction and open the show.  That's what people expect. 

 

I mean it's ballet not a 100m race.  There's not a "best" dancer like there's a "best" time in a race. Different interpreters do different things.  That's why it's lovely to have a choice so you can pick the cast you want to see. 

[Swan]

1 hour ago, Dawnstar said:

 

Seeing a 30 minute interval followed by an only 25 minute Act III makes my heart sink a bit. It's a lot of hanging around when you're attending alone - especially as I'll be doing so 6 times over!

I totally agree @Dawnstar! 
 

On a positive note, I’m super excited about seeing the matinee on Saturday as well as the other casts I’ve booked for. Might be tough missing out seeing the dancers I haven’t booked for but if there are tickets still available……🤔

[art_enthusiast]

5 hours ago, Candleque said:

And Luca Acri looked like he was having a ball. For me, I kept thinking how great he'd be as the jester or even the prince. (Casting a dancer in their prime as a slapstick step-sister isn't a choice I'd have made, but hey I am confused quite often with casting decisions ;-))

Same here, I thought it looked a bit odd that he was cast for this role. Nothing against pantomime humour, I’m just really not a fan! I think he’s a brilliant dancer, one of my absolute favourites. Looking forward to seeing him in a different role when I go, hopefully!

[Dawnstar]

2 hours ago, Sim said:

Dawnstar if you let us know dates you are attending I am sure many of us would be delighted to meet you in the intervals if we are there at the same time.

 

Thank you very much. The dates I'm due to attend (assuming no train strikes or anything occur!) are 5th, both shows on 10th, 18th, 19th and 27th. I very much hope I will react very positively to Cinderella but do warn people that if I don't then I'm no good at lying & say I'm loving something if I'm not - as I'm sure @Rob S can testify from meeting up in the intervals of Woolf Works!

 

1 hour ago, MJW said:

The lengthy intervals do annoy me - I appreciate time is required for set changes etc etc plus of course for the audience to do whatever but two half an hour intervals is a bit too much; perhaps 20 and 25 mins - its not that much shorter but can make all the difference for those travelling further home in the evening. Either that or start earlier!

 

The General overran by ten minutes so finished about 22:25. I knew I wouldn't be able to get to Waterloo for the 22:30 even if it had finished on time. Unfortunately SWR cancelled the fast 23:00 and I had to get the slow stopping train. I'm afraid that rather ruined the evening! 

 

I walk back to Kings Cross for the 23.09 after near-3-hour performances. I've not missed it post-ROH in recent times but the finish time does make a difference in how quickly I have to walk & whether I have time to go to the loo before leaving the ROH - though admittedly the latter will be less of an issue with a 25 min final act than it is for SB with its 70 min final 2 acts!

[alison]

1 hour ago, zxDaveM said:

 

The performances that (overrun) three hours are a pain for me too, and I only live in south London. In their infinite wisdom, the 10.42 from Charing Cross no longer runs (to London Bridge to get my connection), and I really struggle to get the 10.40. The next one means I miss my last (local) train from LB, so have to make a decision to run the East Croydon gauntlet, or wizz over to Victoria to get the sloooowwww train to my local station. For a want of 2-3mins, I can get home 35-40 mins later than hoped

 

I sympathise, Dave.  Where I lived previously, my last local train left London Bridge at 10.30, so past then I had to go on a detour to get home.  And currently, with only two trains an hour rather than the pre-pandemic 4, I frequently end up getting home half an hour later than expected on a regular basis.  I'm hoping that will change in the not-too-distant future.

 

Isn't it a good job that Ashton decided to delete a substantial portion of the final act by not having the Prince travel to 3 different countries looking for Cinderella?  Otherwise who knows what time we would be getting home.

[MildConcern]

The problem with Monahan’s dogged insistence that Hayward is the best thing since sliced bread (not just in Ashton ballets as expressed in this particular review, but all repertoire if you look at his body of work) is that he is purportedly a critic, not mere hobbyist.
 

It’s hard to take his reviews seriously when they all equate to “Francesca is great!” or “I’m disappointed dancer [insert name] is not Francesca”. Given the general scarcity of dance reviews and the fact that many principals rarely get the open night casting (and therefore reviewed), this is a very great shame.

 

By the by, I’ll be intrigued to hear how Hayward’s Ashton credentials hold up in Cinderella. When I first saw her in Rhapsody in 2015(?) I thought she was marvellous, truly Ashtonian. During the last revival in 2022, I thought she had actually regressed a bit and the lower body work was a lot slower. I’d buy my own ticket to see, but I’d fear being sat next to Mr Monahan!

 

[Richard LH]

21 minutes ago, alison said:

 

Isn't it a good job that Ashton decided to delete a substantial portion of the final act by not having the Prince travel to 3 different countries looking for Cinderella?  Otherwise who knows what time we would be getting home.

😂

[Blossom]

https://slippedisc.com/2023/03/why-are-covent-garden-first-nights-often-so-glacial/
 

Ouch! I really hope I don’t agree tomorrow night!

[annamk]

2 hours ago, Sim said:

 This was a special gala night, and Marianela Nunez is a famous, world-class ballerina and is currently the prima at the Royal Ballet.  This, and the fact that she has danced the role before, ensured that people would get something special (reliable?) for their financial outlays.  The other thing that I object to is the implied (meant or not) damning of the other hard-working dancers who will also dance the role.  No matter how good Hayward might be at other Ashton roles, I can't comment on her interpretation of this one until I've seen it.  As I know from experience, I never just assume that because a dancer is good at something or a certain type of choreography that that will always be the case with every role and I don't think that Monahan, as a professional critic, should either.  But that's just my own view.  

 

I agree with all this and it's not only Nunez but her partnership with Muntagirov.  Together they are the top draw for many people in classical ballet - you only have to look at the ticket sales for their performances - theirs are the only sold out ones without any offers. I think Monahan makes himself look ridiculous by suggesting Hayward and presumably "the always interesting Alexander Campbell" should have been first night cast. 

[JennyTaylor]

26 minutes ago, Richard LH said:

😂

I think Act 3 is disappointing in that there is no final pdd for the Prince and Cinderella, though 3 hours in total is more than sufficient. However, I feel that some of Act 2, particularly the Napoleon/ Wellington scenes could well be dispensed with.  Referencing a previous comment on these 2, they are not so obviously the 2 characters so one is left wondering who they are, if you didn't know already.  There was a funny moment in the rehearsal I saw when Wellington momentarily "corpsed" at the antics of Luca Acri and the errant wig of the dancer playing Napoleon.  However, he quickly straightened his face. 

[LinMM]

Well just as I had regrets that I never in the end saw Fonteyn in the role after looking longingly at the pictures of her as Cinderella whilst growing up I will now have regrets that unfortunately  I won’t get to see Francesca as Cinderella in this run 😥 (none of her dates work out for me this time around) …as she and Fumi would have been my first choices for this particular role….and I say this having never seen any of the current principals perform it …..but you can form an idea of a dancer suiting a certain role and then see if this bears out or not.
But anyway much to celebrate as I do get to see Fumi Naghdi and Takada ….and Nunez at the cinema stream on the 12th. So will be interested to see what they all make of it. 
 

[emmarose]

3 hours ago, Sim said:

We don't usually allow such long quotes on the forum, but as many people won't be able to access the review I have taken an executive decision and posted it here.  This is from Mark Monahan in the Telegraph (his/their copyright); he gave it three stars:

 

Frederick Ashton’s Cinderella (1948) was the first full-evening ballet ever to come out of Britain, and as such has always had a special place in the Royal Ballet’s history. The company’s last production, however, was an ugly beast, deservedly “retired” back in 2011 – but in these situations there is (as the company’s current Swan Lake attests) no guarantee that the replacement will be a step up. As an audience member, you can all too easily find yourself out of what, in hindsight, was a relatively well-appointed frying-pan and face-down in an even less rewarding fire.

 

Well, the company’s new Cinderella is, at least, a definite improvement on its predecessor. A curmudgeon might argue that Tom Pye’s elaborate, you-can-see-where-the-money-went sets are more Matthew Bourne/Lez Brotherston than Covent Garden. And Alexandra Byrne’s costumes are, let’s say, decidedly variable. But, expertly lit by David Finn (who also did BRB’s visually resplendent David Bintley/John Macfarlane production, in 2010) and combined with Finn Ross’s elaborate projections and the odd conjuring flourish from illusionist Chris Fisher, the visuals undoubtedly deliver something that was sorely lacking from the staging’s predecessor: magic. 

 

That is certainly for the good. And nor, by the way, was there any shortage of sorcery coming from the pit on Monday's big first night, with the house orchestra under Koen Kessels letting both the magnificent lushness and spiky energy of Prokofiev’s score ring out. 

 

But was there the same degree of enchantment coming from the performances? That, sadly, is more debatable. Of the four crucial Act I fairies – each of their solos a little grenade of choreographic inventiveness – only the terrific Anna Rose O’Sullivan, as “Spring”, seemed genuinely determined to make hers fly, but even she, like almost everyone on stage, fell short on Ashtonian upper-body pliancy and physical, épaulment-driven “presentation”. (Overall, this quartet reminded me of the comparable and similarly disappointing quintet of fairies in the Royal Ballet’s Sleeping Beauty back in January.) 

 

Better were Fumi Kaneko’s serene maitresse d’ of a Fairy Godmother and (in another debut) Taisuke Nakao’s kinetic Jester. Returning as the more strident of the conspicuously old-school men-in-drag Step-Sisters, Gary Avis was an absolute hoot in a way that – as so often with a ballet that has always been a precarious balance of tragedy, romance and knockabout comedy – threatened to topple the whole thing. Luca Acri, as the more browbeaten of the two, was more anonymous, wringing little pathos from the role. 

 

As the Prince, Vadim Muntagirov gave what, by even his standards, was a heady display of classical virtuosity – not much grit in this wife-seeking royal’s oyster, but an undeniably beautiful debut for all that. However, it was tricky to warm much to Marianela Nuñez’s Cinderella. I couldn’t detect much wretchedness or sense of genuine yearning from her punctilious but steely footwork in Act I, and her (undoubtedly impressive) stage-crossing fouettés in the Act II pas de deux felt more show-offy than an expression of ecstatic, once-in-a-lifetime romantic bliss. 

 

It was also Nuñez who was given the “final” opening night back in April 2011 – not much sense there of a company in forward-motion, downright perversely so when the world’s straight-sets greatest active Ashtonian, Francesca Hayward, is now on board. Still, she tackles the role this Thursday, along with the always-interesting Alexander Campbell. I welcome this often dazzling new production; with luck, these two can help do the ballet’s genius of a creator full justice. 

 

and her (undoubtedly impressive) stage-crossing fouettés in the Act II pas de deux felt more show-offy than an expression of ecstatic, once-in-a-lifetime romantic bliss.

 

This has to be the most hilarious line of his review. You have to laugh.

 

He seems unhappy that Marianela wasn't Hayward, but also that Anna-Rose isn't either. I think he needs a full ballet of Frankies, and then he'll be happy. 

 

[Linnzi5]

4 minutes ago, Blossom said:

https://slippedisc.com/2023/03/why-are-covent-garden-first-nights-often-so-glacial/
 

Ouch! I really hope I don’t agree tomorrow night!

Me too!

[Tango Dancer]

36 minutes ago, MildConcern said:

The problem with Monahan’s dogged insistence that Hayward is the best thing since sliced bread (not just in Ashton ballets as expressed in this particular review, but all repertoire if you look at his body of work) is that he is purportedly a critic, not mere hobbyist.
 

It’s hard to take his reviews seriously when they all equate to “Francesca is great!” or “I’m disappointed dancer [insert name] is not Francesca”. Given the general scarcity of dance reviews and the fact that many principals rarely get the open night casting (and therefore reviewed), this is a very great shame.

 

 

Yes.  I mean if I wrote reviews they'd be full of "Vadim is amazing" and "Vadim looks perfect in the costume" and "Vadim partners and jumps sublimely and I should be dancing with him."  But I'm not a critic and not being paid to review things.  Professional critics should be a bit more dispassionate and not let their massive preference for one dancer interfere in giving fair reviews.  

[emmarose]

14 minutes ago, Tango Dancer said:

 

Yes.  I mean if I wrote reviews they'd be full of "Vadim is amazing" and "Vadim looks perfect in the costume" and "Vadim partners and jumps sublimely and I should be dancing with him."  But I'm not a critic and not being paid to review things.  Professional critics should be a bit more dispassionate and not let their massive preference for one dancer interfere in giving fair reviews.  

 

You can for sure have your favourites as a reviewer, the thing is, you shouldn't be able to see who they are in reviews of other dancers.

[BalletBoysDad]

8 hours ago, gdallas said:

The costumes were mostly beautiful, from where I was sitting in the amphitheatre. The Sisters well hmm. I quite liked the Molly Goddard outfit, but I guess they are supposed to look daft. 
 

I snorted my coffee when you said ‘Molly Goddard’. I thought exactly the same thing, with a brief contemplation of Giambattista Valli. Then fully settled on Molly Goddard 😂 

[Silke H]

FWIW - I enjoy this production.  No, it isn't perfect but nothing ever is.  I also said to my friends after the General Rehearsal that some characters remind me of RB's Alice costumes, but then I also like Alice.  What I love is that the party/ball guests in act 2 all wear distinct, beautiful dresses and suits in different colours, just as one would expect at a real ball.

 

Here my curtain call photos from my vantage point in the Lower Slips at the Gala evening.  Not the best of seats for full stage viewing but excellent for seeing the tutus from above

 

Cinderella gala 27-03-23

 

Marianela Nunez 25 years with RB award

 

Facebook Cinderella album (more performances' photos to be added as and when)

[FLOSS]

Let me begin by saying that it comes as a great relief to see this great ballet back on the Covent Garden stage after such a long absence. Ashton's choreography is such a perfect fit with the music that it feels as if it grew organically from the score. The choreography  is full of invention much of it inspired by Petipa's  own inventiveness in the use of soloists  and members of the corps de ballet and his complex  floor patterns.

 

As far as missing characters and leaps in narrative are concerned I think that Ashton felt he could rely on the audience's familiarity with  the basic outline of the Cinderella story, if only from childhood trips to the pantomime, and this freed him to choreograph for those elements of the story which most appealed to him and those aspects of it which the music  clearly suggested to him. Perhaps we  need to remember that there is no stepmother in the British pantomime version of the story and none in Rossini's La Cenerentola an opera which seems to have influenced the pantomime tradition sufficiently to provide it with the character of Dandini. Indeed it is quite possible that Ashton knew the opera or at least knew of it and its characters since although it was far from being a repertory piece  it was staged at Covent Garden in 1934 for Conchita Supervia and revived for her in 1935.

 

I think I need to say something about the designs while the first impressions are fresh in my mind. In her autobiography Alexandra Danilova set down her maim thoughts on the part that good design plays in ballet.She says quite simply that good design does half the dancers' work for them before they arrive on stage by establishing the time  and place in which the action of the ballet is set and its mood. I don't think the new designs manage to do this but then I think that Ellis-Somes sees design more in terms of decoration than story telling or mood. in other words based on other designs she has sanctioned in the past I don't think that she sees designs as possessing any particular power which a stager can harness to enhance the theatrical impact of a ballet.

 

I am not sure what the initial light show which accompanied the overture was intended to do. It seems to be an unwelcome development of the fireside glow effect that we had at the same point in her last production. Then it reminded me of the glowing coal effect in old electric fires and it was an unwanted distraction. The new lighting display is even more intrusive and unwelcome. We then see an image which I think is intended to represent the prince's castle and  it is only after that that we see the room in which the initial action of the ballet is set. We are not in the usual dark oppressive room which fits the mood of the music we have just heard . Instead we are in an airy room lined with books with a large window at the far end. i am not quite sure what I was expecting  but with the radical change in setting for this scene I was expecting something more theatrically effective and inventive when the Fairy Godmother, the Season Fairies and their entourage of attendant fairies arrived. I thought the window area would be used  to far greater effect  than proved to be the case. Nothing remarkable happened except for a lighting display which may look wonderful from the stalls but does not look that special from upstairs and distracts attention from the dancing.

 

Instead of the tableau that we are used to, with each Season Fairy first seen flanked by her seasonally dressed attendants, the soloists appear from a variety o places at the rear of the stage. Each fairy seems totally detached from her attendants whose costumes seemed on first acquaintance to be totally perverse. It is rumoured that the fairies' costumes are modelled on flowers. They are of varying quality. Spring probably comes off best in the costume stakes. Summer draws the short straw stuck with  an enormous bright red bow on her back which moves as she dances and makes her look like a badly wrapped sweet.

 

My big problem with this section of the ballet which acts as a prologue to the great feast of choreography in act two is that the seasons' solos are danced effectively in a black box, presumably to accommodate the light show which accompanies each solo. The dancers and audience rely on the lighting scheme to pick them out sufficiently to render them completely  visible.  I feel that I can say little about how well Kaneko  performed the role of the Fairy Godmother as  she danced it in stygian gloom and on occasion disappeared into the darkness. Her costume does not enhance her visibility. The entry of the corps was not much better lit.

 

The ballroom scene  has been  moved to the palace garden for reasons that are not entirely clear. At least it is well lit and the dancing is visible. it is not entirely  free of problems.Unfortunately we still have Wellington and Napoleon rather than the original tall and short suitors. The stager has chosen to retain the unfunny wig joke which I don't recall being part of the ballet during Ashton's lifetime. In the same way I think that it is the current stager's mistaken belief, perhaps  because it is a point of reference for her, that the Step Sisters are pantomime dames which has led to them being played as broadly and coarsely as they were in the 2003 production. She seems totally unaware of the  long theatrical tradition of men playing older women or that as originally played by  Ashton and Helpmann or Ashton and MacMillan the Step Sisters were characters rather than caricatures.

 

I know that everyone has to start somewhere but it is a big gamble to commission  a designer who has no previous experience of designing for ballet to produce the designs for a major project like the new Cinderella. I understand that the costume designer  has had a distinguished career designing for film but film and ballet design are poles apart when it comes to the function of design. In film it is the director who calls the shots and he or she who controls how the audience experiences every element of the film. In ballet in theory it is the choreographer who controls the audience's experience by his or her choice of music;  the movements he/she has set to it, and the choice of designs. But the choreographer really can only exercise that degree of control during his/ her lifetime, After that it is down to  those  designated the choreographer's heirs to protect the ballets in their care from unnecessary and inappropriate redesigns and choreographic attrition, dilution and alteration. The current production is marginally better than the one it replaces but it is far from ideal. The designer's inexperience as a ballet designer is evident throughout. Her designs are overly fussy and fanciful. 

 

 Although design plays a pivotal role in the audience's experience of ballet performances strangely in the century since the Diaghilev revolution choreographers, stagers and management seem to have lost sight of the significance and power of good design in the world of ballet. Sadly I don't think that the design gamble has paid off in this production.

 

I shall say something about individual performances when I have seen a few more casts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

those for some of the season fairies most definitely are

[ctas]

My thought on the lights during the overture was it was an attempt to get the audience to shut up during the overture haha. Maybe it’s more creative and complex than that… but it did seem to have that effect. 

[Rob S]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 28, 2023 by Rob S

[Sim]

2 hours ago, emmarose said:

 

and her (undoubtedly impressive) stage-crossing fouettés in the Act II pas de deux felt more show-offy than an expression of ecstatic, once-in-a-lifetime romantic bliss.

 

This has to be the most hilarious line of his review. You have to laugh.

 

He seems unhappy that Marianela wasn't Hayward, but also that Anna-Rose isn't either. I think he needs a full ballet of Frankies, and then he'll be happy. 

 

I never associate Marianela with being “show-offy”.  She can just do difficult choreography with a natural ease.  

[Geoff]

9 hours ago, Blossom said:

https://slippedisc.com/2023/03/why-are-covent-garden-first-nights-often-so-glacial/

Thanks for posting this. Whatever one thinks of Macaulay’s judgements (I agree with some and not with others) it is certainly useful to have more of the historical context. 

[Linnzi5]

6 hours ago, Sim said:

I never associate Marianela with being “show-offy”.  She can just do difficult choreography with a natural ease.  

I agree. I  think Marianela has such a wonderful technique that she appears to be elegant and understated - such is her command of the choreography. For me, she has a fluidity and ease which means I never think what she is doing is difficult - which clearly is not true. I haven't seen her in Cinderella, but am familiar with the ballet, so can't comment on her performance in this role, but would be surprised if my overwhelming thought was that she was being show offy - I just would never associate those words with her, though I certainly would with some other dancers (not that this is necessarily a bad thing, as different approaches to roles are refreshing).  I can't wait to hear reviews of other dancers in the Cinderella role!

[Jan McNulty]

11 reviews (of between 3 and 5 stars) to peruse in Today's Links (plus lots more items):

 

 

[Balletfanp]

11 hours ago, Tango Dancer said:

 

Yes.  I mean if I wrote reviews they'd be full of "Vadim is amazing" and "Vadim looks perfect in the costume" and "Vadim partners and jumps sublimely and I should be dancing with him."  But I'm not a critic and not being paid to review things.  Professional critics should be a bit more dispassionate and not let their massive preference for one dancer interfere in giving fair reviews.  

I’m pretty sure Vadim only escapes Monahan’s major criticism because he is male (although I’m not quite sure what “grit” he expects from Prince Charming - he’s not an action hero! 😂). Even then, you get the feeling that he probably secretly thinks Frankie could do a better job of the Prince too….!

 

Absolutely no disrespect to Frankie, of course!

[Odyssey]

18 minutes ago, Jan McNulty said:

11 reviews (of between 3 and 5 stars) to peruse in Today's Links (plus lots more items):

 

 

Thanks Janet. We really appreciate how busy you mods  are on days like these.

it would seem this production is having a marmite effect.