|Decouflé au Crazy Horse
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||saint corentin [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:31 am ]|
|Post subject:||Decouflé au Crazy Horse|
Philippe Decouflé va devenir directeur artistique du Crazy Horse nous dit Le Parisien.
|Author:||@urelie [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:46 pm ]|
Tant mieux pour le crazy!
|Author:||KANTER [ Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:16 am ]|
|Post subject:||Birds of a feather|
Birds of a Feather, Flock Together.
(I’ve just been eating Oysters by the bye)
Those of you thought that bum-sniffing was confined to the canine species, Think Again! You've not seen Wayne McGregor’s new Opus at Covent Garden, entitled INFRA.
Decuffli's nuffink asides zis.
Cannot quite figure out what the appositely-named Weaker Sex may have done to deserve such treatment by Wayne of the ice-cold, dead eyes.
Gives me the Jeebie-Heebies.
But, Thank Heavens for Small Mercies: Wayne's attentions to the Weaker Sex appear to be confined to the stage.
|Author:||KANTER [ Wed Nov 26, 2008 2:26 am ]|
|Post subject:||Et dans la veine Crazy Horse|
Pour ceux qui lisent bien l'anglais, quelques extraits d'une critique hilaire de INFRA à Covent Garden, apparu sur "ballet.co" et signé AlexP (son article est TRES long, j'en donne moins de dix pourcent, donc nous sommes dans la déontologie de l'Internet). Chapeau à AlexP, fort habile - il a réussi à faire publier sa critique, alors que celles de l'auteur de ces lignes ont été, sur un site dont on taira le nom, C..................S.
"(///) Put simply, nothing really happened. Vague themes coupled with an over hyped, simplistic and rather laboured visual statement were not enough to make it come to life. (...) The moments of semi-acting (I think the alarming phrase 'emotional content' was used (...) ) looked contrived (...) as if someone had 'had a quiet word' and requested something a bit less cold and machine-like this time (...).
(...) As for the actual music of this piece, it was so disappointingly flat, meagre, unoriginal, lifeless and downright miserable that no choreography could possibly express it (...) The lack of rhythm (...) means the dancers (...) at times end up looking like human metronomes (...) This (lack of) interaction with rhythm (...) is in my opinion why so many modern pieces have dancers who appear angst ridden, miserable, stony faced, pedestrian (...)
McGregor comes across as wanting to be (...) the 'choreographer-intellectual' who can spend a minute talking like an astro-physicist about such (...) obvious givens as that fact that the stage is quite big so the audience can't focus on all of it at the same time (...). Really?! Talking up such waffle as if it were a valid theme-to-be-explored-as-subject-matter is exactly the reason why this piece goes nowhere.
(...) putting aside the earnest, chin rubbing themes as given in interviews and in program notes it's worth remembering that what we are actually being given onstage is a bucket load of impossible extension, rippling torsos, skimpy costumes, catwalk-cool (non) expression and an awful lot of very slinky/ sultry/ sexy moves. Could it be that some of those audience members leaving the ROH with their tongues hanging out repeating things like, "OMG that was amaaaaaaazing" are being just a tiny bit manipulated here?
(...) as McGregor's appointment was, I believe, in part a drive to woo (new, young) audiences it might be worth remembering that glossy coffee table books may be very pick-up-able and easy to drool over (...) but they are also just as (...) quickly forgotten or discarded. I am not sure (...) if the RB really wants new substantial productions (...) and am starting to think maybe the plan is from now on to gradually go 'pop' and only make 'of the moment' disposable works, relying more and more on celebrity buzz, hype, gimmicky audience involvement and relentlessly creative marketing. I really do hope this is not the case.
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group