public forum
home forum magazine gallery links about faq courtesy
It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:29 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2000 12:01 am
Posts: 12178
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
In the Philadelphia Inquirer, Peter Dobrin notes the failure of NY Times critic Alastair Macaulay to mention the live musicians in his review of the opening weekend at New York City Ballet.

Philadelphia Inquirer


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:01 pm
Posts: 331
Location: New Jersey
For those interested, there are several significant cast changes -- including some debuts in lead roles -- in the last two weeks of NYCB's Nutcracker run. I've posted the casting for the next week below. Although it appears that most performances are sold out, or close to it, if you're interested it may be worth checking with the box office.

TUESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 18, 6:00 PM
(Conductor: Sill)
SUGARPLUM: Pollack; CAVALIER: Danchig-Waring; DEWDROP: Bouder; HERR DROSSELMEIER: Kramarevsky;
MARZIPAN: King; HOT CHOCOLATE: Sell, Applebaum; COFFEE: Muller; TEA: Carmena; CANDY CANE: Schumacher;
MOTHER GINGER: Thew; FLOWERS: Pazcoguin, Laracey; DOLLS: Lovette, Adams; SOLDIER: Alberda;
MOUSE KING: Dieck; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Lowery, la Cour

WEDNESDAY MATINEE, DECEMBER 19, 2:00 PM (Conductor: Capps)
SUGARPLUM: Pereira; CAVALIER: Huxley; DEWDROP: A. Stafford; HERR DROSSELMEIER: La Fosse+;
MARZIPAN: Dronova (replaces Isaacs); HOT CHOCOLATE: Pazcoguin, Finlay; COFFEE: Mann; TEA: Villalobos; CANDY CANE: Prottas;
MOTHER GINGER: Dieck; FLOWERS: Hankes, Smith; DOLLS: Villwock, Segin; SOLDIER: Ippolito;
MOUSE KING: J. Peck; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Muller, Tworzyanski

WEDNESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 19, 6:00 PM (Conductor: Otranto)
SUGARPLUM: Krohn; CAVALIER: la Cour; DEWDROP: Lowery; HERR DROSSELMEIER: Kramarevksy;
MARZIPAN: Laracey; HOT CHOCOLATE: Muller, Tworzyanski; COFFEE: Arthurs; TEA: Ball; CANDY CANE: R. Fairchild;
MOTHER GINGER: Scordato; FLOWERS: LeCrone (replaces Isaacs), Pollack; DOLLS: Lovette, Adams; SOLDIER: Hoxha;
MOUSE KING: Thew; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Anderson, J. Peck

THURSDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 20, 6:00 PM
(Guest Conductor: Outwater+)
SUGARPLUM: Bouder; CAVALIER: Carmena; DEWDROP: Reichlen; HERR DROSSELMEIER: La Fosse+;
MARZIPAN: Lovette; HOT CHOCOLATE: Pollack, Alberda; COFFEE: Lowery; TEA: Ippolito; CANDY CANE: Ulbricht;
MOTHER GINGER: Thew; FLOWERS: Anderson, Muller; DOLLS: Von Enck++, Manzi; SOLDIER: Schumacher;
MOUSE KING: Dieck; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Hankes, la Cour

FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 21, 8:00 PM
(Conductor: Capps)
SUGARPLUM: M. Fairchild; CAVALIER: Veyette; DEWDROP: Hyltin; HERR DROSSELMEIER: Hendrickson+;
MARZIPAN: Dronova; HOT CHOCOLATE: Hankes, Danchig-Waring; COFFEE: Krohn; TEA: Schumacher; CANDY CANE: Peiffer;
MOTHER GINGER: Dieck; FLOWERS: Pazcoguin, Smith; DOLLS: Villwock, Segin; SOLDIER: Laurent;
MOUSE KING: J. Peck; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Muller, Tworzyanski

SATURDAY MATINEE, DECEMBER 22, 2:00 PM
(Guest Conductor: Outwater+)
SUGARPLUM: *King; CAVALIER: R. Fairchild; DEWDROP: *Sell; HERR DROSSELMEIER: Suozzi;
MARZIPAN: *Segin; HOT CHOCOLATE: Pazcoguin, *J. Peck; COFFEE: *Laracey; TEA: *Hoxha (replaces Stanley);
CANDY CANE: *Alberda; MOTHER GINGER: Scordato; FLOWERS: Hankes, Pollack; DOLLS: Von Enck++, Manzi; SOLDIER: *Stanley (replaces Hoxha); MOUSE KING: Thew; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Anderson, Danchig-Waring

SATURDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 22, 8:00 PM
(Conductor: Sill)
SUGARPLUM: A. Stafford; CAVALIER: J. Angle; DEWDROP: M. Fairchild; HERR DROSSELMEIER: La Fosse+;
MARZIPAN: Pollack; HOT CHOCOLATE: Muller, Catazaro; COFFEE: Pazcoguin; TEA: Villalobos; CANDY CANE: Suozzi;
MOTHER GINGER: Dieck; FLOWERS: Anderson, Smith; DOLLS: Von Enck++, Manzi; SOLDIER: Ippolito;
MOUSE KING: Thew; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Lowery, J. Peck

SUNDAY MATINEE, DECEMBER 23, 1:00 PM
(Conductor: Otranto)
SUGARPLUM: *Lovette; CAVALIER: Finlay; DEWDROP: Sell; HERR DROSSELMEIER: Prottas;
MARZIPAN: Adams; HOT CHOCOLATE: Muller, *Dieck; COFFEE: *Kretzschmar; TEA: *Gordon; CANDY CANE: Huxley;
MOTHER GINGER: Scordato; FLOWERS: King, Laracey; DOLLS: Villwock, Segin; SOLDIER: Villalobos,
MOUSE KING: J. Peck; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Hankes, Tworzyanski

SUNDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 23, 5:00 PM
(Guest Conductor: Outwater+)
SUGARPLUM: Hyltin; CAVALIER: Peiffer; DEWDROP: Lowery; HERR DROSSELMEIER: Hendrickson+;
MARZIPAN: Laracey; HOT CHOCOLATE: Hankes, Scordato; COFFEE: LeCrone; TEA: Schumacher; CANDY CANE: Alberda;
MOTHER GINGER: Thew; FLOWERS: Pazcoguin, Muller; DOLLS: Von Enck++, Manzi; SOLDIER: Laurent;
MOUSE KING: Dieck; DR & FRAU STAHLBAUM: Anderson, Danchig-Waring
* First Time in Role + Guest Artist ++Apprentice


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:01 pm
Posts: 331
Location: New Jersey
New York City Ballet
David H. Koch Theater, Lincoln Center
New York, New York

December 23(M)
George Balanchine’s ‘The Nutcracker’

- By Jerry Hochman

In a review of Lauren Lovette’s performance as Calliope in Apollo in June, 2011, after noting that she nailed the role, I wrote that to a long established balletomaniac the anticipation of being able to witness Ms. Lovette grow as a dancer is intoxicating. Following her debut as the Sugar Plum Fairy in yesterday afternoon’s performance of George Balanchine’s ‘The Nutcracker’, I probably should give up driving – I wouldn’t be able to pass a sobriety test.

The worst I can say about Ms. Lovette’s performance is that it wasn’t perfect. But it was close to it – the only minor flaws were a few timing issues coming out of turns, and perhaps a hint of caution. In every other respect, her performance – aided by very able and attentive partnering provided by Chase Finlay – was remarkable.

One would have expected some nervous energy, given that, to my understanding, this was her first performance in a major role, and it was before a sold-out house. On the contrary, if Ms. Lovette had understandable stage nerves, it didn’t show. One would have expected some indication that she was working hard to get the choreography right –some apprehension that maybe she wouldn’t be able to execute perfectly. On the contrary, Ms. Lovette was a model of poise under pressure, with no indication of the effort that was necessary. And one would have expected that at best she would just get the steps right – it’s too soon to expect her to contribute anything more. On the contrary, Ms. Lovette has already begun the process of making the role her own. And the reasonable expectation that her performance will only get better over time is dizzying.

What this viewer found most remarkable about her performance was her stage presence. I have previously written that Ms. Lovette’s stage persona projects a combination of sensuality and innocence, as well as an ability to transmit emotion with a minimum of gesture – just by the way she moves and carries herself. None of those qualities dominated her Sugar Plum Fairy. Rather, it was the authority and regality she projected as a queen of the Land of the Sweets that I found astonishing. She wasn’t ‘just’ performing steps, she was inhabiting a role. I tend to see things in a performance, and make anticipatory leaps to something down the road, that are merely products of my imagination. In Ms. Lovette’s Sugar Plum Fairy, she showed a quality of semi-detached imperiousness that I never would have expected, and I found myself thinking [to my bewilderment, because the thought never would otherwise have occurred to me] that with a little attitude adjustment she’d be a superb Myrtha, Queen of the Willis. [Yes, I know that NYCB does not do Giselle, and I can’t imagine the company ever doing it. But Miami City Ballet (NYCB South) has done it, and one never knows.] While I still have some concerns about her ability to handle NYCB-style speed, having never seen her dance a role that would require it, I’m beginning to doubt that there is anything that this young dancer (I don’t know her age, but I suspect she’s in her very early 20s) cannot do.

Ms. Lovette’s debut was not the only debut in the role of Sugar Plum Fairy this past week. The previous afternoon, Lauren King, another of NYCB’s plethora of talented corps dancers, assayed the role. I was unable to see her performance (but hopefully will catch up later this coming week), but I’ve been told on good authority that she did very well. I don’t doubt it; she was radiant in yesterday afternoon’s performance as one of the lead Flowers (as was Ashley Laracey, yet another talented and engaging corps ballerina, who danced the other ‘lead’ Flower role).

The previous afternoon, Mary Elizabeth Sell debuted as Dewdrop, and she reprised the role yesterday afternoon. Ms. Sell handled Balanchine’s quicksilver choreography easily (she seems born to NYCB-style speed), with no indication to this viewer that she was working too hard to get it done. When she gets more comfortable in the role, and adds nuances that will come with greater experience, she’ll make an excellent Dewdrop.

Yesterday’s performance also marked the debut of Claire Kretzchmar in ‘Coffee’, and Joseph Gordon in ‘Tea’. To this viewer, Ms. Kretzchmar executed the steps very well, but will need to infuse it with more sensuality in the future. Mr. Gordon, accompanied by the appropriately bubbly Kristen Segin and Clair Von Enck (an apprentice), overcame what appeared to be initial nervousness and performed superbly.

This viewer found Sara Adams’s lead in ‘Marzipan’ to be beautifully executed, with appropriate effervescence. And Anthony Huxley was a superb lead Candy Cane.

I have previously written about Chase Finlay, Ms. Lovette’s Cavalier, on several occasions. He is another young star in what supposedly is a company with no stars. But in this performance, Mr. Finlay was not just a star – he was a rock-solid, superb partner. Ms. Lovette and Mr. Finlay appear to work together well and complement each other (as I observed in a review of last year’s West Side Story Suite), and in this viewer’s opinion it is a stage partnership that has a future.

Aside from Mr. Finlay and Mr. Huxley, each of the performances mentioned in this review, and each dancer in the performance, is a member of the corps. Giving opportunities for young dancers to get their feet wet in major roles toward the end of the season has been a hallmark of NYCB’s Nutcracker casting for many years. It keeps the performances fresh, allows young dancers to gain essential experience, and encourages a balletomaniac like me to attend performances of ballets that I’ve already seen more times than I can count. One wishes more companies would do the same.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2000 12:01 am
Posts: 12178
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
In the New York Times, Alastair Macaulay talks about dancers who have been given opportunities as the Sugar Plum Fairy and her Cavalier.

NY Times


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2000 12:01 am
Posts: 12178
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
In the New York Times, Brian Seibert reviews the Friday, November 29, 2013 evening performance and the Saturday, November 30, 2013 matinee performance.

NY Times


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2000 12:01 am
Posts: 12178
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
In Vanity Fair, James Wolcott reports from backstage at the Friday, November 29, 2013 opening night.

Vanity Fair


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:01 pm
Posts: 331
Location: New Jersey
Since there is no 'generalized' Nutcracker topic, a copy of this review is being posted in the American Ballet Theatre topic section.

New York City Ballet
David H. Koch Theater
Lincoln Center
New York, New York
December 10, 2013

American Ballet Theatre
Brooklyn Academy of Music
Brooklyn, New York
December 13, 2013

"The Nutcracker"

-- by Jerry Hochman

In New York City and for its two major ballet companies, New York City Ballet and American Ballet Theatre, “The Nutcracker” is a tale of two ballets. Both versions are derived from the Alexandre Dumas, pere sanitized adaptation of ETA Hoffmann’s darkly brooding 1819 story “The Nutcracker and the Mouse King,” but each takes a considerably different approach.

“George Balanchine’s “The Nutcracker,” the version presented by NYCB, is the iconic production. Created in 1954, “The Nutcracker” was not the first American incarnation of the ballet, but it is the indisputable king of Nutcracker ballets, the glorious production that made “The Nutcracker” into a must-see holiday Event presented by ballet companies of all shapes and sizes, and one that provides these companies with an annual dose of financial adrenaline. ABT’s “Nutcracker,” created by its Artist-in-Residence Alexei Ratmansky in 2009, is less familiar to ballet audiences, and has annoying flaws. But this Nutcracker wears its heart on its sleeve, and what it lacks in spectacle, it makes up for in warmth.

The essential story is common to all ‘standard’ Nutcracker ballets: there’s the Stahlbaum family’s Christmas Eve party, which relates the events leading up to the Stahlbaum’s daughter’s dream. Then there is the unfolding of the dream itself (the second half of the first Act), followed by a dream/celebration in a fantasy setting.

The Balanchine version is both refined and sugary. The patrician Stahlbaum family hosts a Christmas Eve gathering for their equally well-bred friends and their children. Herr Drosselmeyer, the beloved but eccentric godfather of the Stahlbaum’s children, arrives soon after, with his nephew in tow. Drosselmeyer brings with him entertainment in the form of oversized mechanical dolls (stolen, perhaps, from Hoffmann’s “Coppelia”), an air of good-hearted mystery, and, most importantly, gifts for the children. He presents little Marie, the Stahlbaum’s young daughter, with a nutcracker, which Marie’s younger brother Fritz promptly breaks. [Marie is the daughter’s name in the original story; Clara, the name more commonly used, is the name of the Stahlbaum daughter in the subsequent adaptation.]

When the party ends and the guests depart, Marie escapes from her bedroom to the ‘great room’ in the Stahlbaum’s manse, falls asleep holding the nutcracker that Drosselmeyer repaired, and dreams of being rescued from marauding mice by her nutcracker and his brigade of boy soldiers. After the child-sized nutcracker, with Marie’s help, vanquishes the mouse king, he morphs into a Little Prince, who happens to look exactly like Drosselmeyer’s nephew. Marie’s dream then takes them to a snowflake fairyland, from which they eventually are transported to the Land of the Sweets, where they’re greeted by the Sugarplum Fairy and entertained by visiting dancers. When the entertainment ends, Marie and her Little Prince sail away in a reindeer sleigh.

But in this version, the story is not nearly as important as the production. Over the years “George Balanchine’s ‘The Nutcracker’” has been honed to perfection: not a step is out of place or production value unexploited. It’s a visual feast. The Christmas Eve party scene in Act I is particularly realistic and nuanced. All the actions ring true, from the arrival of the friends and children, to the interaction between each cast member – including the brief and underplayed, but critical, visualization of Marie’s instant crush on Drosselmeyer’s nephew.

The transition from this reality to Marie’s fantasy is seamless – and beautiful. There’s the justly famous magical growing Christmas Tree, and the justly celebrated and equally magical Snowflake dance. Befitting its roots in the original1892 Petipa/Ivanov production, Act II is essentially a celebration in a fantasy setting, but instead of a prince’s palace, here there’s the Land of the Sweets – the ballets Fantasyland. The visiting dignitaries (Marie and the Little Prince) are treated to a series of divertissements, and then are sent on their way. In the process, Balanchine creates highly entertaining and complex dances, and more memorable images – like the Sugarplum Fairy balancing en pointe in arabesque and being moved as if by invisible force across the back of the stage. It is a breathtaking production that looks both spectacular and intimate at the same time, like a sequence of snow globes come to life. Everything works.

If there’s a flaw to this production, it is its lack of resolution. The dream doesn’t end, it just signals a change of venue to points unknown, if and when the sleigh carrying Marie and the Little Prince eventually lands. It resembles an apotheosis. This probably makes no difference to much of the audience, but to me it’s the only false note in the production. At some point, the dream must end, and reality, however it is portrayed, must return.

The Ratmansky version is in line with those productions that that are circular rather than linear – eventually, the story returns to its ‘real’ setting, with the Stahlbaum’s daughter in some way changed by the dream. In these versions, the Stahlbaum daughter is usually older than the little girl in the Balanchine version (she’s often played by a young-looking ballerina – as in a prior ABT production created by Mikhail Baryshnikov, which is still available on DVD), and the dream is no longer a journey that replicates a child’s candyland fantasy; the dream is a peek at imminent maturity.

Mr. Ratmansky takes this aproach one step further. Although the dream is always Clara’s dream, here the audience sees the dream through Clara’s young eyes. The princess that she sees in her dream, and that the audience sees, is not her dream of some imaginary princess or regal fairy, it’s her imaginary dream of herself as the princess. Consequently, Princess Clara and her Nutcracker Prince, as little Clara dreams them, are like grown up fantasy children. They’re childlike in certain ways – because Clara hasn’t yet experienced being an adult – but not childish. And when the Princess and Prince in her dream magically join Clara and her Nutcracker Boy as characters on stage, and the two couples briefly dance in tandem to deeply romantic portions of the Tchaikovsky score that seem to have been composed for this purpose, the ballet steals your heart.

From the beginning, Mr. Ratmansky ratchets the ballet as spectacle down a notch. The appearance of the mice in the initial ‘*******’ scene is almost slapstick – but it also provides a significant connection to the images of mice in Clara’s dream. And the Stahlbaum family is not nearly as genteel as in the Balanchine production – they’re Dickensonian middle class neighbors down the street: Mr. and Mrs. Stahlbaum rather than Dr. and Mrs. Stahlbaum in the Balanchine version. They’re the good-hearted Cratchit family after Ebenezer loosened the purse strings; the family that inherited the business after Scrooge ultimately joined Marley.

But much of the first act is, in parts, awkward or worse, and it is troubling that, apparently, no modifications have been made since the ballet’s opening performances. Among other poor choices, having the gathered children in the Stahlbaum home throw temper tantrums in unison is wrong – unless they’re supposed to act as a group, like when they’re dancing, children act on their own or follow another child’s lead. Here the action looks forced and artificial. The transition from reality to dream is visually awkward: the tree massively grows, but the audience sees only the edges of the tree, and others, sticking out from the wings. It looks cheap. The Dance of the Snowflakes is needlessly scary (although as I’ve observed previously, the last image of the snowflakes collapsing to the ground is brilliant). Drosselmeyer is confusing and creepy, and the nutcracker’s unexplained transition from toy-sized to boy-sized and back begs clarification.

Choreographically, the Ratmansky Nutcracker is not without flaws either, and it doesn’t dazzle the way Balanchine’s does. But Ratmansky’s dances are little stories, with dancers who are characters rather than moving images, and they’re never boring. Indeed, except for his invention of the ‘Nutcracker Sisters’ (which creates a story-line that isn’t there and is, at best, uninterestingly choreographed), the choreography is as much, if not more, fun to watch than Balanchine’s. Mr. Ratmansky’s choreography for Harlequin and Columbine in Act I, his Arabian Dance (once adjusting to the absence of Balanchine’s seductive ‘Coffee’), and particularly his dance for the Flowers and Bees (to music for ‘Dewdrop’ in the NYCB version), are superb. And the climactic pas de deux for the adult Princess Clara and her Prince (to the music created for the Sugarplum Fairy and her Cavalier pas de deux) is a perfect combination of bravura dancing and dancing in character.

In the NYCB performance I saw on Tuesday, Rebecca Krohn and Amar Ramasar led the cast as the Sugarplum Fairy and her Cavalier. Ms. Krohn appeared somewhat understated in her initial appearance in Act II, but danced splendidly in the pas de deux, with Mr. Ramasar’s able partnering. Tiler Peck was magnificent as Dewdrop, and Lauren Lovette provided a wonderfully phrased and nuanced lead Marzipan Shepherdess. Although Savannah Lowery was more efficient and mechanical than seductive in ‘Coffee’, she executed the choreography admirably. Robert La Fosse made a welcome annual return as Drosselmeyer, and Zachary Catazaro and Marika Anderson did fine work as Dr. Stahlbaum and his wife. And the children from the School of American Ballet – led by a spirited Rommie Tomasini as Marie and an accomplished Maximilian Brooking Landegger as Drosselmeyer’s nephew/The Nutcracker – were as well-drilled and flawless as usual. [Young Mr. Landegger has appeared in company performances so frequently that by now he should be dubbed an honorary apprentice.]

Friday’s ABT performance was its opening night this season, and most of the dancers were production veterans. Veronika Part, Princess Clara in young Clara’s dream, and Marcelo Gomes as her Nutcracker Prince, were each flat out fabulous both in their flawless execution and in bubbly, childlike character as young Clara’s fantasy of her and her Nutcracker Boy as grown-ups. Other highlights were Misty Copeland and Craig Salstein as Columbine and Harlequin, Zhong-Jing Fang’s finely-tuned Sugar Plum Fairy (a non-dancing role in this production), Victor Barbee’s injection of bonhomie into Drosselmeyer, Blaine Hoven, Arron Scott, and Mr Salstein’s Russians, and all the participating students from the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis School – including Duncan McIlwaine as the Nutcracker Boy, and particularly Justin Souriau-Levine, who once again reprised his role as the Little Mouse and once again received a well-deserved ovation from the audience. But the role of Young Clara is the glue that holds this production together, and JKO student Adelaide Clauss was stellar. I commented favorably on her performance last year – and this year young Ms. Clauss was better still.

For New York’s major ballet companies, these respective Nutcracker productions represent something of a role reversal. Based on online indications of ticket availability, ABT, which projects itself as world class and its principal dancers as ballet royalty, is struggling to find audiences to fill even the reduced number of Nutcracker performances it is giving this year at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. NYCB, which projects itself as New York’s ‘family’ company and its dancers as remarkably talented dancers next door, can’t seem to provide enough Nutcracker performances to fill the demand. Whether this is because the trek to Brooklyn is too arduous, or balletgoers who can only afford to attend one performance naturally gravitate toward the more celebrated and familiar production, or that the Ratmansky version is not quite spectacular enough, is not knowable.

But dissimilar as they are, each is an enchanting production that must be seen and savored, and each is populated by dancers of the highest quality. The Balanchine version, which I’ve previously described as plum pudding for the soul, is both charming and awe-inspiring. It’s a Nutcracker for children of all ages to admire and remember with a smile. The Ratmansky Nutcracker is one for adults and children to take to their hearts and cherish, and, for some, perhaps to remember or experience vicariously what it was like to be a child with a dream. For New Yorkers and visitors able to attend both Nutcracker performances, it is the best of times. And it is the best of times.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: New York City Ballet - Nutcracker
PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 11:01 pm
Posts: 331
Location: New Jersey
New York City Ballet
David H. Koch Theater
Lincoln Center
New York, New York

“George Balanchine’s ‘The Nutcracker’”
December 22, M & E

-- by Jerry Hochman

As a follow-up to my earlier review, I saw two additional performances of “George Balanchine’s ‘The Nutcracker’” presented by New York City Ballet on December 22. These performances again evidence New York City Ballet’s remarkable depth, and also exemplify the encouragement that company management provides to its soloist and corps dancers.

At the matinee performance, soloist Lauren Lovette reprised her portrayal of the Sugar Plum Fairy, and again displayed the regality and confidence, as well as the superlative execution, that she demonstrated in her debut last year. But what makes her performance in this role and others particularly special are the shades of nuance, the facility with which she stretches a choreographic phrase, and her ability to connect with an audience, that are usually the province of ballerinas far beyond her years. Her Cavalier, Anthony Huxley, also a soloist, partnered her well – other than allowing her to over-rotate slightly in her final partnered pirouettes at the conclusion of the pas de deux, it was confident, efficient, and on the mark. However, Mr. Huxley continues to show no connection at all either to his partner or the audience. The Cavalier doesn’t need to be effusive, but he needs to do more than go through the motions, competently or otherwise, and the absence of any animation to Mr. Huxley’s demeanor diminishes the overall quality of his performance.

In other roles early Sunday afternoon, soloist Megan LeCrone danced a wonderfully vibrant and powerful Dewdrop. Despite a sudden fall during the coda, Kristen Segin, a member of the corps, was a superlative Marzipan Shepherdess, with forceful attack and crystalline execution. And Faye Arthurs, also a member of the corps, brought a welcome measure of sensuality, as well as technical competence, to ‘Coffee’.

However, because it was filled with significant and remarkably well-executed role debuts, the later performance proved more exciting. Ashley Laracey danced her initial Sugar Plum Fairy as if she’d been performing the role for years, displaying not only competent execution, but appropriate regality and sensitivity. It was a noteworthy debut. And when my only criticism is that she should use less make-up, it says something about the high performance quality. Considering how well Ms. Laracey, a soloist, has been dancing of late, this was not a surprise. What was surprising to me was the debut of her partner, Russell Janzen, a member of the corps. I had not previously noticed Mr. Janzen, a tall, Nordic-looking, redwood tree of a dancer, but his performance as Ms. Laracey’s Cavalier was remarkable. He not only connected appropriately with Ms. Laracey (his characterization was understated, but adequate), he demonstrated attentive, and capable partnering, and crisply solid execution throughout, marred only by a bit of stiffness in his movement quality – understandable for a major debut. He did the job superbly, and may prove to be the latest in a long line of NYCB danseurs who not only can execute their own steps well, but who can partner.

In another role debut, soloist Brittany Pollack was a dynamic and ebullient Dewdrop, who handled the non-stop motion with ease, and Lauren King, also a soloist, capably and enthusiastically led the Marzipan Shepherdesses. Emily Kikta, a member of the corps who debuted as ‘Coffee’ earlier this season, is a strong, formidable-looking dancer, but not one whom I would describe, based on prior performances, as sultry or sensuous – qualities that to me are essential for this role. Nevertheless, she gave an admirable performance, with a measured but convincing, and intensely enticing, attack.

Based my informal audience-size calculations, each of these two performances was a near-sellout. Fruitful as that may be, these Nutcracker performances serve more of a function than ‘just’ enhancing operating revenue and perhaps building future audiences. They provide exposure and experience for all levels of NYCB’s bountiful crop of young dancers – more than only those identified here. In this respect, these performances are invaluable: they show not only what NYCB looks like now, but what it may look like in the future.

edited 12/28 to correct minor grammatical errors, and again 1/7 to correct the reference to 'Saturday' to 'Sunday'


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
The messages in this forum are posted by members of the general public and do not reflect the opinions or beliefs of CriticalDance or its staff.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group