Matilda the Musical (December 10th, 2015)

Matilda the Musical

So I’ve got about four half-finished Matilda reviews in my drafts folder. It’s been difficult to write them lately as I’ve been sitting in the back of the Upper Circle, and therefore miss the details of the show and performances, making it far more difficult to write. So I finally got to sit back in the Stalls (front row, even), and have enough thoughts about the show to write a complete review again! Yay! I’m going to do this by performer; I won’t write about everyone, just those that stood out to me (whether for good or bad reasons).

Seat/Venue Review: I sat in A7 in the Stalls. I love the Stalls at the Cambridge Theatre; great view, lots of legroom, lots of bathrooms – absolutely no complaints. 

Evie Hone (Matilda)

After a marathon of seeing Lizzie Wells and Lara McDonnell, I final saw someone new! I was really excited to see Evie as I’d seen a few glimpses of her at Oxford St Christmas Lights, and liked her a lot. So it was really thrilling to see her name on the cast board when I walked into the theatre.

Evie was a nice Matilda. She was absolutely adorable and innocent looking, with a very high-pitched voice. She was a good dancer who was sharp and didn’t look awkward, and she had minimal stumbles over her lines (only two fumbles that I counted) and she spoke very clearly (I had no trouble understanding her), though she did spend a lot of time fiddling with her costumes. My main problem with her was that she was quite unresponsive in her acting, especially when opposite any of the adult performers. When Mr Wormwood was ripping up Matilda’s book, Evie didn’t even look like she was paying attention. Her face was totally blank; she didn’t look upset, or angry, or sad, or anything… nothing. Matilda can be quite stoic, but that doesn’t equal emotionless. In My House, Evie said the lines very blankly and bluntly, and didn’t really appear to be showing sympathy or empathy for Miss Honey, which is a characteristic I really think Matilda needs to show. Evie’s acting was great when she was on her own though, and when she was working opposite other kids (her and Lavender’s interaction during the Thripp Throw was amazing).

One of my favourite moments of Evie was her hugging Miss Honey; she nearly sprinted at her, and it was really cute and emotional. It felt like Matilda was so desperate for love that she abandoned her usually stoic exterior and showed a lot of love and feeling towards Miss Honey. I really liked this detail. I also liked how she did the choreography in Quiet a little bit differently than the other girls; it seemed as if her Matilda was really considering her words and actions, and her arms ‘burst’ out when it felt right emotionally, rather than when the choreography called for it.

Miria Parvin (Miss Honey)

I can’t say enough good things about Miria’s portrayal of Miss Honey. It’s sensitive, intuitive, detailed, thoughtful… I could go on for a while. She's very motherly towards Matilda - with all the kids, actually. She gets down on the kids' levels to speak to them, and is very kind and understanding towards all of them. But you can also sense that she's trying to hide the hurt and vulnerability in front of the kids. When Trunchbull is screaming at her in front of the children, she stays very resolute and stony-faced, which makes her complete breakdown in front of Matilda really heartbreaking. Some of the details I love about Miria are at the end of My House, when the Escapologist/Her Father places his hand on her arm, her voice cracks, almost as if she can feel his presence. It's a beautiful and effective moment. I also really love her completely over the top dance at the end of Bruce (it's hysterical but also shocking - which probably makes it more funny). The final detail I wanted to mention is during the scene where Matilda is writing on the chalkboard; before she starts to write "Run", Miss Honey nods and says "Run" first; it's like Matilda got the idea to say that from Miss Honey. It's cute seeing how Miss Honey is really hopeful for a second that it really is her father, but when she sees that it's Matilda; she doesn't get angry or upset. It's sort of a quiet acceptance and a wave of affection for this girl who's trying to help her in the only way she can. I loved Miria's performance and all the emotion and intricacies it contained. I'll happily see her Miss Honey a dozen more times. 

Oliver Brooks (u/s Trunchbull)

I honestly don’t see a lot of difference between him and Craige Els; aside from a few little nuances and details, Oliver’s Trunchbull is a carbon copy of Craige’s. Voices sound the same, mannerisms are the same. Oliver does a good job, but there’s nothing original or innovative about his performance; I’ve seen it all before. One thing at this show that was funny was he dropped the ribbon at the end of The Hammer. The music ended, Oliver stopped, picked the ribbon up with as much contempt as he could muster, and then said “Now get out!”; I thought this could’ve gone so badly, but he handled it exactly how Trunchbull would’ve. It was a nice touch.

Rebecca Thornhill (Mrs Wormwood)

Have to admit, I’m not her biggest fan. She doesn’t really play with the character enough; it’s a very ‘safe’ approach. Mrs Wormwood is such an exuberant, lively character, and Rebecca made her very lackluster, and far too catty for my taste. I also didn’t find her dancing very strong; she’s not very flexible (her drop split is entirely cheated; she doesn’t do a split at all, and she really depends on her partner to get her legs where they need to be. She also doesn’t express very much when she’s dancing, which is when Mrs Wormwood should be at her most alive. I didn’t like her Rudolpho (John Brannoch); he isn’t flexible either (Rudolpho’s main characteristics are part-Italian and ‘supple’, aka flexible… so Rudolpho needs to be flexible!) and I just don’t find anything interesting about watching him, because he’s not an extraordinary dancer, nor did he really have fun with the character. Both he and Rebecca are mean and catty rather than humorous. In this case I guess they’re a good partnership – they’re both equally bland to watch.

Michael Begley (Mr Wormwood)

Well, I’m a bit annoyed because he called me a smelly little bookworm…. That wasn’t very nice. ( ;) ) But otherwise, he was really good. Very stern, serious Mr Wormwood, with an unintentionally humorous streak. But he wasn’t necessarily mean to Matilda – he just ignored her and had his occasional bouts of anger that were directed at her. He actually reminded me a lot of my dad, which is maybe why I felt a bit of sympathy towards his character. Anyway, it made his little interaction with Matilda at the end of the show more believable and heartwarming. I liked how he ripped up Matilda’s book; he was really over-exaggerating the struggles of figuring out how to rip it to the point that I was having hysterics in the front row. It was the same with the hat and the green hair. He had these great comical moments that cooled down the intensity of the scenes and provided much-needed comic relief. Anyway, loved him, love his Mr Wormwood, don’t love being called a ‘S-Worm’.

Ensemble

Alice (Lia Moxom) and Amanda (Caoimhe Judd) were amazing. Really expressive and interesting; they didn’t just scrunch their faces up the entire show, they actually showed a variet of different emotions from fear, to enthusiasm/excitement, to triumph – great range from these two, who also seemed to have strong singing voices and sharp, accurate dancing. Amanda was so cute during the throw; really great acting from her, and her lines were clear and well-spoken. Hortensia (Tilly Cook) was the exact opposite; I could barely hear her during her individual lines, and her dancing looked sloppy and lacked character. She wasn’t doing much acting-wise either. Olly Dobson played both the Doctor and Michael Wormwood. I loved his acting; he brought a great personality and enthusiasm to the doctor (coupled with a strong singing voice), and he was so funny as Michael.

The Royal Ballet: The Nutcracker (December 11th, 2015)

The Royal Ballet's

The Nutcracker

Dec. 11th, 2015

This spectacularly sparkly performance of the Nutcracker is a yearly tradition at the Royal Ballet. A Christmas essential across Europe and North America, the Nutcracker comes in hundreds of versions (with different choreography, stories, and characters) all set to the same score.  It’s easy to think you ‘know’ the Nutcracker after seeing it a number of times; I’ve seen NBoC’s Nutcracker at least four times. But the Royal Ballet’s was so different, and it’s opened my eyes to how one score and basic story can be interpreted so many different ways.

Alexander Campbell and Francesca Hayward (ROH.org)

In the Royal Ballet’s version of the Nutcracker, choreographed by Peter Wright, Drosselmeyer's (Gary Avis) nephew, Hans-Peter (Alexander Campbell), has been bewitched to become a Nutcracker, and must defeat the mouse king to regain his human form. With Clara's (Francesca Hayward) help, the Mouse King is defeated, and Drosselmeyer and Hans-Peter take Clara on a adventure through a magical land full of different characters and dances. 

As I said, Royal Ballet’s Nutcracker is very different from the one I’m used to. In most cases, this is a good thing. But where I think NBoC’s Nutcracker is superior is the story. Royal Ballet’s follows the loosest possible storyline it can in the first act, and abandons it entirely in act two. The coherent ‘action’ ends about halfway through the first act, and the rest of the ballet seems like an excuse to have lots of little dances; it was basically just using the music. I had to reread the plot summary a few times to wrap my head around what was supposed to be happening. I think it’s very necessary for ballets to clearly communicate a story (especially a ballet with a large audience of children), so in this aspect, RB’s Nutcracker fell short. I think I can fairly say that in general, NBoC has more emotional performances and more ably develops coherent storylines, while Royal Ballet has superior dancers, more finesse, more variety in performers, and are clearly better rehearsed.

However, in most other areas, I really enjoyed the Royal Ballet’s performance of The Nutcracker. As soon as I saw how glittery and ‘big’ the first scene was, I knew I would love it (as we all know, I love everything grand and detailed!). The sets were so large and detailed; I was sitting quite far off to the side so I did miss a lot set-wise (especially the Christmas tree! Pout), but what I did see was incredible. They really created an environment in which the story could unfold; there was no question of where things were happening, and the contrast between the warmth of the Act 1 sets versus the iciness of the Act 2 sets helped to communicate the change from Clara's  reality to her dream.

Francesca Hayward (ROH.org)

The costumes were exquisite. From the simple beauty of Clara’s nightgown, so the incredible detail on the Sugar Plum Fairy’s tutu and wig, every costume looked newly made (the costume department at the ROH should be commended for their excellent work). Even all of the group costumes for minor background characters were so detailed and individualized. I can’t comment on them enough. Favourite costumes of mine included Clara’s nightdress (it was so flowy – I need to know what fabric that was because I want to make something with it), the Rose Fairy’s glittery (!!) pink (!!!!) tutu, the Snowflakes’ costumes, and the Angel costumes. I also loved that every costume was a head-to-toe look. Nothing was just a tutu with a hairpiece. Wigs, makeup, shoes – everything came together to create a complete look that embodied and accentuated every single character in the show.

All the dancers performed beautifully. I always commend the Royal Ballet on how well-rehearsed their dancers are. Of course there are the odd mistake, but nothing is ever sloppy, and any mistakes are quickly rectified (and no one fell – every time I see Nutcracker, someone – usually a main character – falls). I was particularly impressed by the caliber of the student dancers; the children were charming and synchronized, and the older students performed so well you would think they were members of the corps. One of my favourite large group numbers was Snowflakes; I loved all of the intricacies and nuances of the choreography. The choreography itself was nothing especially revolutionary, but it was nice enough. I thought all of the divertissements - though too short - accurately communicated the 'feel' of the music. I did dislike the Sugar Plum's main variation; she did these odd little jumps (they're like pas de chats, but smaller, with what looked like a baby ronde de jambe - I'm sure it has a name, but I'm still new to ballet, so forgive my lack of knowledge) that looked awkward, and there was nothing 'fairylike' about the piece. The PDD was gorgeously done though; very grand, very attention-grabbing and exciting. 

Olivia Cowley (ROH.org)

A few outstanding performances were those of Clara (Francesca Hayward) and the Nutcracker (Alexander Campbell), that of the Rose Fairy (Yasmine Naghdi), and that of Lead Arabian (Olivia Cowley). Francesca Hayward is quickly becoming one of my favourite dancers. She is an absolute delight to watch, and Clara was a perfect role for her. She was sweet and innocent (blending in perfectly with the children onstage), absolutely solid technique-wise, and created a character that was believable and loveable. Alexander Campbell was charming and charismatic, and you could see why Clara would like him (I mean, other than the fact that he’s adorable). I didn’t really get much of his character, but I think that was a story issue rather than a problem with his performance. Yasmine Naghdi was beautiful and ethereal; she had a little stumble at one point towards the end of her performance (not in her main variation, but in a little aside later on in the ballet), but otherwise was sharp and tidy, hitting all the accents of the music, and giving an all-around charming and engaging performance. Olivia Cowley, a favourite dancer of mine, was sultry and charismatic as Lead Arabian. I’ve always found that music quite tricky to interpret, but Olivia does so with her usual elegance, finesse, and musicality. Not to mention she’s made out of elastic bands; the flexibility and strength Olivia showcased in this too-short piece would rival that of some of the top Rhythmic Gymnastics (Evgenia Kanaeva totally comes to mind). The Nutcracker was full of great performances, but these were the main ones that stood out to me. I did also have a soft spot for Drosselmeyer and his tendency to throw glitter everywhere though.

Lauren Cuthbertson (the Guardian)

One thing that surprised me was how unenthusiastic dancers Lauren Cuthbertson and Federico Bonelli (The Sugar Plum Fairy and the Prince) appeared to be. Now, in all fairness, there had been a last minute cast change (Matthew Golding was originally scheduled to dance the Prince). Lauren was, as always, exquisitely elegant, and absolute technical perfection, but I felt she was lacking in the emotional department. Her smile seemed forced, and she didn’t really bring anything to the character. It was Lauren dancing, not a character. She and Federico didn’t look comfortable together; he seemed to be struggling to maintain his grip on her during lifts. On his own, Federico is a nice dancer, but like Lauren, he wasn’t really dancing a character. He was just doing a performance. I do love watching them dance, but something just seemed off about their performance that night. There was nothing memorable about either of them.

I had a wonderful time at The Nutcracker. Even if the story isn’t the greatest, Nutcracker’s a great, not-too long night out (it ends at 945, perfect for kids!), full of entertaining performances, beautiful costumes, and grand sets.

The Phantom of the Opera (November 14th, 2015)

The Phantom of the Opera

November 14th, 2015

Matinee

Another trip to Phantom! I've been at the Royal Opera House so much that it felt a bit weird to be back in my old haunt. It's not quite the same as I've been sitting in the Grand Circle (cheaper seats!) rather than stalls, but still. Anyway, I finally got around to seeing the new principal Christine Celinde Schoenmaker, and also managed to catch a few new covers on, so it made for an interesting show. I don't have too many comments on the show itself as I was mostly focusing on the performers, so I've divided the review into sections based on performer. Enjoy!

Seat/Venue Review: I sat A21 in the Grand Circle, and it was £51. Overall quite a good seat. You have to lean forward a bit, but you can see everything on the stage happening. You miss a few details being farther away, but I think it's a good value for what you get. The only thing I hate about the GC is the lack of bathrooms. Also the staff get quite snippy if you want to check the cast board before going up to the GC. 

John Owen-Jones

John Owen-Jones
(program scan by Viscountess on Tumblr)

Love him! Really, really adore his Phantom. But I couldn't for the life of me tell you why. He's basically an all-around amazing Phantom. The voice is fabulous (I've never heard a Phantom get applause mid-song, but JOJ totally deserved it. His voice is like listening to melting caramel), his acting is interesting and engaging, and his very presence on stage is just *drool*. I'm kind of sparse on details because I can't actually tell you specific little things I liked or disliked about his Phantom, I just loved it all. Off the top of my head, I like how he turns the end of the title song into a bit of a music lesson (he's 'conducting' Christine with his hands), and I like how he's not overly violent in the Final Lair. You get the sense that there's some intense crazy under the calm, smooth exterior, but it doesn't pop out much. I also love how he does the Italian accent (mimicking Piangi) in PONR; it's a cool little detail that makes the setup and Christine's reaction far more believable. I also like that he expresses his emotions with his whole body; it's not confined to just his face/hands. It's kind of hard to explain, but it's like watching a dancer (like Matthew Golding in R&J) rather than someone just 'acting'. Anyway, JOJ is amazing and such a treat to watch. 

Celinde Schoenmaker

I wanted to like her. I so badly wanted to like her, because I adored her Fantine, and I thought it was amazing that someone really different from the typical casting was playing Christine. But I was unfortunately quite disappointed by her. 

Celinde Schoenmaker
(tumblr)

Let me start by saying: Celinde's voice is glorious. Her Think of Me Cadenza was the most mind-blowing thing I've ever heard. It was a much richer, deeper sound than your typical Christine. Though her voice is beautiful, I thought she over sung the part (and Harriet Jones was guilty of this early in her run too). She goes all out and sings literally everything. Even lines that are usually spoken, she sings. Because of this, she misses opportunities to express her emotions in her voice (true, she could do this while singing, but she doesn't). Her performance was so vocally-centered, that there was very little character development; nothing really emotionally engaging about her performance. I'm re-reading this and it's making no sense, but she just sings stuff. She doesn't feel it, and that shows in her voice. I also struggled with her accent quite a bit (which was odd because I didn't even notice it as Fantine); it was very thick. She was still understandable, but it seemed as though she was having a difficult time trying to hide the accent, the result being that any time she spoke/sung, it just sounded awkward. I expect she will become more comfortable with this in time.
I was also quite put off by her acting. It was just uncomfortable to watch. It was very much "I'm doing the choreography and blocking that was given to me," and therefore came off as rehearsed rather than natural. It didn't feel 'in the moment'. Some of her acting choices didn't make a lot of sense to me; she seemed far too excited about the Phantom appearing in her mirror (ok, this could make sense if you think about it, but I didn't get it at the time) and was really smiley and twitchy during MOTN. I heard others call it 'Orgasm acting' (a la Gina Beck) - I'm not sure I'd go that far, but it certainly looked off. She also never really got emotional with her face. I mean, she'd frown or smile, but otherwise kept a pretty neutral expression. I couldn't tell you what Christine was feeling at any given moment, and I can't say anything about how her character developed through the show, because it didn't. There's not a whole lot to say here… just disappointing. I loved her acting as Fantine and was expecting such an interesting, emotional Christine.
The one part of her performance that I unexpectedly loved was the second half of the Final Lair; it seemed that she finally let herself go, and went all out emotionally. Face, voice, movements - everything felt less choreographed and more natural. If she could do the whole show like that, she'd be incredible. From "Tears of Hate", she was just on FIRE! I also loved her "Angel of music, you DECEIVED ME!" etc. She just completely broke down, and it showed in her face, voice, and body (everything about her just collapsed inwards). After that line, she just started gasping, and looked very distressed. It was so effective, and demonstrated that she is more than capable of delivering an emotional performance.  The other time I felt like this was at the very beginning of PONR, when she was playing with the Apple. It felt as though she was actually having fun and playing around, rather than rigidly performing choreography. So yeah, let yourself go Celinde!

Nadim Namaan and Celinde Schoenmaker
(program scan by Viscountess on Tumblr)

Mostly, I feel like Celinde's being held back by trying to be the stereotypical vulnerable, delicate Christine. Whether that's her choice or the directors, I don't know. But she's never going to be a delicate, childlike, innocent Christine. She doesn't have the voice or the look to pull that off. However, she absolutely could be a more mature, fierce, badass Christine (a la Olivia Brereton). I mean, yes, there are essential moments of vulnerability. But it's so much more effective to play a really fierce Christine who has multiple layers, including a vulnerable layer which shows through during All I Ask of You, Final Lair, Wishing, etc.). This could be so effective if she just was allowed to portray it that way. Anyway, I've got my fingers crossed. Celinde's got a fabulous Christine inside of her, I'm just hoping we'll get to see it some day. 

Nadim Namaan

Not my favourite performance of his. I felt like he didn't gel very well with Celinde; they didn't seem like close friends or a couple. His usual protectiveness wasn't there, possibly because Celinde's Christine is much more mature and doesn't really need a protector as much. So I think he could've adjusted slightly, but since Celinde doesn't really know what she's doing character wise, Nadim didn't have a lot to work with. So I'll forgive it. Not much to say other than that, but he still had some really good moments as Raoul. "Cease this torment!" in Wandering Child Trio was very passionate, very believable. I love his acting in this scene; he speaks with such conviction and power - making a sometimes ridiculous scene actually mean something. Nadim does a great job at communicating Raoul's fiercer side without going overboard. Loved when he was in the noose; he was really struggling against it and fighting. I loved his, "Christine, forgive me, please forgive me," too. Definitely communicating that it wasn't her fault they'd ended up in this situation, or apologising for not being able to save her/listen to her sooner. Depends on your perception of Raoul. But I liked it.
All in all, great voice, powerful singer (you can always hear him properly), decent acting. I still love his Raoul, just not quite as blown away as the first time I saw him.

Lyndsey Gardiner

Lyndsey Gardiner
(operafantomet tumblr)

Story time! Back when I saw Phantom in London the first few times, there was a swing (I'd just learned what a swing was so I liked to try to spot them) that I really, really liked. She put her own unique little stamp on every ensemble character she played, even if said character was only onstage for 6 seconds. It felt like she put a lot of effort and thought into what she was doing, and that made her very entertaining to watch. A while later, I found out that said swing had been promoted to 2nd cover Carlotta! Whoop! Only… I never got to see her (I had the 1st cover Carlotta a lot, which was great because I loved her, but I still wanted to see said favourite swing). So, a year+ and a cast change later, I finally got to see my favourite swing as Carlotta! And it was so worth the wait.
Lyndsey's Carlotta was so delightfully funny, obnoxious, fierce - I could go on for a while. She really made the character her own, and it wasn't an interpretation that seemed copied from anyone else - very fresh and unique. She had a solid, believable accent, and a voice to die for. She wasn't too shrill or 'throaty' as some Carlottas can get; it was a very solid, clear sound, with just a touch of pomp and a 'look how wonderful I can be' air about it. I really liked that she kept the Italian accent consistent through the singing/speaking/etc. - a lot of Carlotta's tend to drop it when they're singing (after TOM).
My favourite part about Lyndsey's Carlotta had to be the acting. She was so charismatic and engaging; I couldn't take my eyes off of her. t loved how she said "She's mad," in Notes II; it sounded very snobby, frank, and high-schooler-ish, which was funny. Never heard anyone go for that angle before. I can't exactly put it into words, but I found her Carlotta so much fun to watch. Little details in her interactions with the other characters established a solid diva-esque personality, her little rants and emotional outbursts were over the top, yet entirely believable simply because she put the effort into thoroughly establishing her character. I really, really loved her as Carlotta, and I don't think this review does her justice. As with JOJ, I just loved everything she did, and it's difficult to put my finger on a few specific things that made her portrayal so enjoyable.

Basically at this point I'm just annoyed that after how much I liked her, I doubt I'll see her as Carlotta again (it was difficult enough to see her once!). I have a checklist for Carlotta, and Lyndsey checked all the boxes, and then some! She's an amazing, entertaining, and feisty Carlotta, and I totally recommend going to see her if you get the chance. Also, I feel like she'd make a really interesting Christine… she's got the right look for it, and I'd love to see her act something like that as I really thought she put her own stamp on Carlotta. I'd completely support her being the new cover Christine after Lisa's promoted (I mean, I doubt that'd happen, but I'd love to see it). 

Daisy Hulbert

Daisy Hulbert
(picslist.com)

I was very unpleasantly surprised by just how awful Daisy's Meg was. I liked watching her in the ensemble and thought she was a nice and interesting dancer, and I fully expected her to be a decent Meg. I was so wrong. She was embarrassingly bad. I'm surprised anyone let her on stage. In Hannibal, she was trying far too hard to stand out. A beat ahead of everyone, making ridiculous faces, movements not flowing… not pretty. Also, sickled foot! Argh. Even Celinde managed to keep her foot straight, whereas when Daisy's foot was on the floor, it was so turned in I don't know how she didn't hurt herself. Anyway, I wasn't impressed.

I'd heard her sing some stuff before, and I didn't think much of her voice, so I wasn't expecting too much from her vocally. I figured it'd be mediocre at best. I wish she'd been mediocre. Her singing voice was so bad I don't even know how to describe it (my friend described it as a drugged gerbil if that's any help…). Cringeworthy comes to mind. Squeaky. Wobbly. Babyish. Rodent-esque (my hamster made more pleasant noises than her, to be completely honest). Take your pick. It was just.. awful. I'm making faces just thinking about it. I mean, I think she was hitting the notes… sort of… she totally missed them on "the words aren't yours!" though (oh my goodness that was painful to listen to). I guess there's not much else to say about her singing, because I think I'm just ranting now. But it really was unpleasant. They could've used her Angel of Music as some form of torture. I mean, she couldn't even sing "Christine!" without sounding all warbly and shrill. There was no smoothness in her voice (forgive my lack of terminology; I'm a gymnast, not a singer). 

The one thing that wasn't awful was her acting. It wasn't to my taste, certainly. At times it was way over the top, whereas other times she faded into the background. But she seemed to be going for a very childlike approach, and she at least communicated that well. Did I like it? Nope. Did she make a choice and commit to it? Yep. So I'll give her that. But I really have no desire to see the atrocity that is this Meg onstage every again.  

General

The ensemble was weirdly sparse (illness/holiday I assume?); it looked as though a few female ensemble were missing, I spotted at least one male swing on, and there were at least two ballet girls missing (plus Daisy on for Meg), and no male dancer. It looked rather odd watching Daisy and Lily essentially partnering themselves in Il Muto. Unfortunately, no matter how good those girls are, it was very obvious that there were people missing. And I have to say, this group of girls don't gel nearly as well as the last cast (which is weird because it's almost all the same… I guess Layla being gone and Georgia and Danielle missing has a significant impact). Everyone was slightly off time with each other, nothing looked as tight and clean as it usually is.

The Royal Ballet: Mixed Program (November 10th, 2015)

The Royal Ballet's

Viscera

& 

Afternoon of a Faun

&

Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux

&

Carmen

Nov. 10th, 2015

This was a mixed program featuring a brand new ballet. I saw what was apparently the 'B' cast (thank you guy sitting next to me), but I'm positive that in most cases, they were every bit as good as the A cast must be. Certainly there were performances that were so perfect I couldn't see anyone else doing them. I've divided the review into brief thoughts on each piece in the order in which they were performed. Enjoy!

Seat/Venue Review: I sat C25 in the Stalls Circle, and it was a £33 day seat. Not a bad seat. A bit annoying when one of the pieces heavily focused their choreography on an area of the stage I couldn't see. I didn't get in late, but they'd already run out of cast sheets, which was annoying. 

Viscera

(flickr)

Viscera, choreographed by Liam Scarlett, included a large ensemble of dancers, featuring Fumi Kaneko, Leticia Stock, and Nehemiah Kish. The 23 minute ballet was divided into three parts; a large group number, a PDD, and a second group number. I can't really tell you anything about any particular dancers, as it was too quick to pick out individual faces/styles. I think I spotted Olivia Cowley, and there was one blonde dancer (usually in the front) who had atrocious hands/wrists, but aside from that, I can't identify any dancers (not including the PDD), so I'll speak about the piece as a whole.

I found the choreography quite chaotic. It looked like it could've used a bit more rehearsal; many of the synchronised parts had one or two dancers a beat in front or behind of everyone else. In some areas, this was clearly intentional, in others, not so much. Overall, it was pretty sloppy. The PDD was nice enough, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy about either of the dancers. It felt like they were doing their job, and that was that. Both strong dancers, of course, but I thought there was more they could've done expression wise to communicate the meaning of whatever they were dancing. As it was, I have no clue what they were talking about.

I also had a bit of a problem with the costumes. The three types of costumes (two for girls and one for boys) were just different enough to clash quite noticeably. The colours and styles (tight, square necks for the girls and baggy cowl necks for the guys) just didn't go together; deep red and plum aren't complementary. I suppose they were pretty traditional, contemporary ballet costumes, but I thought a little more thought could've gone into how the costumes looked onstage with each other.

I did enjoy watching Viscera, I just felt that it was an unfinished product that had been thrown onstage before it was totally ready. The choreography was chaotic and not exactly memorable, and many lovely dancers just faded into the messy background. 

Afternoon of a Faun

Olivia Cowley
(© @damegrace on Twitter)

This 11-minute Jerome Robbins piece featured two dancers, Olivia Cowley and Matthew Ball, and was probably my favourite piece of the evening. While the name is a bit nonsensical (aside from Cowley's pseudo-grecian tunic, nothing is remotely greco-roman about it), it's a simple, yet enjoyable performance. It tells a brief story of two dancers in a ballet studio, in which the audience is the mirror. The unnerving thing about this idea is that the dancers are looking right at the audience, yet you know that they're looking at a reflection. The head tilts and subtle movements make this very clear. It's a cool idea, and Cowley and Ball execute it to perfection.

The choreography and performance felt very classical with a modern edge to it, shown through the costume and set. There were no fancy tricks; rather, it focused on the relationship between two dancers. It was a piece that was quietly elegant without being overly complex; very clean, very light and airy. Ball was charming and engaging; his little warm up routine at the beginning was very realistic. Aside from the heavy makeup, it didn't look like he was performing on stage. However, Olivia Cowley stole the performance for me. She's such a gorgeous dancer, with lines and extensions to die for and the most beautiful stage presence. Her dancing and the music felt like they were the linked together so absolutely that I can't imagine one without the other; she really connects to the music, her partner, and the audience in a way very few dancers do. She's living it, rather than performing it (does that make sense?); it's incredibly effective, and makes her a joy to watch.

I've read other reviews that suggested a heavy sexual undertone of the piece, which I didn't see. To me, it was more about childlike innocence, beautiful clean lines and simple, yet elegant steps. It was like watching a waterfall at sunrise (imagery much?); peaceful, yet transfixing. I could've sat and watched it go on for hours.

Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux

Lauren Cuthbertson and Matthew Golding
(roh.org)

This Balanchine piece featured principal dancers Lauren Cuthbertson and Matthew Golding. I'm typically not a Balanchine fan; I find his choreography frenetic and lacking in flow or rhythm. However, I did quite enjoy this piece (mostly because of the dancers, but I loved the music too). Lauren Cutbertson is always radiant (although slouching off the stage after a turning section before she's actually out of view of the audience wasn't one of her finer moments - I always find things like that disappointing because she was executing these beautiful, quick turns with such precision and finesse… and then she just stopped bothering before she was off stage. It kind of ruined the moment). But her footwork is quick and tidy, complemented by an elegant port de bras. I felt that she made the best of the choreography; she kept it light and spritely while maintaining her usual fluidity and expression. I really enjoyed Matthew Golding in this piece too. He's a very expressive, emotive dancer, but this gave me a chance to watch his actual dancing a bit more than I did at R&J. Great lines and extension, rock solid turns, very sharp, hit all the accents in the music and choreography easily. I really liked that he's got gorgeous presentation, but will draw your attention to his partner; if you're watching him, it's like he finishes his thing, then slowly extends his arm and head in the direction of Lauren so you follow his gaze right to her. It's hard to explain, but very effective. Pairs skaters/Ice Dancers - take note! My one complaint about him is he tends to 'eat an air donut' quite a lot (basically 'biting' the air while dancing… a lot of dancers and figure skaters seem to do this; it just looks a bit awkward). So, although I'm not a Balanchine fan, the expression and technical ability of Golding and Cuthbertson made this piece entertaining and entrancing. I would happily watch it over and over again. 

Carmen

Marianela Nunez and Matthew Golding
(roh.org)

A new work by Carlos Acosta, featuring a mix of ballet and opera, starred Tierney Heap as Carmen, Vadim Muntagirov as Don Jose, and Matthew Ball as Escamillo. This was the second Acosta-choreographed piece I've seen, and I can't say I'm a fan of his work. It's chaotic, nonsensical, fails to communicate a story… essentially, this version of Carmen was a glorified striptease. I honestly don't know why the Royal Ballet continues to pour money into Acosta's choreography, as it's clearly not been successful thus far (this based on my personal opinion and on other reviews). There was more making out between characters and stripping off of clothes than actual dancing, which was disappointing and unnecessary. The opening consisted of a group of men removing clothing bit by bit as Carmen danced around seductively. Subtle, real subtle. In the middle of the ballet, there was a table prop, and a dancer was put front and centre simply to strip off her top/vest, then jump back down again. These kinds of things happened frequently, and they detracted from the story, leaving a confused mess of props and clothes. I also felt the ballet was far too highly sexualised. In many cases, implication is more effective than actually showing what was happening. Drawn out kisses, dancers rolling around on top of each other, and awkwardly positioned lifts made the piece decidedly un-sexy - any charm or seductiveness that the dancers achieved was cancelled out by the above. 

That is not to say the dancing itself wasn't good. It was clear that Heap and Ball were putting everything into their characters. Heap was sultry and daring; every inch of her screamed seductress through the ballet, yet she was capable of showing the character's more emotional side when confronted with her own demise. Ball was charming and suave as Escamillo, you could see exactly why Carmen was drawn to his intriguing nature. There wasn't a whole lot of actual dancing on his part, but Ball managed to express the character's personality while tidily executing what little dancing he had been given to do. Muntagirov was a bit awkward and muted; he faded into the background very easily, and I didn't see the psychological break that has to happen for Don Jose to murder Carmen. 

Marienala Nunez and Carlos Acosta
(roh.org)

Another thing I liked was the opera chorus. They sang one full song (accompanying Ball's matador -esque introductory routine) and provided some background singing at other times. It added an interesting dynamic to an art that is usually silent aside from the orchestra, providing some depth and a connection to the most famous version of Carmen. I did think the fortune teller could have been played by a ballet dancer rather than sung. In this case, the singing felt cumbersome and unnecessary.

Carmen was a disappointing way to end an otherwise interesting and engaging mixed program. I hope that this ballet will be put aside for a while, or at least go back to the drawing board and reworked into a stronger, more coherent piece. I would certainly be willing to give it another shot if it were reworked. 

This quadruple bill presented by the Royal Ballet is certainly worth seeing, although it disappoints in some areas. Afternoon of a Faun and Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux are beautiful, engaging pieces, and Viscera, though chaotic, is intriguing nonetheless.