The fabulous presentation of Dracula by Ballet Nebraska last Friday night only proves the promise this young company has.
Performed at the Orpheum Theater, the dramatic ballet was a visual feast. From the enormous handsome sets to the impressive lighting, the mood was suitably creepy. Transylvania indeed. Kudos to set design and construction wizards Ron Barrett and Homer McClure, and lighting by Jerry Wolderski of Theatrical Media Services.
And the next best thing to live music is expertly edited recorded music and a great sound system. The music of masters – Liszt, Strauss, Brahms, Kilar, Class, Barry, and Goldenthal – were perfectly blended to set the tone.
The costumes were so beautiful they took your breath away. Lucy’s red dress was perfection, as were the brides’ dresses. Even the flower-strewn hairdos were heavenly. And the Masquerade Ball/Wedding Reception gowns were resplendent. Even the men’s costumes were impressive (especially Dracula’s). All worked to tell the story more effectively.
Ah, the story. A familiar one. Jonathan Harker (Matthew Carter who is also ballet master) come to the Transylvania castle of Count Dracula with papers to sign. There he almost becomes a victim of the vampire, with three of Dracula's brides taunting him (Erin Alarcon, Claire Goodwillie and Kelsey Schwenker). He escapes to his fiancee, Mina. The three vampire brides were so beautiful, and so graceful, it was simply enchanting. The choreography was quite lovely and foreshadowed a larger version later.
The Masquerade Ball offers the opportunity for all of the company to dance, either to a Strauss waltz or as a band of Gypsies who entertain (in more beautiful, colorful costumes). A mysterious masked guest arrives, but no one recognizes Count Dracula as he dances with Mina, the bride, and her best friend, Lucy (in the stunning red dress). After the ball, he returns to find Lucy alone, begins to seduce her then bites her, leaving her dead.
At her funeral, the Count shows up to claim his new bride, taking her body with him to his castle, with Jonathan, Mina and townspeople on his heels.
At the castle, Lucy is brought to life as a vampire. When Mina is left alone, Lucy begins to initiate Mina as Dracula’s next bride. But when the Count sees Mina again, he realizes he is in love with her, so can’t claim her as his vampire bride.
All of these scenes are brought to life with some pretty wonderful dancing. Sasha York IS Dracula. He conveys his creepy nature in a subtle way that is all the more menacing. Natasha Grimm as Mina and Erika Overturff as Lucy were both terrific.
Really, by the last act, I was beginning to be swept away by the ethereal beauty of the dancers – my criteria for a really wonderful experience at the ballet. Guest choreographer Winthrop Corey is amazing, and I think this company was up to the challenge.
Congratulations to Ballet Nebraska founder and artistic director Erika Overturff (also the beautiful Lucy) on her many accomplishments, wearing her many hats.
I am really looking forward to Ballet Nebraska’s next offering, their own brand new version of The Nutcracker. It will be presented at Iowa Western Arts Center on December 2 and the Omaha Music Hall on December 4. There will also be a Nutcracker Tea Party at Joslyn Castle, hosted by the Ballet Nebraska Guild, on November 27. (Visit the website: balletnebraska.org.)
Count Dracula may be scary, but the ballet bearing his name is beautiful!
Saturday, November 5, 2011
To be or not to be ... Anonymous
Did that Bard fellow, William Shakespeare, really write all those plays and poems?
The new film, Anonymous, attempts to answer that question definitively.
Another question: are we the audience able to follow the intricate political thriller?
We shall attempt to answer that question definitively.
Suppose that the reportedly nearly illiterate bard actually took credit for the works of Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford. Why would Shakespeare do it? Why would De Vere permit it? What else is at play at the time of upheaval in Queen Elizabeth’s England circa 1550 - 1603?
If you know the answers to even some of those questions, you should be able to navigate this new film easily. If not, you – like me – will probably suffer from confusion as the fast-talking (with those English accents!) cast weaves its spell.
Okay, it sounds like I didn’t like it. Not so. I just got confused on occasion.
It didn’t help my confusion that the film jumped back and forth in time, forcing me to ID not one, but two, faces for every name.
Here’s the good news: It’s not only an interesting premise, but a pretty convincing one, at least in this context. The film does satisfactorily explain the whys. De Vere, the mature version played by Rhys Ifans (an absolute chameleon – do you remember him from Notting Hill?) – is mesmerizing as the talented royal who was driven to write despite the taboo against him stooping to such a thing. Enter Will Shakespeare, an aspiring actor who in fact could read but not write. De Vere wants his plays produced (at the Rose, later called the Globe, Theater). To do so, he must find someone to submit them; he chooses Ben Johnson, another writer, with the stipulation that he will not reveal the true author. Wait. Where does Shakespeare come in? Sort of accidentally. Once he has taken credit for one of the plays on stage, he has to stick with it, and so does De Vere.
But, that is not the whole story. The big picture includes the struggle taking place over the throne of the aging queen. (Remember that whole Mary, Queen of Scots thing?)
The cast is quite good, including Vanessa Redgrave (looking ancient) and her real life daughter Joely Richardson, who portray the “virgin” queen as older and younger versions. Richardson’s young queen falls in love with De Vere and may have had his child. Okay, I’m going to stop staggering through English history, known and unknown, now because I’m out of my element (and I actually studied this era rather enthusiastically at one time!).
What can’t be beat: the atmosphere of the streets, the palace, the Globe (I have been to the replicated Globe and this brings it to life). The actors, the costumes. If this had smell-a-vision, we’d probably have to leave the theater.
One final prop to Rhys Ifans. He was fantastic. And tell me he didn’t look like Ryan Gosling’s clone! (I’m not the only one who thought so.)
There’s a lot of drama here, and a few laughs along the way. It immerses us in a time four centuries ago with fully realized characters. I do think this will appeal to a somewhat narrow audience. Pity, it’s a fascinating look at history, with not a little speculation thrown in.
So, did it answer the question: Did that Bard fellow write all those plays?
You’ll have to see the movie and decide for yourself. And that’s the fun of it.
I’m giving this three reels (out of four).
The new film, Anonymous, attempts to answer that question definitively.
Another question: are we the audience able to follow the intricate political thriller?
We shall attempt to answer that question definitively.
Suppose that the reportedly nearly illiterate bard actually took credit for the works of Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford. Why would Shakespeare do it? Why would De Vere permit it? What else is at play at the time of upheaval in Queen Elizabeth’s England circa 1550 - 1603?
If you know the answers to even some of those questions, you should be able to navigate this new film easily. If not, you – like me – will probably suffer from confusion as the fast-talking (with those English accents!) cast weaves its spell.
Okay, it sounds like I didn’t like it. Not so. I just got confused on occasion.
It didn’t help my confusion that the film jumped back and forth in time, forcing me to ID not one, but two, faces for every name.
Here’s the good news: It’s not only an interesting premise, but a pretty convincing one, at least in this context. The film does satisfactorily explain the whys. De Vere, the mature version played by Rhys Ifans (an absolute chameleon – do you remember him from Notting Hill?) – is mesmerizing as the talented royal who was driven to write despite the taboo against him stooping to such a thing. Enter Will Shakespeare, an aspiring actor who in fact could read but not write. De Vere wants his plays produced (at the Rose, later called the Globe, Theater). To do so, he must find someone to submit them; he chooses Ben Johnson, another writer, with the stipulation that he will not reveal the true author. Wait. Where does Shakespeare come in? Sort of accidentally. Once he has taken credit for one of the plays on stage, he has to stick with it, and so does De Vere.
But, that is not the whole story. The big picture includes the struggle taking place over the throne of the aging queen. (Remember that whole Mary, Queen of Scots thing?)
 |
| Joely Richardson and Jamie Campbell Bower as the young Queen and Earl. |
What can’t be beat: the atmosphere of the streets, the palace, the Globe (I have been to the replicated Globe and this brings it to life). The actors, the costumes. If this had smell-a-vision, we’d probably have to leave the theater.
 |
| Vanessa Redgrave and Rhys Ifans in later years. |
There’s a lot of drama here, and a few laughs along the way. It immerses us in a time four centuries ago with fully realized characters. I do think this will appeal to a somewhat narrow audience. Pity, it’s a fascinating look at history, with not a little speculation thrown in.
So, did it answer the question: Did that Bard fellow write all those plays?
You’ll have to see the movie and decide for yourself. And that’s the fun of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)