For reviews and discussions of the operas from Henry Purcell.
But your pain was worthwhile, just because of the laughing pleasure it brought me to read this.I think everyone else will hate it and it is guaranteed to bring Alan out in hives.
The pressure of recommendation (or not) is considerable in these situations. I woke this morning in such a grumpy mood, conscious that I'd wasted 4 hours of the previous evening, conscious that I'd wasted a significant sum of money, but most of all, conscious that this could so easily have been wonderful. There's no shortage of effort, goodness knows. It's not as if they didn't try hard. But the naff artistic decisions present (for me) uncrossable hurdles. Part of the problem is that no one seemed to have decided whether it was a variety show, a play, an opera, a farce, or a panto, so they just bundled it all together to leave us to decide. And in principle, that's OK - I can see that Purcell almost invites such a treatment. But the opportunity seems to have been used just to be silly. Silly in a smart-alec, postmodern, sort of way: 'Look at us, we can survey centuries of theatrical and musical history, pick out whatever bits we like, and stick them all together to make such a very clever scrapbook of it all - and y'know it's only for a laugh, wink, wink.'Damn! Should I sell it as "brand new, opened but never watched" for a couple of bucks less than the selling price for a new one?
Alan, but it's not the fault of the production, it's *Purcell's work* that is like this. It's semi-opera, or masque, the predecessor of Restoration Spectaculars. It *is* a mix of spoken dialogue, dance, music, and visuals. It was staged exactly as intended, with flying actors, elaborated scenery, etc. Another one by Purcell is King Arthur.Part of the problem is that no one seemed to have decided whether it was a variety show, a play, an opera, a farce, or a panto, so they just bundled it all together to leave us to decide.
Yep. Ravishing and inspired. And funny, and sexy, and wildly imaginative.I can't find anything to criticise on that score. The sets and effects are ravishing: inspired, even.
Dido is a widow and a queen, she's not some young untried thing. The problem here is that the Aeneas is too young, but I'm not complaining.Watching this. Filmed version. Not bad, even though Maria Ewing looks too old for the role, especially when compared to her young Aeneas (eye candy for Natalie and Annie)
Natalie, sorry that it took so long. I watched it today. Spectacular. A sure buy.No watch it watch it. I want your opinion too. Please?
Would like some further comment.......what makes this spectacular?Natalie, sorry that it took so long. I watched it today. Spectacular. A sure buy.
Just wanted to say that I do and did understand the hodge-podge character of the work, but that I felt the production caused it to disintegrate as an aesthetic whole; it made the work more hodgepodge than it is. The likely lads in their boiler suits stuck out as absurd anachronisms, and I just couldn't bear them whenever they appeared. And the bunnies - well, I guess it comes down to individual taste. There's nothing so idiosyncratically personal as humour, is there? It reminds me of a time I went to see a movie called Strictly Ballroom, having been told it was the funniest thing I'd ever see. I sat in the cinema, completely unable to understand what it was that almost the entire audience were laughing at. I mean, I'm not a humourless person, not at all, - but sometimes jokes just don't work for us. If I stand on the table and call myself a teapot with one arm crooked to my hip as a handle, and the other dangled outwards as a spout, not everyone will be amused. (I would be, though.)One needs to be in the mood for this kind of genre; don't go in expecting an opera, it's not an opera (for example, there is more than one hour in total of spoken dialogue). That's basically what turned off our friend Alan, but I think he failed to realize that this is the point of this genre, it's not exactly the producers' choice.
I remember this opera, featuring Connolly, performed in Milano, at La Scala, including some dance pieces also composed by Purcell. You know, Dido and Aeneas is quite short, so if you don't pair it with another opera, this could be an alternative solution to an otherwise all too brief evening. Around 30 minutes of ballet before the opera proper were included.As for Connolly, I'll just listen to the CD (which has Patricia Bardon as the sorceress so sounds loads better anyway).
While I don't know this DVD, semi-operas, masques, restoration spectaculars indeed belong to a sub-genre that is musical-like (or more precisely speaking, a predecessor of musicals) and combines all sorts of stage resources therefore these productions often look like a disgruntled combination of odd bits, and it may be the "fault" of the sub-genre rather than of the production, but yes, they also function as an excuse for excesses, so I trust from your review that this is one such example of excess.Here is the perfect example of a modern stage production doing bastardisation; an orgy of revolting mixture of "everything goes".
Henry Purcell, King Arthur (1691), a semi-opera.