# Met in HD Das Rheingold Discussion HQ



## Chi_townPhilly

Being for the benefit of dedicated discussion of the upcoming 
*Met in HD* theatre-cast of _Das Rheingold_- October 9, 2010

All are welcome to share contributions here- 
but a special invitation is extended to those who have committed to attending this event!

Your anticipations- your concerns- your 'show-prep'- 
all these and more are fair-game for pre-performance conversation.


----------



## mamascarlatti

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Being for the benefit of dedicated discussion of the upcoming
> *Met in HD* theatre-cast of _Das Rheingold_- October 9, 2010
> 
> All are welcome to share contributions here-
> but a special invitation is extended to those who have committed to attending this event!
> 
> Your anticipations- your concerns- your 'show-prep'-
> all these and more are fair-game for pre-performance conversation.


We don't get it here in New Zealand until the beginning of November  so I'll be reading your posts eagerly. My teenager has insisted she is coming so I'm hoping this first exposure to Wagner will be a positive experience for her. Hopefully Lepage's visual pyrotechnics will tide her through any longueurs she perceives .

Currently I'm watching the Barenboim Ring, reading Bryan Magee's Tristan chord and working my way through this excellent CD-Rom which has heightened my awareness of leitmotifs and enriched my appreciation of Wagner.
None of this was actually conscious preparation but I'm sure the better you know the Ring the more you enjoy it.


----------



## Almaviva

I have good expectations for Lepage's staging, and for Bryn Terfel as Wotan. All the preparation I'm planning to do, is that the day before I'll listen again to my two CDs with lectures explaining the leitmotives (it's a different product than the one quoted by Natalie):










I have ordered the Barenboim Ring as well but it won't be here in time for the broadcast. But even if I received it before Saturday, I probably wouldn't watch it, because I have the feeling that Barenboim's conducting is likely to be better than Levine's, so, I don't want to spoil the fun by comparing two freshly watched performances.


----------



## mamascarlatti

This is a very entertaining review of the Met Rheingold. Loved the T-shirt too, in a definitely non-PC way.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh

Like I said in the other thread, I won't be able to seen a simulcast of this opera...at least not this time around. Hopefully when they put on the entire cycle in a couple years circumstances will have changed. I'll have to settle for streaming it online when it's available for now. But I'm looking forward to hearing what others here think of it.



mamascarlatti said:


> Currently I'm reading Bryan Magee's Tristan chord


Awesome, I'm glad you were able to get it. Hope you're enjoying it.


----------



## mamascarlatti

*Magee: The Tristan Chord*



Poppin' Fresh said:


> Awesome, I'm glad you were able to get it. Hope you're enjoying it.


Was it you who recommended it? If so I'm very grateful - very well written, accessible without dumbing the ideas down, and to me anyway it shed a lot of light on the operas. Thanks.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh

mamascarlatti said:


> Was it you who recommended it? If so I'm very grateful - very well written, accessible without dumbing the ideas down, and to me anyway it shed a lot of light on the operas. Thanks.


Yeah, I remember you saying you had put in a request to the library for it. Glad you liked it. It really opened up my eyes to a whole new way of looking at Wagner and what he was doing in his work as well.


----------



## Almaviva

Poppin' Fresh said:


> Yeah, I remember you saying you had put in a request to the library for it. Glad you liked it. It really opened up my eyes to a whole new way of looking at Wagner and what he was doing in his work as well.


I have just ordered my copy.


----------



## Almaviva

mamascarlatti said:


> This is a very entertaining review of the Met Rheingold. Loved the T-shirt too, in a definitely non-PC way.


Very nice, Natalie. It increases my expectation for tomorrow. And I'm glad to learn that the rainbow bridge is working again.


----------



## ozradio

I had every intention of going until I just looked up ticket prices. $24 is a bit steep for me.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh

Almaviva said:


> I have just ordered my copy.


Maybe we should start a book club.


----------



## Almaviva

*Met 2010 Das Rheingold*

OK, my friends, here is what I thought of the Met in HD broadcast of _Das Rheingold_.

Overall, underwhelming. I'm disappointed.

Pros:

1) Levine and the Met Orchestra did a much better job this time. Faster tempo, more energetic, fuller sound. This is a significant "pro"which may save the day on its own.

2) Patricia Bardon was an outstanding Erda, arguably the highlight of the day.

3) Franz-Josef Selig and Hans-Peter König were very decent Fasolt and Fafner; among the best ever, and they looked better than the stereotypical look that we always get as far as the giants are concerned.

4) Eric Owens started lukewarm as Alberich but improved later.

5) One out of three Rhinemaidens was very hot. For a change, we got a very attractive Rhinemaiden. Better than zero out of three which is the rule.

6) Gerhard Siegel as Mime, although his part in _Das Rheingold _is very small, was very good. I'm looking forward to his more extended part in _Siegfried._

7) The rainbow bridge was cool.

8) Bubles coming from the Rhinemaidens and fire following Loge around were cool.

9) The production improves as it goes. The middle is better than the beginning, and the ending is better than the middle.

Neutral:

1) Freia, Donner, and Froh were correct, nothing more.

Cons:

1) Bryn Terfel was a big, big disappointment. He seemed indifferent, not really into it. His costume made him look fat and short and pathetic, as opposed to powerful. He didn't really convey Wotan's ambivalence. His singing was OK but nothing more. I believe he is more convincing as a baritone buffo.

2) I was expecting more from Lepage. He managed to make the Met stage look small and cramped. The famous "machine" takes a lot of space but isn't as awesome as anticipated. The staging seems indecisive between making use of the technology (like in the rainbow bridge, the fire surrounding Loge, the lightning) and just being minimalistic. By the end of _Das Rheingold _I was already tired of the "machine," I wonder how he'll manage to sustain the novelty over 13 more hours in 3 more operas.

3) In spite of all the new visuals, this production is still very static. There's a lot of "park and bark."

4) The first scene just doesn't work. It starts very well but when the "machine" moves into place and the Rhinemaides are up there and Alberich is trying to get them, it becomes clear that having them up there hanging by wires looks cool, but takes away the possibility of dynamic action. Everybody moves too slowly in the scene, and the effect ends up being very artificial. I almost miss the same scene in the previous Levine DVD.

5) Lepage has managed to make of certain scenes of _Das Rheingold_ a bit of comedy with some goofy moments. Again, this doesn't work. The previous Met Ring was solemn, ponderous, gloomy. It was stiff and traditional, but it conveyed a certain gravitas. This one doesn't. I don't want to laugh when I'm watching the Ring.

6) That's why I didn't like Loge very much. He seems goofy rather than cunny and smart. He looks more like Papageno than Loge. I can understand why some people booed Richard Croft.

7) All that sliding down the "machine" to enter and exit wasn't that interesting, and in the case of Alberich in the first scene, became rather silly. Yes, I know that he slides down when he's trying to catch the Rheinemaidens, but he didn't need to look like a cartoon character or a slapstick comedy character while doing it.

8) I like my Rheinemaidens somewhat misterious and ethereal. These three looked rather like ****s (one of them was hot, but still). This scene had too much light. Lepage should have done it in a more misty, darker mood.

9) Some low tech solutions were distracting. Come on, what's with those lights in Loge's hands that look so fake? And all the hanging cables showing? And that toad looked ridiculous.

10) They couldn't they get anybody less fat than Stephanie Blythe for the Fricka role? Opera these days is getting passed the stereotype of the fat lady singing. Please, don't go back to it. OK, I'd better stop, before PETF (People for the humane Treatment of Fatsos) gets me.

In summary, very good orchestra and conductor, some very decent singing, many strong points, but overall, this will probably not be our reference modern Ring.


----------



## jflatter

I also had the opportunity of seeing the Met's Rheingold last Saturday. Musically I thought it was on the whole a pretty decent effort. Terfel was pretty good as Wotan. Franz Josef Selig and Hans Peter Konig were outstanding as the Fasolt and Fafner respectively. I thought Stephanie Blyth was very good as Fricka (I actually thought a portly Fricka is a good idea as you can then understand why Wotan goes wandering) her vocal performance seemed very commanding and I am looking forward to her Act 2 role in Walkure. Richard Croft was a decent Loge but not in the class of a Graham Clark or most recently in London we had Phillip Langridge and he wasn't helped by the Vegas style Elvis hairstyle. I liked Eric Owens Alberich very much both vocally and dramatically. He seemed to have a good understanding of the role in each respect and seemed to transmit the evilness of the role particularly in the scenes with Mime (played well by Gerhard Siegel). I have to admit I did care for Adam Diega's Froh but Dwayne Croft was decent as Donner. I also was pleasantly surprised by Levine's conducting and found it a bit more punchier than usual a lot less laboured than some of his Wagner conducting.

However I found the production disappointing. Whether you like the Copenhagen Ring or you think that Otto Schenk's Ring the best ever, I would say that this seems to be a technological feast that doesn't really get off the ground unlike Valencia. Plus at this stage I am not sure what this production has to say for itself. I thought that the costume designs seemed all over the place (men in breastplates, women in ball gowns) and just hope that they start being able to improve things over the rest of the cycle. 

Die Walkure will of course be worth catching for Jonas Kaufmann as Siegmund.


----------



## Charon

How can a guy watch this? Is this going to be broadcast on TV soon? DVD?


----------



## jflatter

Charon,

I don't know where you live, but in the UK we have a channel Sky Arts 2 where the met season follows a few months later. You can also bet your bottom dollar that it will appear on DVD as the Met will know that many Wagner lovers will pick it up.


----------



## mamascarlatti

It will probably appear on Met Player eventually too.


----------



## superhorn

I haven't seen the new Rheingold yet but am eager to. If you missed the HD broadcast in the movies and get PBS on TV,it should appear on television before too long and later on DVD.
Perhaps the production will imprive overall with repeated performances and the entire team,
singers,director and technical staff,will get their act together. 
I'm curious to find out what the rest of this Ring production will be like,because Die Walkure is very different from Das Rheingold in its dramatic and scenery requirements,ditto the rest of the Ring.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Met in HD Das Rheingold- Virginia Beach 10/9/10*

Hot_townPhilly (my wife) and I took in the Met in HD _Das Rheingold_ in a mall-cinema in Virginia Beach, Virginia (part of a vacation 'long-weekend'). We were accompanied by about a dozen-and-a-half fellow opera viewers there. After encountering nearly a full room in our South Jersey screening of _Der Rosenkavalier_, the turnout was disappointing... but at least it meant plenty of leg-room for everybody. (No small consideration for us, since Hot_townPhilly is a 6-footer just like me.)

To begin with, I should mention the things that you might not hear anywhere else:

* It's unfair to say that Richard Croft's Loge was booed, since there were plenty of cheers for him, as well. If you like you Loge to be a seminal, scene-stealing over-the-top rendition, then his perfomance was not going to be one you would embrace. I thought he struck a good balance in that part. I'll say that he wasn't helped by his costume, which looked eerily like the garments of Hennet the Rogue in Dungeons & Dragons c. 3.0.

* Hot_townPhilly thought Bryn Terfel turned in the best performance of the afternoon- and I'm not going to disagree with her. If it seemed monochrome in places, remember that the Wotan of most of _Rheingold_ is involved in a power-quest- lots of it=good, even more of it=better.

* Special mention should be made of Eric Owens' Alberich, who marvellously essayed the transition from frustrated would-be wooer to imposing tyrant. One commentator said that Owens & Terfel on the screen together was like a 'King Kong vs. Godzilla' moment-- and that metaphor serves as well as any. You really get the idea that his character constitutes clear-and-present-threat-to-everything. It's a little early to say he's the Alberich of our generation (we'll be able to say more at the end of the _next_ Met season), but he's definitely off to that kind of start.

* The staging of the Serpent made for a good 'nudge-wink' moment- and curiously, I've seen no remarks on one aspect of it anywhere else. Hard to describe it for those who didn't see it, but when Alberich shifts into the Serpent, the skeletal face points to the center of the the RIGHT side of the stage, while the bony back-end appeared on the LEFT side of the stage, narrowing to a point when viewed from left-to-right. (That is to say- the torso is not in sight.) To those of us who know the Nordic legend of the Midgard Serpent (rings the circumference of the earth, long enough that its mouth can clasp its tail), we got it...

* And speaking of shape-shifting moments, I think I understand the idea behind the depiction of the toad (even if I don't agree with it), and that's that it was as small as it could be and still have it clear to the people in the Family Circle and Standing Room that it was a toad. For me, a little less size, a little more motion would have been better.

* *I thought that the Met orchestra and Maestro Levine were remarkable throughout. I've heard them doing Rheingold on DVD, and again not long ago on radio- but thought that this was the best of the three.*

(In the 'behind-the-scenes' portion that preceded the opera, there was a rehearsal segment that showed the orchestra working on a transition from the Magic Fire motive. Instead of specifically requesting additional emphasis from the players, Levine went with a little understatement, saying something like "it's very difficult to OVERcook this music... if you get anywhere close to doing so, I'll be sure to let you know.")


----------



## Almaviva

Chi_townPhilly said:


> It's unfair to say that Richard Croft's Loge was booed, since there were plenty of cheers for him, as well.


Sure, but he was booed.


> * Hot_townPhilly thought Bryn Terfel turned in the best performance of the afternoon- and I'm not going to disagree with her. If it seemed monochrome in places, remember that the Wotan of most of _Rheingold_ is involved in a power-quest- lots of it=good, even more of it=better.


Sorry, but I don't agree at all. I've seen better, and Bryn needs to get his act together and improve in the next two operas.


> Special mention should be made of Eric Owens' Alberich, who marvellously essayed the transition from frustrated would-be wooer to imposing tyrant.


Yes, he did well. I thought he started a little tentative but then grew into the role.


> * The staging of the Serpent made for a good 'nudge-wink' moment- and curiously, I've seen no remarks on one aspect of it anywhere else. Hard to describe it for those who didn't see it, but when Alberich shifts into the Serpent, the skeletal face points to the center of the the RIGHT side of the stage, while the bony back-end appeared on the LEFT side of the stage, narrowing to a point when viewed from left-to-right. (That is to say- the torso is not in sight.) To those of us who know the Nordic legend of the Midgard Serpent (rings the circumference of the earth, long enough that its mouth can clasp its tail), we got it...


Thanks, this is really interesting. It's an inside joke, I didn't get it (but still liked the Serpent anyway).


> * And speaking of shape-shifting moments, I think I understand the idea behind the depiction of the toad (even if I don't agree with it), and that's that it was as small as it could be and still have it clear to the people in the Family Circle and Standing Room that it was a toad. For me, a little less size, a little more motion would have been better.


I thought that the toad was ridiculous. I expect more from the Met. It's not that difficult to come up with a convincing toad. But it's just a detail, I wouldn't nitpick.


> * *I thought that the Met orchestra and Maestro Levine were remarkable throughout. I've heard them doing Rheingold on DVD, and again not long ago on radio- but thought that this was the best of the three.*


I entirely agree about the orchestra and Levine, that's how I opened my review of it, saying that it was so good that it may very well have saved the day.


----------



## mamascarlatti

I'm just back from this tonight (just showing in NZ now, Dead in HD lol).

Le Page's set was a big disappointment to me, ponderous and really awkward for the singers to navigate, hindering movement rather than facilitating it. The Rheinmaidens looked more like beached orca than watersprites, Albericht's sticky leather outfit kept getting stuck on the set as he was singing about how slippery the rocks were and the director's penchant for having people enter by sliding down into view was risible.

I thought Terfel was OK, Blythe sounded fantastic and Owens great in act 3. I loved Mime and hope the same singer will be in Siegfried. The Giants were the best I have ever seen, not ludicrous for once.

Can someone explain to me what Richard Croft did that was so terrible it got him booed? Neither my companion nor I had a clue, we thought he did a decent enough job and I personally love the timbre of his voice. I hate booing, it's so uncivilised and uncharitable, better just not to clap.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

mamascarlatti said:


> Can someone explain to me what Richard Croft did that was so terrible it got him booed?


Don't know if I can help you out with this one. The thing is, this action has had the effect of making some of us second-guess our observations about this performance, on this and a few other sites I've seen. In the face of such vociferous disapproval, we're wondering if there's something we missed. It even causes us to couch our support in tepid-sounding phrases- 'not great, but didn't deserve booing' - 'heard better... but I've heard worse.'

Would have liked to have heard it as an live-audience member- it's possible that it may have been concentrated in one area in the hall. It's also interesting to contemplate the possibility that it might have been 'jockey-club' style premeditation.

The one thing I can tell you is this- lately, most _Loge_s have been sung very 'big,' with lots of scenery-chewing... almost as though he's genuinely the subversive protagonist of _Das Rheingold_. From here, it would take more psychology than I know to get in the minds of people who subscribe to this formula, *and* feel so strongly about it that they feel the need to loudly boo any rendition that deviates from this expectation.


mamscarlatti said:


> I hate booing, it's so uncivilised and uncharitable, better just not to clap.


Yup- I can't feel good about the idea that some MET audience-members continue to import some of the more churlish aspects of regional opera in Southern Europe to the ol' Horsehoe. New York audiences have elsewhere been taken-to-task for being too uncritical- but I'd much rather have that extreme than the other one...


----------



## scytheavatar

mamascarlatti said:


> Can someone explain to me what Richard Croft did that was so terrible it got him booed? Neither my companion nor I had a clue, we thought he did a decent enough job and I personally love the timbre of his voice. I hate booing, it's so uncivilised and uncharitable, better just not to clap.


According to reviews, he's one of those "can't be heard after the second row" singers. That is not obvious in a webcast, but it's much more obvious to those who are actually in the MET; like it is said New York audiences are about as uncritical as you can get and when they boo someone it's almost certainly because he deserves it. And he's part of the "made of webcast" singers that's getting a lot of flank from those who actually have to hear him live.


----------



## mamascarlatti

scytheavatar said:


> According to reviews, he's one of those "can't be heard after the second row" singers. That is not obvious in a webcast, but it's much more obvious to those who are actually in the MET; like it is said New York audiences are about as uncritical as you can get and when they boo someone it's almost certainly because he deserves it. And he's part of the "made of webcast" singers that's getting a lot of flank from those who actually have to hear him live.


Aha, that was a theory we did come up with, but as you say in webcasts you can't tell that kind of thing. It did strike me as a sweet voice but possibly not too powerful; up to now I have only seen him in earlier works such as Theodora where his fach seems to sit more comfortably, the orchestra would be smaller and of course the Met would never put that kind of work on.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

mamascarlatti said:


> Aha, that was an [hypothesis] we did come up with...


Oh, Lordy- where do I *begin* with this???

A.) Actually, it was _one_ of the justifying explanations found in reviews. As to whether that or one of the competing statements is closer accurate is something that I can't say, since I wasn't in-the-house at the time.

B.) Even if we accept the premise and say that he has a down-sized "made-for-webcast" voice... what's so terrible about that?! A few thousand people heard the performance that afternoon- a few _hundred thousand_ have heard and will hear it in theatre HD.

C.) I *totally reject* the premise that the hearsay evidence that his voice was smallish somehow made the performance worthy of being booed. As Gary Lehman has said, you *sing with the voice you have*. What's he supposed to do- turn down the role?? From the theatre-seat _I_ occupied, I'm glad he didn't.

1. If someone gave a lethargic rendition that showed lack of concern, involvement, energy- one could say that booing would be deserved (although I wouldn't boo- I'd just withhold applause). 
2. If someone's performance showed lack of preparation such as needing a bunch of help from the prompter-box, then one could say that booing was deserved (though again, I wouldn't do so). 
3. However, if someone was less capable of carrying the volume we seek (whether by nature or by infirmity), then the booing becomes more of a comment on the boorishness of those who do so than the person being booed. mad


----------



## mamascarlatti

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Oh, Lordy- where do I *begin* with this???
> 
> AC.) I *totally reject* the premise that the hearsay evidence that his voice was smallish somehow made the performance worthy of being booed. As Gary Lehman has said, you *sing with the voice you have*. What's he supposed to do- turn down the role?? From the theatre-seat _I_ occupied, I'm glad he didn't.
> 
> 1. If someone gave a lethargic rendition that showed lack of concern, involvement, energy- one could say that booing would be deserved (although I wouldn't boo- I'd just withhold applause).
> 2. If someone's performance showed lack of preparation such as needing a bunch of help from the prompter-box, then one could say that booing was deserved (though again, I wouldn't do so).
> 3. However, if someone was less capable of carrying the volume we seek (whether by nature or by infirmity), then the booing becomes more of a comment on the boorishness of those who do so than the person being booed. mad


Absolutely. That's why we were so puzzled - he sang beautifully, was well prepared, was involved, and even managed all the stupid business with the raked Machine. That's what made me so cross actually, there was nothing to boo. If his voice is too small for that huge auditorium, the met team should have thought of that before they hired him.
Anyway we cheered him, even in a cinema a month after the event halfway across the world.


----------



## scytheavatar

Chi_townPhilly said:


> C.) I *totally reject* the premise that the hearsay evidence that his voice was smallish somehow made the performance worthy of being booed. As Gary Lehman has said, you *sing with the voice you have*. What's he supposed to do- turn down the role?? From the theatre-seat _I_ occupied, I'm glad he didn't.


He's singing Wagner, not Verdi. And when it comes to singing Wagner, volume is as important if not far more important than how well you can hit the notes or how intelligent your interpretation is. What's more, the MET is a big opera house and filling it with your volume is more demanding than usual. If he's not cut out for singing Wagner he should have let someone else do the job.


----------

