# Faust MET Live HD



## ooopera (Jul 27, 2011)

I can't wait till Saturday!!! I'm already excited











Anyone else going?


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

Oh, I hope this is going to be released on DVD!! In the meantime, I'm staying home and taping the radio broadcast.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Me! Me! I'm heading to my first non-Wagner Met in HD theatre-cast since _Rosenkavalier_.

A few people whose opinions I mostly respect (e.g.: Father Owen Lee) have argued that Faust is unjustly given short-shift in this era. I'll be anxious to see how this comes off on stage. [Even with the bizarro Science-Fiction world setting...]


----------



## FragendeFrau (May 30, 2011)

I will be there! I'm sorry I haven't reported back--I saw it at the Met on Saturday! I enjoyed the production, to tell you the truth, although it was my first time seeing Faust. It was enthusiastically received by the crowd, although I think dear Jonas has a cold or something (he could be heard coughing during the prima streamed live last week, and sniffling during a radio interview). And he cracked the C in 'Salut demeure'  You would never have known it from his performance, ie he carried on as if that were the sound he was intending to make--I guess that's being a professional--but there was a palpable feeling of 'oh no, I'm so sorry' from the 3800 people in the audience. He sang everything else (and all the other high notes) perfectly well although, to my admittedly untrained ear, a wee bit 'phlegmy' sounding. He didn't cough though.

(PS I think the fact that both times I've heard him sing that aria he has NOT gone for the pianissimo effect he usually does on the C--rather has had to power through it--suggests to me that he's working through some illness. Just my uninformed guess.)

I read that Poplavskaya was on antibiotics last week I think there must be some illness going around.

Anyway, I'm really looking forward to seeing it again on Saturday! I am sure Jonas will be terrific!


----------



## ooopera (Jul 27, 2011)

Great, FragendeFrau! Then you can compare and then tell us which performance was better


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

FragendeFrau said:


> And he cracked the C in 'Salut demeure'  You would never have known it from his performance, ie he carried on as if that were the sound he was intending to make--I guess that's being a professional--but there was a palpable feeling of 'oh no, I'm so sorry' from the 3800 people in the audience. He sang everything else (and all the other high notes) perfectly well although, to my admittedly untrained ear, a wee bit 'phlegmy' sounding.


I feel so bad for the singer when something like this happens. Of course, it just proves that they're humans, not machines. And, fortunately, on the rare occasions this has happened during a performance I was attending, the audience there also seemed sympathetic.


----------



## FragendeFrau (May 30, 2011)

Well, I have just heard reports that last night's performance went terrifically with everyone in great voice, so YAY! Looking forward to Saturday, even though I'll be bringing a change of clothes for our Christmas Oratorio concert that same evening. A big music day for me.


----------



## Operafocus (Jul 17, 2011)

ooopera said:


> Anyone else going?


I'm goin' this Saturday!


----------



## edge (Nov 19, 2011)

Thankfully I found out about this today. I'll be going in Norman Oklahoma.


----------



## AmericanGesamtkunstwerk (May 9, 2011)

I really wanted to go but i'm busy saturday. i'll have to wait for the encore on the 11th of january


----------



## FragendeFrau (May 30, 2011)

I've got to run to the Bach Christmas Oratorio tonight, but--WOW! fabulous!! everyone sounded AMAZING, Poplavskaya was much, much better than the prima.

As for HD vs live performance--there is NOTHING as good as the excitement of a live performance. Also I would say that the music/singing sounds better in that it has a three-dimensionality to it.

The two drawbacks of HD: the cameras are TOO DARN CLOSE! Back OFF! Nobody loves Jonas more than I do, but please. . . Even on the interviews, I don't need his entire face taking up the screen! what are they smoking? Second drawback--the sound is flat--everything is perfectly balanced and it just sounds 'flat' compared with the 'depth' of a live performance. Don't know how else to describe it.

But as for this particular performance vs the one I saw in house a week ago? I thought everyone sounded better, especially Popsy. Jonas and Rene just looked like they were enjoying themselves! And Jonas was perfection. That is all.


----------



## edge (Nov 19, 2011)

I couldn't wait to get on here and see the reviews for the HD performance. I should wait since I'm an opera newbie but I couldn't agree with FragendeFrau more. I'd read that some were disappointed that Poplavskaya would be playing Marguerite. I thought she was amazing. I knew to expect as much from Jonas and Rene but I was not disappointed in her at all. I thought her acting was marvelous also.

I really liked Acts 1 and 2 (before the 1st intermission). Jonas was outstanding in the closing aria before intermission. Act 3 was a little slow for met (between 1st and 2nd intermissions). What was the purpose for that giant "death" thing that showed up at the end of Act 3?

Acts 4 and 5 were outstanding. I was OK with the updated performance (maybe because it's the first time I'd seen Faust) but the green lighting in, I think that was supposed to be hell, and the atom bomb explosion.... That just seemed out of place. As were the "angels" dressed in lab coats! That was a little too much for me. I think the staging was pretty good until acts 4 and 5 when it started getting a little weird.

I read the libretto last night and was surprised by the ending so I went and read the NY Times review just now. I thought I'd just missed it but I guess the part with Faust waking up again as an old man in his laboratory is something new for this production. The NY Times didn't like it but I thought it was a great way to end it. You have my permission to flame me for this comment if you'd like.

I agree that the sound wasn't the best. I was the first one in the theater and seated myself right in the middle but I was disappointed. I also didn't come away from the show humming any of the music. I didn't think any of it was that memorable. Perhaps I'll get a cd and see if I like it.

Also agree with the camera being too close up on the interviews but that was something I enjoyed seeing on the broadcast.

Did you hear some boos during the curtain call for the director? I thought I did.

To sum it up, all of the performers were outstanding (voice and acting). I'd love to have a recording of this performance. I thought the music was so-so. I liked the updated staging if it weren't for the "atom bomb" reference and the lab coated chorus (especially as angels).


----------



## ooopera (Jul 27, 2011)

edge said:


> I read the libretto last night and was surprised by the ending so I went and read the NY Times review just now. I thought I'd just missed it but I guess the part with Faust waking up again as an old man in his laboratory is something new for this production. The NY Times didn't like it but I thought it was a great way to end it. You have my permission to flame me for this comment if you'd like.


Hallucination between the poison and dying??? Great idea!

I really really like it! JK, Pape and Marina were outstanding.

I've been listening to premiere (not live  ) and yesterday Jonas and Marina were much better!

By the way: I love close up


----------



## MAuer (Feb 6, 2011)

Fantastic!!! As much as I would have liked to actually see the production (especially those close-ups with Jonas ), I'm glad I stayed home and taped the broadcast. Now I can listen to the performance again (and again . . . and again . . . ) :lol:


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

*Faust- saved by "Regie?"*

When the Metropolitan Opera has forays into _regietheater_, the middle-aged (or older) reviewer has to struggle against temptation. The temptation is not exactly one of satanic seductiveness, but the siren call is indolence. The easy way is out is to pull out "Generic Review Number Six/6-6." If you read reviews, you know the drill. The singers were wonderful. The orchestra played great. The conductor was marvellous. _What was the Director thinking?_ Yeah- Generic Review No. Six. About half the people who read it will agree with you. Well, the MET's performance of Gounod's _Faust_ deserves something more than Generic Review #6, and (which is more) readers deserve more, too, so I'll shake off indolence and go for it.

Although _Faust_ is still decidedly a repertory opera, the days of its consideration as the very finest French Opera had to offer are a distant memory to all but people closer to the grave than the weary Doctor of the opening scene. The most common modern objection was mentioned by Joyce DiDonato (albeit probably reading from a script) in one of the introductory segments. She said that the _Faust_ story had "gone creaky" to modern audiences. Another objection was lodged in a previous _Opera News_ run-down of French operas which weirdly omitted _Faust_ from their dozen-plus list of French greats. The objection there was that _Faust_ didn't live up to the achievement of Goethe (as though anyone but Goethe _could_).

_Faust_, like Wagner's _Tannhäuser_ written over a decade before, is emphatically a product of its [Victorian] time. Audiences used to depictions of near limitless power (and considerable gore) from Satan could find themselves rolling their eyes at the spectacle of Méphistophèlés driven back by sword fragments of his own making held in the shape of a cross, as per the original stage instructions. Also potentially empty to the perspective of a modern opera-goer is the idea that the Faust-Marguerite consummation at the end of Act II has imperilled their immortal souls, to the evil laughter of Satan. Even someone with as traditional a bent as mine is inclined to conclude that if any opera could be saved by "Regie," _Faust_ would be the one. The issue of whether or not _I_ agree with the vision is completely secondary to the question of whether or not the vision _works_ as a cogent and cohesive whole.

Does the vision work? Well, like a prototype Orthocon Tube of the era putatively in question, it works intermittently. Faust is in the lab with A-bomb blueprints. I buy into his cries of "Rien" ("nothing"). Méphistophèlés grants his wish for youth, and we're transported to a different place and I guess a different time. I say "I guess" because here's where the tube grows fuzzy. I get the doughboy-esque soldier uniforms, and think that maybe we're heading towards a "youth do-over" for Faust. Méphistophèlés presentation of the "Wine of Bacchus" avoids cliché by issuing from a water-cooler (and doesn't every watering hole you know of have a workplace-style water-cooler?). Also, when you recognize that the water-cooler, which wouldn't look out of place in a 21st century office, is present in League of Nations era Europe, you start to think the Lord of Darkness could use a decent continuity-man.

Eventually, when time comes to repulse Lucifer, he's driven back not by the sword-fragments but by Marguerite's locket. Don't know if it's an improvement on the old "sword-fragments" trick. It seems less goofy but more difficult for the audience to visualize. I guess that this was noticed, too- since the point's emphasized by seat-benches formed in the shape of a cross towards the back of the stage.

Of course, every "Regie" production must have at least one 'WTF' moment, and the WTF moments were furnished by a larger-than-life size soldier-puppet that danced with the corps, and a larger-then-life size Death's head puppet that stood to the left of Méphistophèlés in one of his scenes with Marguerite. Was there some particular point that was being emphasized, or was this just some sort of bizarre over-compensation? (For what, I wouldn't begin to speculate.)

Another recent issue of _Opera News_ spoke of certain productions "glossing over" Marguerite's infanticide. To be sure, "glossing over" this event was not in line with 'original intent.' In the era of its creation, mere mention of the incident provided enough shock. We're in a different time, with different demands. A director has to function on the continuum of detailing the depiction (and risking the cessation of sympathy for Marguerite) and suggesting it (and attenuating the shock). Here Director Des McAnuff goes for the "in-your-face" Monty.

So (as mentioned above), the most obvious interpretation of the ending is the "it's all a dream" conclusion reached in dozens of good and bad (mostly bad) American TV shows. Another interpretation (and my wife, in addition to NY Times critic Anthony Tommasini, considered this one)- is that Méphistophèlés collects his fee by depositing Faust back at the site of the bargain, to finalize his death.

So- can _Faust_ by saved by "Regie?" Hard to say-- but it won't entirely be saved by _this_ 'Regie.'


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> When the Metropolitan Opera has forays into _regietheater_, the middle-aged (or older) reviewer has to struggle against temptation. The temptation is not exactly one of satanic seductiveness, but the siren call is indolence. The easy way is out is to pull out "Generic Review Number Six/6-6." If you read reviews, you know the drill. The singers were wonderful. The orchestra played great. The conductor was marvellous. _What was the Director thinking?_ Yeah- Generic Review No. Six. About half the people who read it will agree with you. Well, the MET's performance of Gounod's _Faust_ deserves something more than Generic Review #6, and (which is more) readers deserve more, too, so I'll shake off indolence and go for it.
> 
> Although _Faust_ is still decidedly a repertory opera, the days of its consideration as the very finest French Opera had to offer are a distant memory to all but people closer to the grave than the weary Doctor of the opening scene. The most common modern objection was mentioned by Joyce DiDonato (albeit probably reading from a script) in one of the introductory segments. She said that the _Faust_ story had "gone creaky" to modern audiences. Another objection was lodged in a previous _Opera News_ run-down of French operas which weirdly omitted _Faust_ from their dozen-plus list of French greats. The objection there was that _Faust_ didn't live up to the achievement of Goethe (as though anyone but Goethe _could_).
> 
> ...


:tiphat::clap: wow fantastic review CTP

I think _Faust_ is one of those operas where you just have to accept that's what people believed during Goethe's time. But the traditional version does still work, people don't really believe in zombies but that hasn't stopped the popularity of zombie movies. And those of us who remember the Dracula Hammer Horror films would understand the meaning of the broken cross. I loved the traditional version I saw back in September.










Bringing an opera story up to date sometimes works, in this case probably not.


----------



## tedster (Feb 7, 2012)

I am surprised no one has commented on Marguerites ascension into heaven. I found that it was "corny" as she took the "Stairway to heaven".


----------



## AnaMendoza (Jul 29, 2011)

Would you have found a different means of depicting her ascension into heaven corny? In other words, is it the stairway you object to, or the entire concept?


----------

