# Live from the Met: Don Carlo



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

in movie theaters tomorrow. Anyone else planning to go?


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> in movie theaters tomorrow. Anyone else planning to go?


Well, here's the thing. I love this opera, but I don't know if I can stand Roberto Alagna for five hours. So in theory I'm not going, but I may as well decide to go at the last moment.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Well, here's the thing. I love this opera, but I don't know if I can stand Roberto Alagna for five hours. So in theory I'm not going, but I may as well decide to go at the last moment.


He's got some good reviews

Link


----------



## Lipatti (Oct 9, 2010)

What's the consensus on Robert Alagna among opera fans? Seems like many people really can't stand him. Same goes with Angela Gheorghiu, by the way. (I just watched them both in La rondine)


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Just get his L'Elisir d'Amore DVD, pay attention to his Una Furtiva Lagrima, then go to YouTube and listen to the same aria by really good tenors like Pavarotti, Villazón, and oldies like di Stefano, Gigli, etc, and you'll realize that Roberto Alagna has a small voice and not enough musicality in his phrasing. Most of his prominence in my opinion came from his being partnered with his ex-wife who has a load of more talent, and by their marketing as the golden couple of opera. Draculette on the other hand has proper technique and musicality and a beautiful voice, however her behavior is off-putting.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

To return to the original topic: I've just come back from the movie theater and I definitely liked the performance.

I had some fears about the new production, but fortunately these were largely unfounded. While the sets were too minimalistic to earn very high grades with me, the libretto and plot were honored and what was on the stage supported the action well. The only quibble was the giant cross in the garden scene (veil song), built from what looked like giant Fisher Price pieces. This is almost slightly insulting in that it's so obvious, you can almost watch the director think ("inquisition", "church dominant in 16th century Spain", "its oppressive influence must be made clear to the audience").

Musically it sounded great to my unschooled ear, and except for occasional problems with a running nose (almost added a humorous touch, that) Alagna seemed in fine form (sorry, Alagna bashers).


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> Musically it sounded great to my unschooled ear, and except for occasional problems with a running nose (almost added a humorous touch, that) Alagna seemed in fine form (sorry, Alagna bashers).


The problem with Alagna is when you compare him with those who really do it properly. You listen to him, he sounds OK, then you listen to the same stuff done by others, and his weakness shows.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> The problem with Alagna is when you compare him with those who really do it properly. You listen to him, he sounds OK, then you listen to the same stuff done by others, and his weakness shows.


I have the DVD of an old Met performance with Domingo as Don Carlo (Furlanetto is the Grand Inquisitor there, he now got promoted to king). But as I already said in a few other threads, I certainly don't claim any expertise on singing, and you won't find me having strong opinions on singers (if it sounds good to me, I'm happy, and I don't analyze further).


----------



## Agatha (Nov 3, 2009)

I saw the opera today too. Five hours went by in a blink of an eye. Today was the first time I heard Marina Poplavskaya - wonderful deep voice (imho, I am just an opera amateur ). Was going to ask Almaviva how did he find Poplavskaya as he is a great expert on sopranos. 

Alagna was wonderful, his stage presence and the role of hero-lover suits him. I totally agree with Almaviva regarding Alagna regarding his voice, though it is hard not to love him, he is such a sweet little french guy


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Agatha said:


> Was going to ask Almaviva how did he find Poplavskaya as he is a great expert on sopranos.


Thanks, but I'm afraid I'm more of an expert on their - cough, cough - physical assets rather than vocal assets...

But back to the singing, yes, Poplavskaya is a very good soprano, as proven by this rather perfect rendition of the Willow Song. Pay attention to the clarity of articulation, the perfect mastery of the length and rhythm of the musical line:








> Alagna was wonderful, his stage presence and the role of hero-lover suits him. I totally agree with Almaviva regarding Alagna regarding his voice, though it is hard not to love him, he is such a sweet little french guy


I admit to the fact that he's a likable fellow.

But see what I mean:






Seems good enough, right? Well, I'm not even sure that it does, there's an unpleasant wobble, and a couple of pitch errors. But OK, let's say it does, but if you say so, it's only until you listen to this:






Look at the musicality, the small variations in speed and volume, and emphasis on syllables and their extension, for example, get to 1:42 and see how subtle and beautiful is the musical phrasing before and after the climax of the word "m'ama" and then keep listening until 2:12 and see what he does with the words "lo vedo." Got it? That's musicality!!! That's what Alagna most definitely doesn't have.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I'm just thinking, people who don't like Bel Canto need to listen to di Stefano singing this aria, and realize how sublime Bel Canto can be.

The lyrics are here, so that you all follow it better:

Una furtiva lagrima negli occhi﻿ suoi spuntò, quelle festose giovani invidiar sembrò. Che﻿ più cercando io vo? Che più cercando io vo? M'ama, sì, m'ama, lo vedo, lo vedo! Un solo istante i palpiti del suo bel cor sentir! I miei sospir confondere per poco ai suoi sospir! I palpiti, i palpiti sentir, confondere i miei coi suoi sospir! Cielo, si può morir...! Di più non chiedo, non chiedo. Ah! Cielo, si può, si può morir...! Di più non chiedo, non chiedo. Si può morir... Si può morir d'amor...

OK, so, I have demonstrated the musicality aspect, now let me show you what I mean when I talk of a small voice. Listen again to the same aria, by a tenor who *doesn't* have a small voice:






See the difference?

By the way, I was mostly addressing the other folks here in this thread, not the user who agreed with me regarding Alagna's voice, but the sequence of posts got a little messed up.


----------



## Agatha (Nov 3, 2009)

Almaviva said:


> but if you say so, it's only until you listen to this ...


indeed! what a difference! thanks for the clips, it is so obvious when I listen to them "side by side"


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Agatha said:


> indeed! what a difference! thanks for the clips, it is so obvious when I listen to them "side by side"


Yes, people need to do this when they are gauging a singer. Listen to the singer and then compare him/her to the gold standard, and suddenly the flaws become painfully apparent. Roberto Alagna's vibratto wobbles, his high notes are strained, his passagio doesn't always keep a constant pitch, he doesn't manage well the dynamics of the musical line (as compared to di Stefano's piano and Pavarotti's forte), and he lacks musicality to ornament the syllables and stretch them where needed. His articulation in Italian is not as clear as those of di Stefano and Pavarotti - well he can't help the fact that he is not a native speaker, but good tenors learn these things. And furthermore, his vocal interpretation lacks passion. The verdict is that his _Una Furtiva Lagrima_ is anemic and unpleasant, while those of the two masters are sublime. When you listen to Alagna's _Una Furtiva Lagrima,_ the maximum you can think is "wow, this is a beautiful aria." When you listen to di Stefano or Pavarotti, on the other hand, you get goosebumps and you say, "wow, this is a beautiful interpretation." The aria is so beautiful that even when it is poorly sung you can still notice its beauty - but when you get an outstanding tenor, his personal approach to the aria, his passionate rendition of it, makes an even bigger impression, and this is a way to get what *great* (not merely good or acceptable) singing is about. Sometimes I worry that today's operatic audiences are losing track of the distinction, and getting content with sub-par singing.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

@ Gualtier Malde and Agatha

How was Simon Keenlyside?

Is it the same production as this one with Villazón as Don Carlo?


----------



## Lipatti (Oct 9, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Just get his L'Elisir d'Amore DVD, pay attention to his Una Furtiva Lagrima, then go to YouTube and listen to the same aria by really good tenors like Pavarotti, Villazón, and oldies like di Stefano, Gigli, etc, and you'll realize that Roberto Alagna has a small voice and not enough musicality in his phrasing. Most of his prominence in my opinion came from his being partnered with his ex-wife who has a load of more talent, and by their marketing as the golden couple of opera. Draculette on the other hand has proper technique and musicality and a beautiful voice, however her behavior is off-putting.


I agree with you on his musicality. Also, judging from Romeo et Juliette with Netrebko, his voice seems to be too nasal (don't know if he was ill at the time). But I do understand why he's popular with audiences (which I assume he is).


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> The problem with Alagna is when you compare him with those who really do it properly. You listen to him, he sounds OK, then you listen to the same stuff done by others, and his weakness shows.


Alma you're a tough critic on poor Alagna........

You have to have some appreciation how hard it is to master and sing many languages at the highest level (to pass the Alma test)

Alagna's native language is french so he is going to be hard pressed surpass Stefano in the finer points of Italian his native language, but in general you are correct that Stefano has a clearer voice with better diction and is able to shape and caress Italian words better than Alagna, and in general Stefano is just a better overall opera singer.

However......
If we turn the tables and compare a french aria I wonder if the same results will be had

Alagna is popular because he is good (perhaps not great) overall singer, can act well, is handsome and very versatile in his scope of work.......as a result his career has been very successful (even if he was not married to the adorable draculette)


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

DarkAngel said:


> Alma you're a tough critic on poor Alagna........
> 
> You have to have some appreciation how hard it is to master and sing many languages at the highest level (to pass the Alma test)
> 
> ...


I don't think you're disagreeing with me all that much in what you're saying, DA.
I'm sure he's good. But he isn't great.
Villazón is Mexican and he has a sense of musicality when shaping and caressing Italian words. He doesn't do it as well as di Stefano or Pavarotti who were native speakers, but he does it *a lot* better than Alagna. I did mention in my initial assessment that Roberto had the native speaker thing against him, but I also said - good tenors learn these things, at least, those who aspire to a diverse career (di Stefano was a specialist in Italian belcanto, I don't think he'd have had an interest in polishing other languages, but if you *do* want to sing in several languages, then you'd better learn).
And then, when I attended Roméo et Juliette with Alagna, as well as Carmen, I wasn't that impressed with his singing in French either.
If he wasn't married to Draculette? Well, that I don't know. It may be the only point we're really disagreeing upon here. He is nothing special, and just like him there are many others. But then, he was under the spotlight because of his wife. It's a question of being at the right place at the right time. I'm sure there are many tenors just as good (or just as bad depending on how you see him) as Alagna who don't have his career because they weren't propelled to the spotlight by a celebrity wife. Surely if he were a complete no-good, being married to Angela wouldn't have helped, but if you're decent enough (like many others are) and you get to the spotlight for reasons unrelated to your talent, it helps.

But Almaviva is not such a harsh critic.
Better proof, the Almaviva test for sopranos is much less strict.
All that is required is a pair of nice boobs.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

sospiro said:


> @ Gualtier Malde and Agatha
> 
> How was Simon Keenlyside?


I thought excellent, but as I said, I'm certainly not the foremost authority in this forum on these matters. If I absolutely had to criticize something, I would point out that I found his looks too boyish for the part (Rodrigo is idealism and dignity and Schiller's ideals personified, but of course not a real life person), but that would really be nit-picking.



> Is it the same production as this one with Villazón as Don Carlo?


Almost certainly yes: I read somewhere that the same production was also used in London, and Hytner was the director.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

DarkAngel said:


> You have to have some appreciation how hard it is to master and sing many languages at the highest level (to pass the Alma test)


I was having similar thoughts. As someone who is (largely unsuccessfully) trying to achieve a modest degree of proficiency on the piano I think I have a faint idea of what is required to come even remotely close to this level, and I have the highest respect for everyone who does succeed.

For similar reasons, I think it is in extremely poor style to boo in an opera house (typically for one cracked or inaudible note in a 3 hour performance).

On the other hand, performers do present themselves on stage to a paying audience, so there's of course nothing wrong with criticism if done tastefully.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> I thought excellent, but as I said, I'm certainly not the foremost authority in this forum on these matters. If I absolutely had to criticize something, I would point out that I found his looks too boyish for the part (Rodrigo is idealism and dignity and Schiller's ideals personified, but of course not a real life person), but that would really be nit-picking.


Simon keeps looking younger - I think he's got a painting in his attic ..

I'll be looking at him even more closely next time.


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

sospiro said:


> Simon keeps looking younger - *I think he's got a painting in his attic* ..
> 
> I'll be looking at him even more closely next time.


Indeed...........


----------



## DarkAngel (Aug 11, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> But Almaviva is not such a harsh critic.
> Better proof, the Almaviva test for sopranos is much less strict.
> All that is required is a pair of nice boobs.


It is preferrable to not have to "imagine" beauty when seeing our favorite soprano


----------



## Agatha (Nov 3, 2009)

sospiro said:


> @ Gualtier Malde and Agatha
> 
> How was Simon Keenlyside?


When I was leaving the theater my first thought was that I liked Simon-Rodrigo better than Alagna-Carlo. I thought maybe because Simon had lesser role and less tension on his voice. But after Almaviva dissected Alagna in so details I know why. Now I am off to youtube to compare Simon to others.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> I was having similar thoughts. As someone who is (largely unsuccessfully) trying to achieve a modest degree of proficiency on the piano I think I have a faint idea of what is required to come even remotely close to this level, and I have the highest respect for everyone who does succeed.
> 
> For similar reasons, I think it is in extremely poor style to boo in an opera house (typically for one cracked or inaudible note in a 3 hour performance).
> 
> On the other hand, performers do present themselves on stage to a paying audience, so there's of course nothing wrong with criticism if done tastefully.


I never boo.

It is true that any of the hundreds of singers performing in the main opera houses of the world have a high level of quality as compared to those who never made it.

Still, as paying customers and fans like you said, it's part of the enjoyment to be gauging the relative worth of them all. While it is indeed amazing that they are able to sing at that level, they are not homogeneous, there are those who are outstanding, those who are good, and those who are mediocre when compared to the good and outstanding ones (but still much better than those who couldn't even make it to that level).

But when you place yourself up there, you must understand that criticism comes with the territory.

See, every Sunday I watch sports on TV (often while I type on my laptop and post here, like I'm doing at this very moment).

Certainly if I were there playing on the field, a number of predictable results would happen:

1. I'd be short of breath in no time.
2. I'd embarrass myself and be ridiculously bad
3. People would boo me
4. In certain contact sports, I'd break a bone or get literally killed.

Still, as a sports fan who knows a bit about the strategies and skills required of athletes in my favorite sports (even though I wouldn't be personally able to perform like they do), I feel perfectly entitled to yelling at the TV (in the privacy of my living room; like I said, I'd be a lot more hesitant in booing if I knew that my boos would get to the poor professional athlete who is trying his best) and complaining of some mediocre play when the athletes I'm supporting fail to perform properly.

So, Roberto Alagnas of this world, beware, because I'm here watching you, ready to pounce!:devil:

Unless, of course, you're a soprano with a nice pair of boobs. I'll be more lenient in this case.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> I never boo.


I of course hadn't suspected you or anyone else here for that matter.

True, sports have different mores, but I'm glad we are more refined here (see especially the discussions of certain body parts of sopranos)


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> I of course hadn't suspected you or anyone else here for that matter.
> 
> True, sports have different mores, but I'm glad we are more refined here (see especially the discussions of certain body parts of sopranos)


But the boobs of some sopranos are fair game, since they are an integral part of the show. See for instance this production:










Ms. Naglestad's quite good-looking boobs (dully completely naked and proudly displayed for most of her screen time - her behind also makes a brief appearance) are two of the main characters of this production, and they don't even sing!

This is another boob-rich production, although Ms. Mei's boob (only one of them is shown) is not the main attraction - those of the ballet dancers are better looking and more lavishly shown.










And here is another one:










This one has very frequent display of these anatomic parts, although Ms. Damrau's don't make an appearance.

I could also quote a version of Tannhäuser, one of Mefistofele, and a couple of Salomés, of course, that also count on nice display of these assets.

As you can see, I'm quite the expert on these things...LOL


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> But the boobs of some sopranos are fair game, since they are an integral part of the show. See for instance this production:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Useful warnings, thanks. 
The first DVD can clearly be ruled out (doesn't pass the cover test, and in fact most Regie disasters don't), but the other two cases are less obvious.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Really? The first one is quite good and actually erotic. Like I said, Naglestad looks great in this production and her very enticing body is shown in a number of different ways, in the most nudity-laden opera I've ever seen.

Anyway, maybe you're right. I'm saying it's quite good probably only because I have fond memories of her body more than anything else about this production... not the music... not the staging... just her gorgeous boobs and legs all over the place.

If I'm not mistaken, as a matter of fact I gave of it a negative review, because her body was so distracting.

Talking about it, this Rigoletto is something that puzzles me. I'd like to recover other people's reviews about it. I think that Natalie has posted a review.

I got it, and haven't watched it in its entirety yet.

I found that the nudity is distracting, in the bad sense. Not in the "distracting due to fascination" as in the case of Naglestad's Alcina.

This production is so visually intense that we can barely pay attention to the otherwise gorgeous music of _Rigoletto_.

The opening scene has this people dressed in animal costumes, with animal heads. Several females are topless. One of them has absolutely gorgeous breasts, while another one has droopy breasts. The damn thing is that the one with the spectacular breasts appears shortly and keeps going off screen, while much more screen time is given to the one with droopy breasts.

Then, a heterosexual male like me can't help but look at the back and the sides of the stage, trying to spot the gorgeous one. Here she comes again and then she disappears once more. Meanwhile you're getting angry with the constant exposure of the less enticing boobs. Meanwhile Flórez is singing _La Donna è Mobile_, and the aria comes and goes and you don't even pay attention because you're trying to find the beautiful boobs.

Seriously, I don't know if the above sounds funny or not but in any case my intention is not one of being funny. I'm serious about it. I found this production so profoundly distracting that I ended up turning it off.

Before I gave up on it, I browsed certain scenes - your namesake aria, for instance.

Diana Damrau sings it while laying on her bed and rolling around, her cleavage showing. Again, she wiggles so much that I couldn't concentrate on this most gorgeous of arias.

The singing is competent in this production and the images are striking, but at one point I thought - "this production can only be enjoyed in two ways: either with the mute button on for the images only, or else with the TV off and the receiver on for the sound only. You put the images with the sound and there's just too much distraction.

Even a boob lover like me can take just so much.

And sometimes I wonder about Flórez's voice. He is competent, no doubt. I won't say about him the kind of things I've said about Alagna.

But don't you feel that sometimes his voice is too metallic? I miss a certain warmth that you find in most Italian tenors.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Seriously, I don't know if the above sounds funny.


Absolutely not. Every thing has its proper time and place, and, call me old-fashioned, but I don't think an opera house or an opera DVD is the place to present nudity (if one so desires, there are other venues and DVDs that provide the supplies for these demands). But of course the Regie crowd tries just about everything to make opera ugly and mean.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> Absolutely not. Every thing has its proper time and place, and, call me old-fashioned, but I don't think an opera house or an opera DVD is the place to present nudity (if one so desires, there are other venues and DVDs that provide the supplies for these demands). But of course the Regie crowd tries just about everything to make opera ugly and mean.


I wouldn't go as far as you go regarding this issue.

Kidding apart, the fact that some sopranos nowadays are gorgeous-looking women *does* increase my enjoyment of opera, and when some enticing body part makes a flash appearance I won't be offended, much the opposite. I like sexy productions when they're done in good taste.

When you say "there are other venues and DVDs" for that, no, it's not the same thing. I'm not talking about explicit material for titillation purposes. I'm talking about opera, a sublime art form, which is hundreds of miles away from porn. But I like the occasional tasteful spice in opera.

Opera after all *is* about sex and love and betrayal and passion, etc. The difference nowadays is that we don't need to try to *imagine* that the soprano is beautiful and sexy while we look at someone like Montserrat Caballé.

One of these days a friend of mine (who isn't sophisticated in the least) attended an opera performance at the Bolshoi theater in Moscow, in Russian, no subtitles. Her sister who lives in Moscow tried her best to do some simultaneous translation.

My friend came back and said - "you know, you're always talking about opera, I gave it a try. But I couldn't understand at all why this guy was singing all these romantic songs to a 300-pound ugly woman as if she was the most exquisite creature in the universe.":lol:

So, yes, having on stage women like Anna, Miah, Isabel, Elina, Patricia, Renée, etc, makes a *huge* difference in my opinion. Of course, we want them to sing well too, and we can't have it all - it is quite hard to match Montserrat Caballé in the matter of singing - but it does add to the enjoyment in my opinion.

So, Anna singing La Traviata in Salzburg - the scene where she says "Oh... amore" when she hears Alfredo singing from outside his serenade "misterioso... misterioso, altero..." is fabulous for the dramatic moment and the singing... but then Anna turns on the sofa where she's laying down, and lowers her head when she says "Ohhh...." and the camera looks right down the cleavage of her spectacular red dress, and four fifths of her sensational boobs show...

If you look at that scene, being a heterosexual male, and you don't have a jolt of excitement travelling down your spine... I don't know what to tell you, man...

But sure, I agree with you that a production like this Rigoletto is distracting and in poor taste.

But I wouldn't generalize like you did.

As a matter of fact, I do encourage you to check out this production of Anna and Rollando Villazón in Salzburg 2005. There is no nudity. Nothing is gross. It is quite classy and minimalistic. But it is *extremely* erotic, and it does enhance *a lot* this _La Traviata_ opera which is ultimately about sex and passion.










I know that you don't like updated productions... but buddy, open just one exception, will you? Watch it. It is extraordinary. There's such chemistry, sparks fly, Anna is gorgeous and sexy and a gifted actress. The singing is not top notch of her part, confessedly (she gave interviews about it) due to the physically strenuous nature of the production - she said - "how would people expect me to sing super well while jumping all over the place, rolling around, being upside down and all? One needs to breathe!" She said she hates to listen to this production which was also released on CD. She said "when people see the video they understand that I couldn't be in control of my breathing all the time."

But vocal glitches apart (largely non existent in the case of Villazón who delivered a performance for the ages - of course helped by not needing to sing upside down like Anna), it is something *really* worth viewing, and it may change your view of the place of sex in opera.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> I know that you don't like updated productions... but buddy, open just one exception, will you?


Hmm, you're really asking for a lot here...
Maybe some time I will give this a try, but not very soon because I have the Gheorghiu/Vargas Traviata that we already discussed in another thread (now that's a wonderful production, that's how you do it, just the fact that something like this is still possible in this age of Regie madness almost makes me hope that not all is lost yet for humankind).

By the way, I'm not quite as stern as you probably think, I in fact considered an updated Le nozze di Figaro (1770 -> 1830) for a while before I, thankfully, came to my senses again.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Oh, and Villazon seems to be wearing a suit, I have developed an allergic reaction against suits on stage because this has become a standard Regie technique. From Regie 101: You want to produce Eurotrash but lack the time or interest to come up with something truly disgusting and outrageous: Well, just let everyone wear a business suit.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> Oh, and Villazon seems to be wearing a suit, I have developed an allergic reaction against suits on stage because this has become a standard Regie technique. From Regie 101: You want to produce Eurotrash but lack the time or interest to come up with something truly disgusting and outrageous: Well, just let everyone wear a business suit.


Gualtier, you're sadly mistaken if you think that his production is Eurotrash. It is a classy, tasteful production that doesn't change anything that Verdi intended for _La Traviata._ When I say sadly mistaken, I'm far from being confrontational. I respect your taste and like your posts. It's just that I feel sorry for you if you deprive yourself of this outstanding production because of a preconceived idea of it based on the cover. I actually share your distaste for Eurotrash, and I'm telling you my friend, this is most definitely not Eurotrash.

I liked a lot the period production called _La Traviata à Paris_ with its gorgeous settings in Parisian palaces and mansions, I agree with you that it is nice to see it done like this.

But still, this Salzburg production among the 5 versions that I own and the few others I've seen live on stage is by far the best Traviata I've ever seen.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Gualtier, you're sadly mistaken if you think that his production is Eurotrash. It is a classy, tasteful production that doesn't change anything that Verdi intended for _La Traviata._ When I say sadly mistaken, I'm far from being confrontational.


At the risk of elaborating tediously on totally unimportant trivial points, here are a few general remarks for (further?) clarification:

(1) It's always a problem with Internet communication that you just have the typed word; in this case, you of course couldn't see the silly grin on my face when typing the original post (which would've made it clear immediately that I wasn't _completely_ serious).

(2) You (or everyone else here for that matter) can call me "sadly mistaken" any time, I'm here for fun chat on my passion opera and I enjoy the more profound things many of you guys contribute, but I don't claim any expertise myself that would have to be defended against imagined attacks.

(3) I used the term _Eurotrash_ just for stylistic variety, without any very specific meaning (_non-traditional_ would have been a more neutral word); and perhaps I was teasing you just a little, see (1) again.

(I would maintain though that my general point on the business suits is a valid observation.)

Keep up the good work!


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> At the risk of elaborating tediously on totally unimportant trivial points, here are a few general remarks for (further?) clarification:
> 
> (1) It's always a problem with Internet communication that you just have the typed word; in this case, you of course couldn't see the silly grin on my face when typing the original post (which would've made it clear immediately that I wasn't _completely_ serious).
> 
> ...


Gualtier, I made it very clear that I used the words "sadly mistaken" in a very good sense - not confrontational, but to convey my sadness for the fact that you are depriving yourself of a fabulous production, because of mistakenly taking it for something that it is not.

Maybe I used a poor choice of words. But I assure you, I said it in the most constructive way possible. Probably I should have said: "I'm so sad that you seem to be mistaken about the content of this production" because "sadly mistaken" has pejorative tones that weren't my intention to include.

Buddy, please, give it a try! Pretty please?


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Buddy, please, give it a try! Pretty please?


It's definitely been burnt into my memory now (whose powers are sadly declining, though). But at this point of my collector's career, the stars are not favorable for Netrebko/Villazon because I already have the Gheorghiu/Vargas and I currently only consider multiple performances of the same work for operas that I really adore (so right now, probably only Rosenkavalier qualifies).


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Mmm... maybe you should recycle the Gheorghiu/Vargas as a Christmas gift to someone (preferably, someone you don't like very much), and buy the Netrebko/Villazón for yourself?:devil:


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I have to put in my two-pennyworth, at the risk of sending Alma into a frothing fit - after watching it twice I can say I don't really like this production, and this come from someone who often enjoys non-traditional stagings. I find the symbolism (giant clock, father time suddenly getting recycled as the doctor) heavy-handed, some of the scenes really bug me (especially the "bulls" pushing Alfredo around) and it's not even faintly erotic, as this Alfredo is such a wet blanket and Rolando Villazon in his boxers is not that appealing.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

mamascarlatti said:


> I have to put in my two-pennyworth, at the risk of sending Alma into a frothing fit - after watching it twice I can say I don't really like this production, and this come from someone who often enjoys non-traditional stagings. I find the symbolism (giant clock, father time suddenly getting recycled as the doctor) heavy-handed, some of the scenes really bug me (especially the "bulls" pushing Alfredo around) and it's not even faintly erotic, as this Alfredo is such a wet blanket and Rolando Villazon in his boxers is not that appealing.


Well, you know, I was certainly not paying attention to Rolando's boxers with a half-naked Anna around.
I can understand that you girls won't find this production as erotic as we boys do.
After all, Anna is gorgeous, while Rolando looks like Mr. Bean!


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

The one role he really has the looks for is Nemorimo in L'Elisir d'amore. (I have this DVD, in fact everything directed by Otto Schenk is well worth having.)


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> The one role he really has the looks for is Nemorimo in L'Elisir d'amore. (I have this DVD, in fact everything directed by Otto Schenk is well worth having.)


Me too. It's a very good DVD. And much better than the Gheorghiu/Alagna Elisir, which should encourage you to give the Netrebko/Villazón Traviata a try.


----------



## curzon (Dec 1, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> The one role he really has the looks for is Nemorimo in L'Elisir d'amore. (I have this DVD, in fact everything directed by Otto Schenk is well worth having.)


Possibly, if you like opera from a museum.... 

Sebastian


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

I've got this production with Villazón as Don Carlo & I thought he did OK in the role.

Interesting review.

_The greatest ovation went to tenor Roberto Alagna, as Carlo. He was in full command of his lyric voice from top to bottom. He sang confidently. He has an Italianate throb, an almost-ringing top, and a lovely soft voice. Carlo however is a crazed character, and Alagna is too much a doughy, open-faced bumpkin to look crazed or frightening. As an actor he lacks the intensity that Neil Shicoff brought to the part in the 1980s, but I wouldn't trade Alagna's singing for Shicoff's acting._

Poor Roberto, I'm not whether this is a compliment or not.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

sospiro said:


> I've got this production with Villazón as Don Carlo & I thought he did OK in the role.


Villazón as Don Carlo? Is this still another production, or did you mistakenly type Villazón instead of Alagna?

As for the comments about Alagna's great voice, I'm still taking them with a grain of salt.

In this kind of blog we see people going crazy about a performance all the time, not always accurately.

This will eventually be on MetPlayer and I'll see.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I think Annie means that she has the UK DVD version of this production with Villazon as Carlos, which is now at the Met with Alagna instead.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

curzon said:


> Possibly, if you like opera from a museum....


I do, as a matter of fact (I take _from a museum_ to mean _traditional, as intended by composer and librettist_). But of course tastes differ.

For example, I can't even begin to tell you how Schenk's unbelievable Meistersinger staging (the Met performance) warms my heart. This really has to be seen to be believed. Even if there wasn't any singing at all, I could just spend 5 delightful hours looking at Schenk's sets. (They do sing, though, in the Met performance.)


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

mamascarlatti said:


> I think Annie means that she has the UK DVD version of this production with Villazon as Carlos, which is now at the Met with Alagna instead.


Oh, OK, I didn't know Villazón had done it.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Almaviva said:


> Villazón as Don Carlo? Is this still another production, or did you mistakenly type Villazón instead of Alagna?


When I say 'production' I meant as in the Nicholas Hytner production, costumes, sets etc

It was broadcast on British TV but has also just been released on DVD.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

For those in UK there's a live broadcast on BBC Radio 3 this Saturday 18th December with Yonghoon Lee as Carlo

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00wh4t6


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

DarkAngel said:


> Alma you're a tough critic on poor Alagna........
> 
> You have to have some appreciation how hard it is to master and sing many languages at the highest level (to pass the Alma test)
> 
> ...


I was listening today to a French aria by Pavarotti and I thought of this thread, had to dig a little to find it.

See what I meant when I said that good tenors learn these things? Pavarotti sings in beautiful French here, and of course, there's also the bonus of his spectacular voice, this is the aria of the 9 high Cs, starting at about 5'40" and Pavarotti's version is one of the best - or rather, maybe, the best - I've ever heard.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I'll be seeing the Dead in HD broadcast tonight (it gets to Brazil with considerable delay...).
I'll be posting my impressions tomorrow.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Almaviva said:


> I'll be seeing the Dead in HD broadcast tonight (it gets to Brazil with considerable delay...).
> I'll be posting my impressions tomorrow.


It'll be truly decomposed by the time it gets to NZ next year!

What always gets me is that even though it's not live they keep in all the endless intermissions.


----------



## Gualtier Malde (Nov 14, 2010)

mamascarlatti said:


> What always gets me is that even though it's not live they keep in all the endless intermissions.


Well, they have to give people the opportunity to buy popcorn and munch it noisily during the following act, just in case there isn't enough coughing.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I'm back from it, it's 11:58 PM in Brazil, and my entire party loved it.

I'm ashamed to say that I liked Roberto Alagna! This was the best of his performances I've ever seen, in spite of a bit of vocal strain in the fifth act. It turns out that the little French guy can sing, and I'll have to take back some of my bashing.

This was an almost flawless performance, overall - well, almost, I'll mention the little flaws, but they weren't really important.

Very effective staging by Nicholas Hytner (except for the bright red wall in the garden scene, and I didn't care much for the Fontaineblau forest with its obviously fake snow - a white blanket), especially in the Auto da Fe scene, with a most impressive burning pyre. The oppressive effect of the tall black wall with small windows was smart. The soldiers looked scary. The costumes were all very appropriate.

Conducting by Yannick Nezet-Seguin was phenomenal: energetic, fast-paced, and intense. This is a young conductor to follow.

Of the seven main singing roles (I'm including Carlos V's ghost as a seventh one), all singers were at least good, many excellent, and two were outstanding - good being Anna Smirnova who was the weakest link but still adequate, and outstanding being Simon Keenlyside who stole the show, and Ferrucio Furlanetto who had a sublime rendition of the king's big aria in the fourth act. Like I said, I must confess that Alagna was excellent, and so was Marina Poplavskaya. Eric Halfvarson had some wobble but I would still call him very good, and the wobble actually fits well the role of a 90 years old man - but then, the ghost (by a singer whose name I was unable to catch - excellent as well) is also an ancient figure and there was no wobble. Still, Halfvarson had an impressive voice and was excellent in his acting. It is hard to get a cast with 100% of excellent to outstanding singers, and since nobody really sank the ship, I believe that this is as good as it gets.

About the acting, Marina was a little stiff but this fits well the dignified figure of the queen. I'd still have liked a little more emotion. Anna Smirnova didn't look the part (again the weakest link) but she wasn't a bad actress. Roberto did pretty well, way better than his usual. Simon, Ferruci, and Eric were stupendous (what a death scene by Simon!).

Overall, an A+ production that is very much worth buying when and if it comes out on DVD or blu-ray - not to forget that this is one of the most spectacular and gorgeous operas ever written, so, when we get a superior production like this one of a top opera, it's absolutely a winner.

I'm glad that I was given a second opportunity to catch it in another country, since I failed to attend the live broadcast in the US out of my prejudices against the poor little French guy.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Gualtier Malde said:


> Well, they have to give people the opportunity to buy popcorn and munch it noisily during the following act, just in case there isn't enough coughing.


I do think that it adds to the feeling of being there at the Met.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I finally got to see this and I was very impressed too. I've seen the same production with Villazon and I preferred the little Frenchman, despite the nose-wipes - just two quibbles, he's not quite genuinely batty enough, too bon viveur; and he over-does the verismo sobbing tone when he wants to convey emotion. Marina was wonderful, I saw her more as conveying rigid self-control and repression of emotions than being stiff. Furlanetto managed to make me feel sorry for the King (I usually dismiss him as a creep). Simon was a very manipulative cold Rodrigo, political through and through. Smirnova sounded wobbly in the veil song but warmed up enough to make me forget that she is no beauty in "o don fatale". Halfvarson was repulsive (that's a compliment). I was rivetted the whole way through.

My 15-year-old daughter for once didn't fall asleep, at the end she said: "Well, I'm not sitting through that again, that was SO intense."

I loved the bit in the interval when Voigt was interviewing her co-star Giordani about Fanciulla, and said "What's your favourite part about this opera", and he gave her a big passionate smooch.:lol:


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Rumour that Simon will be Posa in Munich. Hope it's not regie .....


----------

