Tchaikovsky: The Nutcracker

An odd production - I was expecting more from the Deutsche Oper Belin and the Staatsballett Berlin, but the production didn't gel for me. Some specific points: the tempos are *quite* slow - and that is comparative to other Nutcrackers I've seen, such as the San Francisco, and Royal Ballet versions - slow to the point of dragging; the design is also somewhat drab - with the woman's outfits superb, but the male costumes are bad to the point of absurdity, with polka dots and stripes and eye-cringing color combinations. The backdrops are incredibly detailed, with the Candy kingdom and other scenes vivid and wonderful. The dancing is fine, but nothing struck me as spectacular; there are some odd choices for the libretto, with the Rat King being cast as one of Drosselmeyer's dancing dolls, and nothing in the way of prologue. Another sticking point is Drosselmeyer's magic tricks, which are rather pedestrian and hackneyed. All in all, a workmanlike production that failed to produce any wonder or magic.

This Nutcracker was an ambitious project -- Yuri Burlake attempted recreation of the 1892 Petipa/Ivanov production. Sets, costumes, and choreography were supposed to adhere to the 1892 production as much as possible. And you can see the result of the research -- the costumes and sets are indeed full of period detail, while the choreography has aspects that you can see Balanchine, or Sir Peter Wright picked up. For instance, the Candy Cane hoop variation is something Balanchine preserved in his version. The Waltz of the Flowers was the eye opener -- both male and female flowers dancing together. This is a wonderful concept and Burlaka deserves credit for his efforts.However, the Berlin Ballet's performance is invariably sluggish and uninspired. For example, in the Snow Scene, the music and the dancing is at such a ponderous level that you lose all sense of the "blizzard" pattern that Ivanov created with the snowflakes. The Candy Cane variation is also danced so slowly that the thrill of jumping through the hoops is gone. Also, it seems as if Burlaka was unwilling to make Clara/Prince child roles, so Iana Salenko and Marian Walter take over the second act as the adult Clara and Prince and once again, the Sugarplum Fairy role is deleted. Salenko and Walter are fine dancers. This ignores the 1892 storyline and structure of the ballet, which was decidedly NOT a love story, but rather a child's fantasy. In the end, this video is a document of an extremely noble ambition (restoring the 1892 Nut) but with unfulfilling results.

On this new DVD from Belair Tchaikovsky's beloved "Nutcracker" ballet receives a splendid performance from the Berlin State Ballet Company with Marian Walter as the Prince and Iana Selenko as Clara and the Sugar Plum Fairy. The orchestra plays well under its conductor Robert Reimer, the dancing is excellent, the scenery is good, though I am sure that it would have been even more lavish if more had been spent on it, and the audience was well-behaved. I have only one minor criticism: I find it odd that Iana Selenko performed the dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy without a change of costume from her role as Clara. I suppose that there is no reason why Clara and the Sugar Plum Fairy should not be danced by the same protagonist, but the sudden appearance of Iana Selenko, still dressed as Clara but now dancing to the music that always accompanies the Sugar Plum Fairy, was initially confusing. If this strange anomaly doesn’t put you off, the rest of the performance should give you much pleasure.Ted Wilks

This Nutcracker was full of beautiful dancing, but not a great deal of magic. The tempi (especially in Act I) seemed to drag. At some points, the children were actually seen "waiting" for the downbeat to take off again. Act II was better. Some to the most beautiful dancing was from non-principals. The oriental (or as we would say now, Middle Eastern) dancers were wonderful, especially the women. The Pas de deux was beautiful but it might have been thrilling. The simple descending scale is so familiar, but the ascending scales were gorgeous. There were times when the climax of the phrase came after a physical high point for the couple. Again, it could be tempo related. The dancers were graceful and flawless, but the marriage of choreography to the music seemed a bit "off." Costumes for women were beautiful. The sound over a "normal" sound system was quite dull.

Berlin's new Nutcracker is not your average perennial favourite: It comes with a firm nod to its authentic 1892 source! This version premiered in october 2013 and its release of exactly two years beyond, is timely to put it among your gifts under the X-mas tree. The ballet never looked as fine as here, making use of the original 1892 palette of Mikhail Bocharov and Konstantin Ivanov (sets), and Imperial Director Ivan Vsevolozhsky (costumes). If ballet goers might take some getting used to it, we owe that to the more subdued colour schemes of a later era. No matter. If you look for a beautifully danced Nutcracker, or indeed one of old-fashioned beauty rather than one full of Hoffmannesque angst so liked by most producers, this is for you and you need not read on ...... should you however care for a more detailed review dealing with Casse-Noisette's history, please do. Lovely as this Nutcracker is, should you have perceived it as a full reconstruction you'll be disappointed. I explain why. In 1999, Sergei Vikharev's production of Sleeping Beauty was staged for the Mariinsky Ballet, initiating an interest in what the Imperial St Petersburg Ballet repertory actually looked like. This interest increased, and it saw ballets such as La Bayadere, Awakening of Flora, Esmeralda, Coppelia, Le Corsaire and here Nutcracker - all staged with information provided by The Sergeyev Collection of Harvard. In a nutshell: twenty-something ballets notated for the Imperial Ballet in the late 19th- and early 20th century, spirited out of Russia shortly after the 1917 revolution. Seattle-based Doug Fullington and well-known choreographer Alexei Ratmansky added Paquita to the lot in 2014 for the Munich Ballet, while the latter produced the purest version of Petipa's Sleeping Beauty to date, in the spring of this year for American Ballet Theatre (to raving reviews). I say purest, for the other ballets were reconstructed with varying degrees of authenticity.Reasons for this vary: Some ballets turned out to be not well or partly notated, written in different versions, or producers decided not to go for an academic reconstruction, incorporating present day performance practice and widely accepted changes in them.In any case, all these efforts did manage to prove the word of Soviet producers spectacularly wrong - I mean them parrotting one another about how they kept Marius Petipa's heritage alive.The producers of this Nutcracker are Yuri Burlaka and Vassily Medvedev. These balletmasters are among the non-purists. It is safe to assume they cannot have been anything but, for they must have faced problems. I just wish they had been purer in the spots where they could have been.Back in 1892, the Nutcracker-ballet didn't have the easiest of births. The great balletmaster Marius Petipa had been plagued by illness and was in mourning, for his 15-year old daughter Evgenia died of cancer during the ballet's preparations. Petipa passed the choreography job on to 2nd balletmaster Lev Ivanov, though his detailed hand in the script may have hindered Ivanov. Nevertheless, dances of sheer beauty were created. When the ballet was first given in Imperial St. Petersburg, it received a mixed press. It was accused of being a children's show, the Konfiturenburg (Kingdom of Sweets Scene) had little to do with the rest, the structure was odd, the principal dancers got to dance only near the end of the ballet, etc.The Sergeyev Collection lacks an overly large bit of notation for act I. The dances of the Christmas party are admirably recreated, in accordance with the Imperial Ballet style devoted to social dances of the epoch. These clever recreations do come with a mistake: the spot where Drosselmeyer should conjur up four dolls to amuse the children is used for an early entrance of the principal dancers. They tell the backstory of the nutcracker (for the uninitiated: a prince under a spell). It is understandable from a producer's point of view to go for streamlined storytelling - but it happens at the expense of invaluable pieces of choreography: two little duets by Ivanov. Gone are the soldier and vivandiere, and his Harlequin and Colombine. To see the brilliant 1892 steps of the latter pair, we must turn to Doug Fullington (Work and Process, Balanchine's Harlequinade: Commedia dell Arte explored, on Youtube).The second scene involves the battle of the nutcracker with the toys versus the mice and their evil king. How closely it resembles the original is for scholars to decide, for there are detailed descriptions matching Tchaikovsky's score - but to me it looks pretty good (bear in mind the mice and their sovereign, all played by students, will have had easier dance steps, if at all). After the battle the spell is lifted, for the nutcracker becomes Prince Coqueluche again. Yes, the character is happily rebaptised, saved from being a 20th century nameless ballet prince. Clara transforms into an adult, after Vassily Vainonen's Mariinsky version. Now ensues one of the finest music ever written for ballet, The Pinewood Forest. The 1892 Petipa/Ivanov version gave it as an orchestral interlude, leaving Burlaka/Medvedev to opt for a more 21st century approach: A pas de deux. Fine, but why load it with high lifts and leg extensions one sees in Onegin and Manon? An all too sharp contrast with the authentic Waltz of the Snowflakes, immediately following. Many steps of this huge corps de ballet number are similar to the Royal Ballet version, which, alas, does not make use of the prop twigs. We have them here. Ivanov showed how a troupe of dancers could allegorically resemble snow, from falling lightly to developing in a storm. I say this fascinating choreography goes unbeaten by the endeavours that were to follow.The Konfiturenburg Scene (Kingdom of Sweets) makes up most of act II. Prince Coqueluche's Mime Scene leads into the divertissement, one true dance spectacle. The first dance number is a peculiar inclusion: An excerpt taken from the 1903 ballet Fairy Doll, in the version by the Legat brothers. The choice is defendable for it being an extra children's dance, set to Tchaikovsky too. The next dances are not just inauthentic, but completely out of style too: The technically difficult Spanish Dance (Chocolate) and the Arabic Dance (Coffee). When Balanchine choreographed Coffee for a long-legged female dancer in a daring costume, he was observed to remark:' Something for the daddies.' Well, the Berlin Coffee is something for the mummies - and their gay friends, for the Berlin Nutcracker team produces an über-sexy male dancer. Six of the original fairies are reintroduced, as are the Hoop Dance and the Mirlitons (both authentic). Berlin even includes the rarely performed Mere Gigogne, with her huge frock. Pity, of the numerous children just six appear from underneath it (Mother Ginger is known from Balanchine's New York City Ballet-version too). Then there is a more or less true version of the Golden Waltz, commonly known as the Flower Waltz. Especially the design for the corps de ballet is well done. The first part sees a huge vase placed centre stage, from which festoons are drawn. It fits perfectly, but by the time Nutcracker got notated it was no longer in use, so its existence may have been either a stylish guess, or Burlaka and Medvedev had access to other sources.Leaves what we all wait for: That most emotional of all classical duets, the Nutcracker pas de deux. The original adagio is more than breathtakingly choreographed. It has survived through different sources and inserted in other productions. The large scarf, the 'river' on which the ballerina glides, could not be produced as effectively without the proper machinery for it, but it is being used anyway and I am glad for that. Salenko looks extremely pretty with her red hair and lush, sweet-dropped tutu. She is an ideal Sugar Plum Fairy, albeit one who cannot resist extending her legs too much. Salenko works her way radiantly and effortlessly through the difficult morceaux of her assignment, ably partnered by her husband Marian Walter, whose regimentally-inspired, strong costumes must be mentioned. Walter struggles through his tarantella variation, mistakenly perceiving it as big elevation- choreography. What happened to terre-a-terre? Connoisseurs claim the famous Sugar Plum variation is being played '20th-century slow.' I know them to be right, however due to the character of the music (displaying the celesta - Tchaikovsky's nervously guarded trouvaille) does not disturb me much. The camerawork is excellent. Tone, colour and sound are all fine.This disc has an easy menu, of which a chosen number lights up sparsely, there are no extras. presents a well-filmed record of a lovely staging, but remember, if it is to count as an attempt at a reconstruction of the Imperial Ballet version it pales significantly. And I say this while deducting the parts that could not be brought back. Even so, it remains something of a winner in comparison to other discs, carrying Nutcracker-productions that vary from fair to artistically neglectable. No, let the curtain rise on this dreamed up place, so blatantly oblivious to the crudeness of the present tense.

A fascinating production based on the original 1890s staging and designs. Lavish and spectacular, it includes two dances oddly missing from the Covent Garden production. However, the latter remains a gold standard, and no production equals the sheer magnificence of the Royal Ballet's endlessly growing Christmas tree, which so echoes Tchaikovsky's glorious music.The Royal Ballet battle of the mice is also more spectacular. However, it is great to have both productions.

happy

I love it! It is hard to ruin the Nutcracker, but this one is really sweet.

« Casse-Noisette » n’est pas un ballet pour un couple d’étoiles, mais plutôt pour une troupe solide et homogène. En effet, le livret propose une succession de numéros qui peuvent être très brillants pour peu qu’on dispose de grands danseurs. Ce n’est pas le cas de la troupe berlinoise, qui ne compte pas de grands solistes pour épauler ses vedettes Iana Salenko et Marian Walter (bons techniciens, mais assez peu expressifs). La chorégraphie s’en tient donc à des pas très classiques et sans grande originalité, autant par souci de vérité historique que pour tenir compte des forces disponibles. Cette version bien filmée n’est pas très aidée non plus par l’orchestre, très prosaïquement dirigé par Robert Reimer (on est vraiment très loin de la poésie de Gergiev au Mariinsky).Les meilleures choses dans ce spectacle sont l’omniprésence des enfants, pas seulement sollicités au premier acte. Ils sont très motivés et tiennent visiblement, à leur jeune âge, le rôle de leur vie ! J’apprécie aussi la belle tentative de reconstitution (décors et costumes) du spectacle tel qu’il pouvait être à l’époque de sa création. C’est visuellement très cohérent et convaincant, même si c’est (volontairement) passéiste.Bref, un très agréable pour un jeune public, qui pourra s’identifier aux nombreux enfants présents sur scène. Mais ça ne donne pas de grandes émotions sur le plan chorégraphique.

Vu tout à fait par hasard à la télévision lors d'un réveil nocturne : on comprend alors ce que signifiait, à une certain époque, les fééries : cette interprétation du nut cracker, les costumes et les décors sont tout à fait magiques.

このディスクは2014年12月にベルリン国立歌劇場で上演された＜くるみ割り人形＞を収録したもの。1892年のイワノフ初演版＜くるみ割り人形＞の復刻という謳い文句が付されているが、実際は、振付を担当したメドヴェージェフとブルラカがイワノフの振付を基に振付し直した版で、プティパの台本、イワノフの振付をそのまま復刻したわけではないらしい。プティパのオリジナルのプランでは、クララはお菓子の国に赴いてもクララのままで、グラン・パ・ド・ドゥを踊るのはあくまでもドラジェの精と王子である。メドヴェージェフとブルラカのプランは1934年に上演されたワイノネン版に準じていて、クララがドラジェの精に変身し、くるみ割り人形がコクリューシ王子に戻って、共にグラン・パ・ド・ドゥを踊る。復刻上演と謳うなら、プティパの台本通りに設定を行うのが本筋だろう。それはさておき、この公演では第一幕が見物である。子供たちが大活躍。彼らはベルリン国立バレエ学校の生徒たちだが、かなり達者に演技し、踊る。特にクララを演じているイセキ・エレナ（たぶん日本人）の演技・踊りは可愛いだけでなく、役に相応しい色が出ていて中々の好演。大人たちの舞踊場面も、巧みに作られていて、物語当時の上流社会の息遣いを感じさせる。第一幕第二場の戦闘場面は、ネズミたちと兵隊人形たちとが結構よく演じていて、面白かった。戦闘場面の後、ヤーナ・サレンコがイセキからクララを引き継ぐが、遠目にはともかく、クロース・アップされた映像を見るとイセキとのギャップが大きく、落ち着いて観続けるのがちょっと難しい。くるみ割り人形もグラウバー・L.M.シルヴァからマリアン・ウォルターに入れ替わっているけれども、サレンコとイセキほどのギャップはない。二人が入れ替わった後の松林の道行きのデュエットは大人の踊りであり、子供の雰囲気から遠い。続く＜雪のワルツ＞は、イワノフの振付をそのまま生かしたものと思われ、原典の良さを味わえる。第二幕は、殆どドラマの展開がないから、ディヴェルティスマンの羅列だけれど、ここは踊りの饗宴を楽しめば良く、大きな不満はない。ディヴェルティスマンの最初は、通常なら＜スペインの踊り＞だが、この版では＜プルチネッラ、人形、ムーア人、黄金人形の踊り＞になっており、それぞれに扮した子供たちが闊達に踊る。この後、＜スペインの踊り＞以下が続く。それから、多くの版では、カットされたり他の踊りに置き換えらえれたりする＜ジゴーニュ母さんと子供たち＞の踊りを観られたのは嬉しかった。この踊りでも子供たちの活躍がみられる。＜トレパーク＞が＜ロシアの踊り＞ではなく、＜道化者の踊り＞になっていたことに疑問を持つ。グラン・パ・ド・ドゥはサレンコとウォルターが情感豊かに且つスマートに踊り抜いていた。アダージオでイワノフの振付にあるドラジェの精が薄い布に乗り、王子がその布を引きずるシーンが観られるのも収穫である。サレンコは良く踊っているけれども、彼女の踊りの良さはこのパートでは発揮されないような気がする。ウォルターは弾力感のある踊りを踊るダンサーで、その弾力感をコクリューシ王子のヴァリアシオン（アントルシャやブリゼが多用された軽快洒脱なもので、新鮮に感じられた）で存分に活かしていた。＜くるみ割り人形＞では、ドロッセルマイヤーの存在がとても大きいが、この版ではマイムの役ではなく、グリゴローヴィチ版ほどではないにしても、踊る場面が結構ある。時代物の衣装の所為か踊りにくそうだったが、ミヒャエル・バンツハフは不気味さを漂わせながらも、愛情深い人物を丁寧に表現していた。他、個人的な思いだけれども、ベルリン国立バレエのメンバーには数人日本人ダンサーが入っていて、結構活躍している様子もうかがえる。ヴォイテンコとノギノワによる装置・衣装は初演時の装置・衣装を基に作られたものとのこと。確かにリアルで美しかったが、場面によっては、ゴテゴテの感が否めない。特に花のワルツの花たちの衣装にそれを感じた。ロイヤル・バレエの定評あるピーター・ライト版＜くるみ割り人形＞もイワノフ版をベースにしているが、台本の変更があるにしても、説得力はこのメドヴェージェフ・ブルラカ版より強い。ロベルト・ライマーの指揮による音楽演奏は充実しているけれど、リズムが重く、流麗さや軽快さが不足しており、踊りに相応しいものではなかった。

世界バレエフェスティバルでヤーナ・サレンコを見て、以前から彼女の出るブルーレイを待ち望んでいました。期待して観ましたが彼女の持ち味であるキレ、安定性があまり表現されていなかったと感じました。振付の関係とは思いますが残念でした。次回の作品に期待しています。

Um peut different de l'histoire habituelle j' Aimé lá presente dês eleves de l'Ecole de StaatsBallet Berlin.qui ont danses bien.

Great