 |
 | Star! |
 | "Anatomy of a Flop" | 2008-09-15 |
I have waited to write my review of Star! but I now have the wherewithal to do so. This movie was a flop-twice. Then why is it so interesting? I know 'bad' movies such as "Wild Women of Wongo" but that wasn't a big studio production. This is different. This was the time of the death knell for movie musicals. I love movie musicals, but the times were changing in the late 60's. When The Sound of Music was made, this erosion was just starting. Also, when Blake Edwards became involved with Julie, he wanted her to play less "innocent" roles. This certainly could pose as one. Andrews plays Gerturde Lawrence, a "star" who was much more well-known in England as she was in the U.S. I'm a little up in arms as to why this movie was called "Star". So this movie gives one an interesting look at the British Music Hall as well as the Algonquin theater in New York. I really like the cockney lingo here, although I wonder if it is accurate because of the criticism given the screenplay. The best part of the film are the musical numbers, which my favorite is "Limehouse Blues" which is almost done in pantomime, as the music of Limehouse Blues gets adapted in many different guises until it is tragic at the end. This sequence should be in movie history. The next best part is the relationship between Gertie and Noel Coward (maybe it should be called that, but Noel Coward was still alive). Having collected a sizable amount of Noel Coward recordings on CD it is interesting to see parts of his stage plays recreated. After all of the relationships with men that she has in the film, the most memorable is with Noel Coward, and that is on a friendship and professional level. Dramatics are provided more from Gertie herself, who tends to want to steal scenes from her stars so her own career can increase. She also has a propensity to not deal with her monetary affairs very well. She finally has a roadblock in the guise of Kurt Weill, whose play "Lady in the Dark" she stars in. Her almost husband brings her to a club where it seems that the act that is being presented gives her the inspiration. But we don't see the act! What is it? Soon afterwards, we see the infamous "Jenny" sequence which makes one wonder if they have overstuffed their coffers. Still, a very intersting sequence considering that you hardly see "Lady In The Dark" in the theater. Everything is big, big, big! Perhaps its this excessiveness that hurts the film. Still, for me this film has many magical moments that makes one love the remote control, so we can make our own version. The DVD is stuffed with extras-on side two we have some documentaries and also a written history of the film. The commentary is very thorough-with comments by Wise, Daniel Massey, and other colloborators. I wish this could be done with other 'flops' too. Time has a way to bring movies into a different light, and I think that "Star" is worth more than it was back then. Too bad that the monetary losses cannot be recouped with DVD sales. So help out and buy the DVD already!
|
 | Star |
| "Anatomy of a Flop" | 2008-09-15 |
I have waited to write my review of Star! but I now have the wherewithal to do so. This movie was a flop-twice. Then why is it so interesting? I know 'bad' movies such as "Wild Women of Wongo" but that wasn't a big studio production. This is different. This was the time of the death knell for movie musicals. I love movie musicals, but the times were changing in the late 60's. When The Sound of Music was made, this erosion was just starting. Also, when Blake Edwards became involved with Julie, he wanted her to play less "innocent" roles. This certainly could pose as one. Andrews plays Gerturde Lawrence, a "star" who was much more well-known in England as she was in the U.S. I'm a little up in arms as to why this movie was called "Star". So this movie gives one an interesting look at the British Music Hall as well as the Algonquin theater in New York. I really like the cockney lingo here, although I wonder if it is accurate because of the criticism given the screenplay. The best part of the film are the musical numbers, which my favorite is "Limehouse Blues" which is almost done in pantomime, as the music of Limehouse Blues gets adapted in many different guises until it is tragic at the end. This sequence should be in movie history. The next best part is the relationship between Gertie and Noel Coward (maybe it should be called that, but Noel Coward was still alive). Having collected a sizable amount of Noel Coward recordings on CD it is interesting to see parts of his stage plays recreated. After all of the relationships with men that she has in the film, the most memorable is with Noel Coward, and that is on a friendship and professional level. Dramatics are provided more from Gertie herself, who tends to want to steal scenes from her stars so her own career can increase. She also has a propensity to not deal with her monetary affairs very well. She finally has a roadblock in the guise of Kurt Weill, whose play "Lady in the Dark" she stars in. Her almost husband brings her to a club where it seems that the act that is being presented gives her the inspiration. But we don't see the act! What is it? Soon afterwards, we see the infamous "Jenny" sequence which makes one wonder if they have overstuffed their coffers. Still, a very intersting sequence considering that you hardly see "Lady In The Dark" in the theater. Everything is big, big, big! Perhaps its this excessiveness that hurts the film. Still, for me this film has many magical moments that makes one love the remote control, so we can make our own version. The DVD is stuffed with extras-on side two we have some documentaries and also a written history of the film. The commentary is very thorough-with comments by Wise, Daniel Massey, and other colloborators. I wish this could be done with other 'flops' too. Time has a way to bring movies into a different light, and I think that "Star" is worth more than it was back then. Too bad that the monetary losses cannot be recouped with DVD sales. So help out and buy the DVD already!
|
 | Esquivel - Space Age Bachelor Pad Music |
| "Classical Kid Reviews Esquivel" | 2004-10-10 |
I have always been a fan of the off-beat, the unusual, from unknown classical composers to "bad" music (which is in the eyes of the beholder), which also extends to popular music. I was delighted when the retro-swing movement came about, and that meant that many old recordings were going to be resurrected on CD and I said, "I better get these while they are still out there"! Well, I bought many of those CD's, and I do not regret it! From a classical standpoint, Esqivel really reminds me of composers like Stockhausen and Ligeti! He really distorts pop music, slowing down tempos, using instruments that are unusual (such as the Jaw Harp and many others that he invented himself). His most famous trademark is his back-up singers, who say "Zu-Zu-Zu-Zu" or only say one or two words of a lyric while the instrumentalists take over the others while you imagine them being sung. Esquivel also wrote many pieces by himself, of which "Latin-Esque" is one. The sound quality is extraordinary. This is a big factor: if you listen with headphones, you can hear more of the stereo "spread"-xylophone glissandos surround you instead of just coming out of the speakers. CD technology has a way of making the old sound even better, and you can tell these recordings were made with love. My only criticism of these compilation CDs is the fact that there is duplication of certain numbers which of course overlap between CD's. Great notes by the amazing Irwin Chusid, who should put out a book of all his program notes from his CD's. A winner all around!
|
 | Got A Minute |
| "Super works for piano bring super performances!!" | 2004-06-18 |
Leopold Godowsky made 7 transcriptions of the Chopin Etude in G-Flat, Op.10, No.5. The focus of this CD is the Chopin "Minute" Waltz, and we have many more transcriptions of this piece that seems to have fascinated many transcribers. To add more music, Frederic Ullen has added some other Chopin transcriptions as well, including a "Showpan" Boogie and some jazz arrangements by Louis Gruenberg and ending with the original waltz. Some of these arrangers copied other ideas (e.g. putting the theme in 3rds rather than single notes) but most of them have something new and interesting to say. Most of these arrangements are of the romantic school,and I wonder if there are others of more later vintage. There also used to be a published volume of "Minute" waltz transcriptions. Ullen plays these gems with panache and commitment, not just reading them through. I found this disc in the 20th-century orchestral section of my local classical CD store. This is one for those who enjoy the pianism of Marc-Andre Hamelin and others who relish late 19th century fireworks.
|
 | Pyotr Il'yich Tchaikovsky ,Leonard Bernstein - Tschaikowski: Symphonie No.6 (Pathétique) |
| "Controversial Tchaikovsky 6th" | 2004-06-17 |
The fastest performance of this symphony must by the NYPO under Dimitri Mitropolos. This is the slowest performance of the symphony ever. This is quite a feat! I always thought that the 4th movement of the Pathetique was the disappointment of the symphony, but I always felt that the slower the finale, the better the performance (example: Ashkanazy at 11 minutes.) But Bernstein goes an incredible 18 minutes and somehow this movement makes sense. Perhaps it is played like Mahler (which of course is a Bernstein specialty). The trick is to make it sound right and for it to work, and only Bernstein can do that. He does that in the 4th and 5th Symphonies also. The sound is brilliant and immediate but not very warm. I really like the sound that DG got in Avery Fischer Hall, but I bet nowadays with the 24-bit technology, etc. they could do better. For a standard interpretation, Ashkenazy heads the list. But this one is my favorite because for me, Bernstein makes it work like no other conductor.
|
 | Tchaikovsky: Symphony no 5, etc / Bernstein, New York PO |
| "Not as controversial, but still......." | 2004-06-17 |
I keep citing Ashkenazy as my favorite interpreter of these last Tchaikovsky symphonies. But Bernstein somehow with his idiosyncriatic interpretation makes these symphonies sound like new. So many performances of these works sound the same. Bernstein's old CBS recording of this was very good also, along with the Haitink and Karajan recordings. No recent CD's of this piece really do anything for me, and that includes Gergiev's highly touted Vienna Philharmonic recording on Phillips (there just isn't any passion there! All on auto-pilot!) If you know these performances, you will be amazed at the tempos, especially in the last movement after the introduction. Very fast! But he tempers that with slower tempos that somehow he makes work. Get to know this work through the other conductors I have mentioned (again, Ashkenazy reigns supreme, but those are analog recordings) and listen to Bernstein and see what you think!
|
 | Tchaikovsky: Symphony no 4, etc / Bernstein, New York PO |
| "Bernstein does it again!!!" | 2004-06-17 |
This is probably the slowest performance of this work ever and the one that could be the most controversial. This is in relation to what performances you are used to. Mravinsky and Svetlanov are very fast, especially in the finale. I used to think that if the finale was slower than 8 minutes 20 seconds, it just wouldn't work. Then came Barenboim's recording with the NYP (on a long deleted LP from Columbia) which was one of the longer versions, but it made sense! Now Bernstein further stretches it out to about 9 minutes 20 seconds. Rumor has it that the audience started applauding before the last note ended, so they went back in the studio and redid the ending. This to me is very controversial, because I think that a live performance should be an accurate representation of that event. I would have no problem hearing applause sneak through at all. It just adds to the excitement. I will cite Ashkenazy again as my all-around recommendation for this work, but this one is lots of fun and exciting. Even better is Francesca da Rimini, also stretched out to unimaginable lenghts. But this is my favorite performance, even better than Stokowski and Giulini.
|
 | Stravinsky/Bartók: Violin Concertos |
| "Absolutely Fabulous!" | 2003-10-29 |
Ever since I heard the recording of the Bartok concerto (with the original ending) by Mark Kaplan on Koch, I have listened to all of the recordings of this ending. I have no reservations at all in saying that I prefer the original ending. All of the conductors (Lawrence Foster, Michael Gielen, Leonard Slatkin and Esa-Pekka Salonen) play it for all its worth-and to me, it's worth a lot. I can see why Bartok published this ending. It is true, though, that it should say on the CD case that the original ending is used (which is also the case on the Tetzlaff/Gielen recording.)This is my favorite available recording of this version, as the Zuckerman/Slatkin recording is out of print. There is also room on this disc for the revised ending, which Zuckerman/Slatkin also do. All you have to do is program your CD player accordingly.As for the rest of the performance, it is absolutely fabulous. Mullova's tone never falters, and she is expressive where possible and she is backed to the hilt by Salonen and the LA Phil. The sound is gorgeous, with a very realistic bass drum. Soft playing is beautiful and loud sections are very powerful. As for the Stravinsky, this piece is foolproof, in my opinion. Every recording I have heard of this piece (Perlman/Ozawa, Stern/Stravinsky,Chung/Previn, Gitlis and now, Mullova and Salonen) is very well done. The spirit is certainly there, and Mullova certainly can play her violin well. This cd is recommended with much enthusiasm!!
|
 | Shostakovich: Symphony no 11 / Mravinsky, Leningrad PO |
 | "Great Performance, but not what it advertises......" | 2003-01-09 |
I have owned this recording for quite a long time now, and I now own the Russian Revelation recording of the Shostakovich 11th that was made in the studio in 1959. Upon looking at a discography of Mravinsky's recordings, I discovered that these two recordings are the same! Well, not quite. It is very easy to access the information on the internet. According to the DSCH Journal website, there has been doctoring up of the earier performance to make it seem to be a live recording. Applause has been added to certain parts of the recording (especially the end-which has full applause on it.)...the biggest difference is the break between the second and third movements. This Praga recording has this break, although it is not notated in the score (if you got to know about this piece via Stokowski's recording, one realizes that these movements follow each other without a break.) In the Revelation recording, there is no break. The performance is, of course, worth owning, but I guess I feel a little bit duped. If you cannot find the Revelation recording (and it is hard to find, I jumped for joy when I found it today used) by all means, listen to it. Mravinsky's Shostakovich recordings are well worth it. But be warned. Also, other recordings in this series have the same story. Please see the website above for more information.
|
 | Gustav Mahler ,Ole Kristian Ruud - Mahler: Symphony No. 1 / Piano Quartet |
| "Original Version of Mahler Symphony Gloriously Performed!!" | 2000-11-06 |
This piece is actually called Titan: Symphonic Poem In Symphonic Form. This does include Blumine and the rest of the work is in the earliest surviving orchestration. Wyn Morris made the first recording of this version, and as that is out of print, this one admirably fills the bill. This is then the real thing, not like those recordings that just throw in Blumine into the text of the revised version. There are many little differences between the two versions and comparing them is fascinating. The big difference is the textures which are sparser and not as big. Clarity is the watchword here, and Ruud delivers. The big moments come out with a will, and are very well done. Very recommendable, along with the only existing movement from Mahler's early Piano Quintet. Great annotations and wonderful sound. The playing is wonderful. Recommended with enthusiasm!
|
 | Grainger: Piano Music |
| "Fantastic Grainger Recital!" | 2000-01-08 |
Strangely enough, there have not been too many recordings of Grainger's piano music. Martin Jones did a four disc set on Nimbus. But this set is good because it has his famous arrangements (Country Gardens, Irish Tune From County Derry, Shepherd's Hey) which makes this disc irresistible for someone looking for a one-disc survey. I was utterly surprised when this disc came out-Hamelin keeps on surprising me with his choice of repertoire! He is on his toes throughout, and in the lyrical music he is superb! My favorites are In Dahomey, which is Granger's version of Scott Joplin (he puts two tunes together) and the "MacGuire's Kick" from the Stanford Irish Dances (a transcription of a transcription!)Utterly fascinating, and beautifully recorded.
|
