Desiree Mohammadi ppoo

To my surprise, I came back to this piece one year later and watched it again very carefully I have to say that Franz Lehar did mean that the original opera would take place at three different High-class parties/dances as we imagine Maxims and Kings could provide and where the feminine grace, elegance, and class appeared to continuously rule externally, even if the internal tacit intentions were otherwise. Still, in our world, everyone is entitled to some happiness irrespective of how s/he achieves it and while the " Ladies in the Chorus" are not projecting the upper-class behavior, every lady irrespective of class, is willing to romp around occasionally and with the brilliant sound effect and high definition, the stage effect and romping and the playing or frolicking boisterously. is still deserving applause as it is of the highest caliber of execution, as who cares about class and elegance on some occasions when one wants to let his / her hair down.

I also saw it at the Met, and I enjoyed it. I am also a long time opera fan, and I also grew up in the country where major cities had "operetta theaters" in addition to opera theaters, so I've seen many Viennese operettas. I am normally very critical of non-opera singers singing opera arias, but I thought Kelli O'Hara was very good, and I enjoyed the whole performance a lot. I wonder how many of the critics actually saw the whole performance, much less live. I think they judge this scene out of context and also have preconceived notions. I liked all the cast.

No one need feel sorry for Kelli O'Hara. Over 40 with two young children, she is everywhere in demand doing everything. Two sold out holiday concerts at Carnegie Hall with the New York Pops, followed by a Met debut in which she fared far better in the very mixed reviews than did Renee Fleming, and then into rehearsal for the much-anticipated Lincoln Center revival of the Rodgers and Hammerstein's classic The King and I. Of all these, she may be best remembered some day for her vocal performance in The Bridges of Madison County, which failed on Broadway but left behind a musical legacy that you can sample here.

William Keating I don't think feeling sorry is the motivation, just expressing an opinion which is different from the negative ones - often for people who haven't even saw it live. Also, people who read negative opinions may decide to skip the performance, expressing a different opinion provides different view for people who aren't sure if they want to go to the Met to see it. (too late now - until Spring when there is different cast, but it wasn't late at the time the comment was written).

That comment wasn't directed at you exclusively. It was just meant for all who were upset at the criticism that Kelli was taking here. My "feeling sorry" was probably a poor choice of words. Kelli is never afraid to try something new, whether comedy ("Nice Work") or a stern drama which revolves around her character ("Madison County"). She always appears to be so calm and in charge.

William Keating I didn't think it was directed at me, I thought it was to the person who wrote the comment, and I don't think (s)he was feeling sorry for Kelli either. You may well be right about other comments.

I think it might be you who misunderstood the piece.

No complaints against Kelli, just against StrohMan's unimaginative interpretation!

I don't deny that Ms O'Hara does a good job at broadway. I've seen a few clips of her I found rather nice, too. However, in this production she doesn't sound too good and is far away of being a "FANTASTIC" singer. If you want to listen to someone singing Valencienne really good, try the ROH production of the Merry Widow from 1997 or the production with Frederica von Stade (both to get here). I believe that Ms O'Hara cares for her craft a great deal. However, that doesn't make her a good opera singer - and I think I could find a lot of people agreeing with me - probably almost everyone with a bit of a glue about opera!

Sibylle Luise Binder I'm not one of those who agrees with you, and I have been in love with the performing arts my whole life. Instead, I find the way that you are so bumptiously talking about other peoples' work to be the reason that so many theater seats are empty, and why the arts have such a snooty and uptight stereotype.

Jaydoggy531 Oh yes, the good old "you're so elitist and with that you hinder people to enjoy opera and classical music". I know, I know - I've heard that so often I find it by now slightly boring. Fact is: Art needs elitism - or as my first bassoon teacher 40 years ago used to say: "Kunst kommt von Können" (art develops from having the skills). If we stop reaching for the stars and lower our demands the art will be lost. "Go home tonight and read Keats, Byron. Try to imagine how many of us there are now with the necessary knowledge and background to write anything that approaches the quality and depth of work those two men alone produced. We kow-tow more and more to the mass appeal, which seems to be the order of the day. We have undoubtedly become a civilisation in rapid cultural decline." By the way: The last is a quote - by Sir Thomas Allen from a speech he did in 2003. Since then he's always accused of elitism, too - and so I've learned to talke it as a compliment.

Sibylle Luise Binder "The old" - so it's been said to you before? Have you ever had the humbleness to even consider an opinion that is not your own? It is essential to society, education, and the arts. You've presented your argument, and I've presented my reasons for arguing your thoughts. I've also shared my observations on the arts and why seats are emptying. So I ask you, who between the two of us, is likely to bring more people into the theater? I'm enjoying this performance, and sure wish I was able to see it in person.

Jaydoggy531 On the long run my chances to keep opera alive are better, methinks. It certainly goes down the bog when the standards are lowered. And yes, I've had this argument before - more than once. I've discussed it, I've considered the accusation and I've decided I won't go with the tide. And there's something else: I'm rather upset about this "Merry Widow" because I actually looked forward to it. As I heard about it I thought a "Broadway Met cooperation" could become rather interesting. Besides I really, really dislike what the European Regietheater is doing to operetta, so I was the one who said: "At the Met and with a Broadway director this Widow will probably be big fun." Now I'm just hugely disappointed. I listened to the live broadcast last night and actually the only pieces I really, really enjoyed were the orchestra's. The Met Orchestra and Sir Andrew Davis were great together. The rest was ... if I wouldn't have known it's the Met I wouldn't have believed it! It starts with the translation which is rather boring (I know, "speaking" is a bit difficult at the Met, therefore they tried to shorten the speaking parts. But by doing so they kicked a lot of the wits the Widow actually has out. And I really wonder why they didn't use the translation once done for the Royal Opera House in London which is rather witty) and goes on with Renee Fleming's obvious problems (and that's something I found almost painfull because I used to adore her voice!), Nathan Gunn having a nice voice, but one which isn't suitable for Danilo (for heaven's sake the role was once written for Richard Tauber who was a tenore! Nowadays it's often sung by a baritone because it's rather deep lying for a tenore. And I've heard a few baritones who did it greatly - like Sir Thomas Allen or Thomas Hampson who were both great Danilos. Only Nathan Gunn is a bass-baritone with a rather dark timbre and it was painfully clear that he's got problems with the high tones in the Widow) and Kelly O'Hara's rather thin, little voice sounding "squeaky" whenever she hit a high note. Her interpretation of Valencienne one can certainly discuss - I don't like it much and I think it rather wrong and misunderstood. Yet one can hardly discuss that her voice isn't suiting the role. I really like her with a lot of musical pieces and I think her fame on Broadway is well deserved. But I'm convinced Danielle de Niese, the Valencienne in the second run, will do much better - and that means something because I'm absolutely no fan of de Niese.

Yep, I'm not a New Yorker. I'm a German with a degree in classical music and experience in the orchestra of an internationally renowed opera house. I admit: I don't know much about the Broadway, but I do know something about opera and operetta, thank you very much.

Well, I guess it's good that Kelli didn't "stay at home" in her flyover state (Oklahoma), you obnoxious little snob.

I really don't mind Broadway actors in operetta, e.g. Patti LuPone was fantastic in "Candide" - Kelli O'Hara can somehow sing the notes, but her level is the one of a community theatre production and definitely not what I would expect from the Met!

If you have seen amateur opera stages like this, I’m jealous.

You can search for "Eh Voila Les Belles Grisettes" or "The Grisettes song".

jewelmarkess

The original title is: "Ja, wir Sind es, die Grisetten"

Why did they let her do that? It's not in the score as far as I remember.

RemmersMusic The ladies are great dancers, but if they can't do French accents, please don't have them just change TH to Z, but otherwise sound American Broadway.

RemmersMusic The translation is horrible. No way the author or singers has ever been to the "Champs-Élysées" based on the way they are pronouncing it (they fucked up all chance of scansion by putting the stress on the Y). Also, your stupid "Yippe-ay" section should all be sung in French; that usually happens when you translate the German parts to English, you leave the French in French. It's simple diegetics, folks. That said, I don't know if I want to see any of these people attempt proper French.

RemmersMusic This show's about a bunch of men hounding on a newly-widowed woman to try to get a fat inheritance check. Relax. This show isn't one to be uptight about. It's a slap in the face against "sophisticated" people. Don't be among those it satirizes.

Jaydoggy531 The show has much more at stake than that. It's one of my favorite operas to perform in and listen to. This is allegedly the most prestigious opera house in the world. We deserve better.

Ugh

Is your nose bleeding up on that high horse of yours? You do realize this is a comedy? It's a fun, swinging piece, and alcohol is meant to be involved. It's not meant to be strict. You're meant to sway back and forth and enjoy yourself with a fun dance and song.

Jaydoggy531 Yes, it's supposed to be a bubbly, funny, but rather elegant and sophisticated comedy. Only this version is neither elegant nor sophisticated. Besides I think it a bit embarassing that a lady who's sold to us as a big star at the Broadway is such a lousy dancer (and don't start me on her singing! It's certainly not up to what one expects from the Met).

Sibylle Luise Binder I'm not sure if you noticed but the whole point of this moment is that her character is rather buzzed, so she's purposefully slurring and stumbling. This is a comedic moment. As for sophisticated: The whole plot of this show is men are trying to get a newly-widowed woman for her massive inheritance check. It's a slap in the face against the behavior of "sophisticated" society. So let's enjoy the comedy and satire.

Sibylle Luise Binder you do know O'Hara's character is drunk here right?

wickedfan7681 Yep. And I wonder why. It's certainly not in the original libretto and there's definitely no reason for it. Besides: Playing drunk isn't a reason for lousy singing. I remember the "Merry Widow" at the Royal Opera House in 1997. Sir Thomas Allen sang Danilo and made a very comical, believable drunk entry, but he nevertheless sounded great.

I think it's you would doesn't understand the context of Maxines.

+Ian Smith Don't worry, I understand it quite well.

I don't worry for you, I worry for opera. Unless the storytelling and acting improve audiences will continue to stay away, beautiful technique just doesn't cut it anymore and their isn't a big generation of new purists to keep the houses alive. The ENO in London is in a terrible financial state and opera companies must catch up. There is nothing on stage in that clip that the writer would be unhappy with, it tells the story and it aims for humour. Whether it's completely to s purists taste or not is by the by but it cannot be condemned as bad baca use its different.

I think the problems of the ENO have nothing in common with the problems of this certain "merry widow". The ENO's in trouble because they're doing "regie theater" at its worst with very "advanced" directors even changing the music (ever heard a Beethoven Streichquartett in the Fidelio? I did - in the ENO!). The ENO tries to be uber intellectual - so much that there isn't any fun left. This "Merry Widow" in the meantime tries to be funny in a rather cheap way. The costumes are so overdone they look rather tacky, the director obviously neither understood Danilo (he's a noble man, for God's sake - elegant, sophisticated, a charming rake. Yet Stroman's Danilo is a kind of cowboy without any charme!) nor Valencienne. She who always maintains that she's a "honourable lady" appears drunk in a shady night club? Sorry, that's destroying the entire "I'm a honourable wife" thing - and one wonders why its done because it's not in the script like that. I certainly don't think that's the way opera should go. But I do wonder why you say "audiences will continue to stay away". How comes opera is now in the cinemas? Would that work if people wouldn't want to see it?

Oh yawn