Jump to content

Chen G.

Members
  • Posts

    7,417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Chen G.

  1. As far as I know there are only two versions of Flying Dutchman: the three-acter, and the one-act with the Tristan-esque cadence tacked-on at the end; both are wonderful. The same could not be said for Tannhauser, which was revised multiple times and of which every performed or record version is somekind of hybrid; its Wagner's most flawed work.
  2. We know Lucas had watched and enjoyed the films, so that seems most likely. You can also see Lucas adopted Jackson's "flyover" shots for Revenge of the Sith.
  3. Oh sure, Flying Dutchman is also a good starting point. It already started doing away with the feeling of numbers, especially when its presented in one act. But I have a huge soft spot for Lohengrin. Its some of the preetiest "fairytale" music ever written.
  4. Well, Meistersinger is the longest work in the repertoire: some 4.5-5 hours. The length is definitely daunting, but its one of mankind's most joyous works: its delightful!
  5. Its probably best to start on Wagner with Lohengrin, his most popular work. I happen to think Tristan is his best - better than the Ring - but that one REALLY takes some getting into!
  6. "With some intensity", but without describing why.
  7. I know, I know. But you just know that some people are going to take that very literally; I've certainly seen that in reviews leading-up to the film.
  8. I think these comparisons to The Lord of the Rings are really harmfull to Dune, not because its better or worst, but because its different. Dune is not Star Wars. Dune is not The Lord of the Rings. Dune is Dune, and is all the better for it.
  9. I know, I know, it was just a convienent example for the case I'm making that some of the similarities one sees between Dune and Star Wars are just "genric sci-fi" tropes. Really, the only thing that seems to me to be very deliberate was the whole "The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded" bit. I was watching Dune and went "oh!"
  10. Oh, for sure Dune is an influence on Star Wars! But to my mind, its one of tertiary importance. There are much more significant influences in there. The concept of having Emperors in a science-fiction setting far predates Dune, and the character of the Emperor in Star Wars went through a lot of variations, none of which seem to resemble Dune much. Sometimes, similarities between works are - if not coincidental as such - just stem from those simialr concepts being generic. For instance, its very easy to look at the trash-compactor monster in Star Wars as being based on Tolkien's "Watcher in the Water", but I don't think it really is.
  11. Was it? Its mostly just Tatooine as an environment and the whole "The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded" thing and that's it.
  12. The Winterst├╝rme would really, REALLY like a word with you now...
  13. My own position with regards to archiving is that the film should be preserved (and made available) in the very first version that will have ever been seen by an audience; that would mean the stereo mix, and none of the (admittedly minor - though not insignificant - and few) changes made to the visuals between the limited run and the wide release. As I understand it, the library ultimately got a print from 1978, so it would not conform to this; and its an answer print of somekind.
  14. Bruce does have a point insofar that Wagner, while he does sometimes put huge demands on the voice and asks a lot of his acting-singers in terms of interpertation, his works are not about vocal display (at least, by way of coloratura) and the orchestra is of great importance because it tells you things the characters on-stage are not privvy to. But then, that also proves your point in that - because the orchestra is an active storytelling tool in Wagner, more often than not its not playing the same music as what the singers are singing, which is why the singers need the kind of volume to punch through over the orchestra, in a way that you don't in Verdi.
  15. True, but then, the concluding film often struggles: like, I'd watch Deathly Hallows Part 2 on-loop over The Rise of Skywalker...
  16. Order of the Phoenix is definitely the best as far as I see it. And I refuse to accept this idea that the film is somehow great in spite of Yates.
  17. Its INCREDIBLY important, for any number of reasons. The one is that some of the Wagnerian roles are very difficult, and take a great, seasoned singer to simply bring them off on the most basic level: I've already mentioned Tristan (which is hard), Siegfried (which is nigh-impossible) but also Tannhauser and several of the major female leads: only great, great singers can do an Isolde or a Brunhilde any justice. Another reason is that - Lohengrin notwithstanding - Wagner writes well-round, fleshed-out people, and it takes a singer with great intelligence and interperative skills to bring-out the subtleties of his characters' psyches in the singing. And this extends to the physical acting on the stage: Wagner's complex characters demand acting singers, who can actually perform their parts on the stage while singing it, rather than just "park 'n bark." Its why I prefer the Chereau Ring to the Kupfer Ring: the acting is more naturalistic. If they can also look the part (which sadly is seldom the case) then all the better. Annette Dasch looks like you want an Elsa to look, and in her heyday Waltraud Meier looked like you'd want Isolde to look.
  18. You mean, the different roles? I mean, the first act of Siegfried is mostly sung by two tenors, and Das Rheingold is brimming was bass-baritones. But I think its fair to say you could never confuse Fasolt for Wotan: they sing completely different music. As of distinguishing certain singers, I sometimes can and sometimes can't; it depends: I can always pick-out Matti Salminen and a few other prominent Wagnerian singers. But suppose I couldn't, is it necessarily a bad thing if the singers disappear into their roles?
  19. Goblet of Fire is very uneven, directorially speaking. But then, I like some of the Yates-directed entries the best, so what do I know...
  20. The synopsis Jay linked is fairly Newt-centric. But...suppose it wasn't, and that the characters the script chose to focus on instead - say, Dumbeldore or Jacob or whomever - were just as interesting, would that be so bad? We get so caught up in what a story should be, that we forget to appreciate them for what they are.
  21. There's a beast in this story that's used to...let's just say, fortify Grindelwald's standing in the Wizarding World. So it is relevant to the story.
  22. I read it. The good: the nostalgia-trip of Hogwarts is not a permanent fixture of the story (as the trailer might have on believe) but an isolated episode. The bad: the rest of it doesn't come across very good, but I'll reserve my judgement.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.