Nunez and Muntagirov are perfection for me here, and they take more risks (beautifully!) by opting for the fish dives. Every movement breathes throughout its entire extent. You could freeze it at any point and their lines would be harmonious. Plenty of genuine chemistry between them and no emotions plastered on as an afterthought.
They are both so beautiful, yet with very different styles. Nuñez reminded me of Fonteyn with her joy, ease and purity of line. Zakharova was lyrical and gorgeous. Maybe I'd give the edge to Nuñez - Muntagirov just because they had great chemistry as a couple, harmonious lines and better choreography (fish dives!).
Fonteyn was the comparison I was making, but then this is the quintessence of English style even though it was staged originally by Sergeyev lol! Even with Zakharova on the other side of the split screen, I can't take my eyes off Nunez!
Я не специалист, мне показалось, что эта хореография была более суетливой, и Захарова отчаянно пыталась попасть во все эти движения, во все ноты. Молодец, попала, но мне аж жалко ее стало. И эта шапочка ужасно раздражала, как будто танцевала не Аврора, а Ния.
My preference is nearly always for Nunez - she has an extra element of grace. Beyond that I'm no judge of skill. But the costumes and set of the other pair are wonderful.
I had to watch this video twice because at about the 15th second i concentrated mainly on the left side of a screen. I did glance two or three times to the right (что они там суетятся?), but always returned to Nunez and Muntagirov's performance. After the second watch i understood these couples are dancing different scenes, different moods. The left is a love scene between two people, gentle Aurora, like she is just awake and realized that she is falling in love, and the right is a showing her partner and, mainly, herself off to others at the ball, where Aurora is more flirtatious, young and joyful. I liked the gentle version better.
I love this pas de deux. Thank you for posting this. I certainly prefer Núñez and Muntagirov in this. Núñez portrays Aurora beautifully, and Muntagirov is wonderful as Désiré (also called Florimund). Zakharova, in my opinion, was very exaggerated, and Hallberg was just dull. Thank you, once again, for this video.
Zakharova is so charming and seducing . And Hallberg so Dignified (although dancing with an open mouth doesn’t help). With them We feel in a big event, a royal and public wedding. there is a special nervousness and grandeur (that the coziness of the RB couple lacks, it is more like an old couple reviving good moments).
I didn't realize a lot of the differences till I saw them side by side. I have to admit at 2:03 I've never liked the portage as much as the supported penchee/4th front (or whatever that move is), and I will always prefer the fish dives to the fall, although I know the fish dives weren't in the original choreography. I'm guessing the music track was laid over the video so both kind of "fit" the dancing. That said, wow! does the choreography fit the music differently between RB and Bolshoi even when the couples are doing essentially the same steps! Nunez at 4:37 delivered all I've ever wanted out of an attitude to arabesque balance, and I wish (IIRC) she had utilized this slow, controlled, and above all PERFECT transition in her Rose Adagio. Hard to watch this as a split screen because you literally don't know where to look when 4 such superb dancers are dancing at the same time. Can you do a split screen with the rest of this pdd, or at least with the male solo and coda because Hallberg and Muntigirov? Lovely, and thank you for posting. It's a nice reminder that Russia has more to offer than warmongering!
So I LOVE Nunez as Aurora but Fumi is my all time fave Aurora! I also love watching Svetlana dance Aurora because it forces the tenderness out of her! It’s nice to see her with a softer, bubbly, stage presence than the typical ice queen. I mean that with endearment.
Nunez-Muntagirov are peaches and cream: her port de bras! Zakharova-Hallberg are sugar candies: hard and brittle. I love nuanced and dreamy sweetness of peachy dessert.
I think I prefer David Hallberg (one of the greatest dancers). However the choreography in the Royal Ballet version is cleaner, more authentic and more challenging. Some iconic steps are sadly omitted in the Bolshoi version. This Royal Ballet version is largely the same choreography that Fonteyn danced - Fonteyn’s favorite role. Fonteyn is still revered at the RB as the iconic Aurora. To me Nela just looks too mature. Even though Fonteyn was older she looked like youthful. I find Nela to be a superb technician but she need a little bit of spontaneity. I’m not a huge fan of Zakharova but she brings a youthfulness to the role. Sadly it’s really hard to compare the two PDDs because the Bolshoi version is simplistic and a number of signature steps and poses are missing - not just the fish dives but some more subtle elements. To me Hallberg is the superior dancer and partner although both men are great. Nela has a chance to do more balances and penches, and opportunities to show her elegant lines. Other than Fonteyn whose lines were incomparable, Darcey Bussell was an amazing Aurora,
There is no comparison. Russian school is the best ever. And look at the proportions of the body. Zaharovas body and feet are amazing Although she cannot preferred jumps at all. She does the technical imitation of them
@@minissa2009 Zaharova does not perform the ballon she imitates it with the technique.You’re supposed to be sort of “freeze in the air” The shorter the legs are the easier it is to perform jumps in the air. When your legs are too long you kind of get tangled in them. But she has great technique so she uses her technique to substitute for her lack of natural jump
However, I must agree with you that Zakharova is not suitable for this role, I prefer her in more lyrical role such as Nikiya. My 2 favorite princess Aurora are Novikova and Somova.
Throwing hate towards Svetlana has become a trend since a couple years. And the worst part is the disrespect you show towards her work. I do not say anything about Nunez, her qualities are stunning. I do however want to point out that Zakharova is now heavily criticized for the sake of it, because she's an old fashion ballerina. Sylvie Guillem was the one who turned ballet into gymnastics but no-one dares to say anything about it. Zakharova on the other hand amazed thousands of people with her art and her serious work. I've always been amazed by her mostly for her port de bras, expression and way of moving, that includes but goes way over the extensions. There are millions of people with Zakharova's body in the world, but there is only 1 Svetlana. The serious work she put into ballet for her entire life is there and should not be discredited. The true passion and artistry she has shall not be diminished by any means. You talk about sleeping beauty being about pure classical lines. Well Sleeping beauty is a RUSSIAN ballet and Zakharova expresses the absolute perfection of the vaganova russian technique. She does everything clean and precise, exactly the way it's supposed to be. She raised her legs high only in the 3rd part and in 1 ecarté, and her dancing expresses the grandiosity of Russian ballet. Her elegance is beyond comparison, elegance due to her royal movement and to the clean, precise movements. Nunez is more modern, has smooth strong technique, which is more appreciated now in 2022, but theoretically Zakharova's sharp, and yet light movements fit the historical meaning of the ballet the most. I agree that she is very long, which does not help for this role, but I also want to point out that this is 3rd act and Aurora is already basically a queen. Her journey ks towards the and, and she has to act royal. It's different from the act 1 princess, and Zakharova gives the royalty amazingly. Last but not least, Nunez' movement is again very modern, she conveys a whole more complex physicality in her movement which is typical both of modern ballet and English technique in general. This is very appreciated nowadays but has nothing to do with the classical tradition. And if you talk about pure lines Nunez may NOT be an example. She's an example of perfection and strength, but in a modern way. If you want to see the purity of the lines look at Carla Fracci or Aurelie Dupont. Or go look at any russian ballerina and then come back to Zakharova. And then understand why she's prima ballerina assoluta.
Emanuele Babici Zakharova holds a special place in my heart. She might be not be the best Aurora, the best Kitri I have ever seen but I love her because she is the one and only Zakharova in history. And thank you for your clarification , I could understand the reason now !
The role is one of pure classical technique and Nunez cannot be beaten here. She has the pure classical line, Svetlana is hyper extending everything and it does not fit here, at all.
Throwing hate towards Svetlana has become a trend since a couple years. And the worst part is the disrespect you show towards her work. I do not say anything about Nunez, her qualities are stunning. I do however want to point out that Zakharova is now heavily criticized for the sake of it, because she's an old fashion ballerina. Sylvie Guillem was the one who turned ballet into gymnastics but no-one dares to say anything about it. Zakharova on the other hand amazed thousands of people with her art and her serious work. I've always been amazed by her mostly for her port de bras, expression and way of moving, that includes but goes way over the extensions. There are millions of people with Zakharova's body in the world, but there is only 1 Svetlana. The serious work she put into ballet for her entire life is there and should not be discredited. The true passion and artistry she has shall not be diminished by any means. You talk about sleeping beauty being about pure classical lines. Well Sleeping beauty is a RUSSIAN ballet and Zakharova expresses the absolute perfection of the vaganova russian technique. She does everything clean and precise, exactly the way it's supposed to be. She raised her legs high only in the 3rd part and in 1 ecarté, and her dancing expresses the grandiosity of Russian ballet. Her elegance is beyond comparison, elegance due to her royal movement and to the clean, precise movements. Nunez is more modern, has smooth strong technique, which is more appreciated now in 2022, but theoretically Zakharova's sharp, and yet light movements fit the historical meaning of the ballet the most. I agree that she is very long, which does not help for this role, but I also want to point out that this is 3rd act and Aurora is already basically a queen. Her journey ks towards the and, and she has to act royal. It's different from the act 1 princess, and Zakharova gives the royalty amazingly. Last but not least, Nunez' movement is again very modern, she conveys a whole more complex physicality in her movement which is typical both of modern ballet and English technique in general. This is very appreciated nowadays but has nothing to do with the classical tradition. And if you talk about pure lines Nunez may NOT be an example. She's an example of perfection and strength, but in a modern way. If you want to see the purity of the lines look at Carla Fracci or Aurelie Dupont. Or go look at any russian ballerina and then come back to Zakharova. And then understand why she's prima ballerina assoluta.
@@emanuelebabici You've copied and pasted this a few times, but I'll respond. It's not throwing hate that Svetland just doesn't compare to Nunez as she just doesn't. Nunez does have a pure classical line, her technique is more classical than Svetlana, on one hand you even admit she is in the style of Sylvie, which is a more modern style, so you agree there. Anyway, just because Svetlana is Russian does not mean she has inherited their old school technique. You look at the arabesque, Nunez is in the absolute perfect shape, the line is pure. Nothing is ever forced from her or pushed too far and that's ballet.
@@Emmareads15 yes I have copied and pasted because I didn't have 4 hours to write specifically to each of you. I apologize for that. It does not make sense to try and find who is more pure. Expecially since we don't even know well how pure original classical ballet looked like. I am the first to really appreciate Nunez' strong technique and preciseness in her work, but that's what I call modern technique. There's the original ballet, if which we do not have footage, then the gradual evolution through Ksessinskaja, Pavlova, Plisetskaja, Makarova, Fracci (sorry for not mentioning all of them) until Sylvie Guillem, who "opened" the era of extensions and physical qualities, and then it goes further with many ballerinas who value strength and clean technique. If you think Guillem is modern you're very far off. However, I do not agree that Nunez has no rivals. For instance, her so called "perfection" takes away from the unicity that other ballerinas have. Whenever I see her dancing, I see Marianela Nunez and not the character she's portraying. Which works while she's really good, but you can collect very unique interpretation of each role from different ballerinas. Then you can call Nunez versatile, but not unique
@@emanuelebabici If you believe that Nunez and her perfect technique diminish her, then you really have never seen her dance. The fact she has such a perfect technique allows her to be free and capture every nuance within a dance, you can even see it here with her eyes and facial expressions throughout, they are never set to one thing. She's extremely emotive. Anyway. I'm out.
Sorry...but I am only 53 seconds in and I have to write this: Svetlana is lovely of course but when it comes to comparing her with Dame Nunez it isn't really worth it! Even with that incredible facility she has she simply lacks all of what Nunez has and that is not me being biased...it is what it is! If they were to ever have a dance off and they won't, Svetlana would have to leave the stage early! I'm not trying to be nasty or shady but come on! That might be the next great reality show...divas out dancing divas!
I agree, they don't sit on the same level, Nunez is pure classical ballet, every line, every step is of the true essence of the art form. Svetlana is just nowhere near Nunez's very high bar. Completely different leagues here.
Throwing hate towards Svetlana has become a trend since a couple years. And the worst part is the disrespect you show towards her work. I do not say anything about Nunez, her qualities are stunning. I do however want to point out that Zakharova is now heavily criticized for the sake of it, because she's an old fashion ballerina. Sylvie Guillem was the one who turned ballet into gymnastics but no-one dares to say anything about it. Zakharova on the other hand amazed thousands of people with her art and her serious work. I've always been amazed by her mostly for her port de bras, expression and way of moving, that includes but goes way over the extensions. There are millions of people with Zakharova's body in the world, but there is only 1 Svetlana. The serious work she put into ballet for her entire life is there and should not be discredited. The true passion and artistry she has shall not be diminished by any means. You talk about sleeping beauty being about pure classical lines. Well Sleeping beauty is a RUSSIAN ballet and Zakharova expresses the absolute perfection of the vaganova russian technique. She does everything clean and precise, exactly the way it's supposed to be. She raised her legs high only in the 3rd part and in 1 ecarté, and her dancing expresses the grandiosity of Russian ballet. Her elegance is beyond comparison, elegance due to her royal movement and to the clean, precise movements. Nunez is more modern, has smooth strong technique, which is more appreciated now in 2022, but theoretically Zakharova's sharp, and yet light movements fit the historical meaning of the ballet the most. I agree that she is very long, which does not help for this role, but I also want to point out that this is 3rd act and Aurora is already basically a queen. Her journey ks towards the and, and she has to act royal. It's different from the act 1 princess, and Zakharova gives the royalty amazingly. Last but not least, Nunez' movement is again very modern, she conveys a whole more complex physicality in her movement which is typical both of modern ballet and English technique in general. This is very appreciated nowadays but has nothing to do with the classical tradition. And if you talk about pure lines Nunez may NOT be an example. She's an example of perfection and strength, but in a modern way. If you want to see the purity of the lines look at Carla Fracci or Aurelie Dupont. Or go look at any russian ballerina and then come back to Zakharova. And then understand why she's prima ballerina assoluta.
@@emanuelebabici Sweetheart you could have saved yourself the grand explanation of why you believe Svetlana is a prima! No one ever said she wasn't! She is but there are primas and there is a prima of the primas! Nunez is that! And as far as Svetlana being a representation of past Russian ballerinas and training that isn't quite true is it! She is however a representative of the ones who are - members of the new and improved Russian training. Sorry to say many of them lack musically and sound like horses when they run across the stage and let's not blame it on the Gaynor Minden pointe shoes! Which, my wife wore who has the highest extensions and hyperextended legs and feet to die for next to Ms. Guillem and she never made a sound like the true ballerinas were known for like Ms. Fracci you mentioned and others from that period! Svetlana is very much appreciated but she is simply not on par with Dame Nunez! That's my opinion and you ranting on about her being as beautiful as she is and she is, is not going to change my opinion, one bit! Let it rest!
@Emanuele Babici Is she a prima ballerina assoluta? She's a La Scala étoile, which is assoluta, right? I dislike this trend (undeniable) of constantly saying she's crap with no basis. Zakharova is an undeniably great ballerina. But she is not old fashioned. She is the style of 10 years ago, which is slowly changing today. But not pure Vaganova. Why don't you ask @John Hall or @Galina Yepanchina or even @John Clifford here on RUclips? They can tell you what pure Vaganova style is. And I'm sure since you're so knowledgeable you can find someone in real life who knows all about such things. And Aurora gets married. To a prince. Getting married doesn't make her a queen. Guillem did turn ballet into the overextended, hyperextended, hyper thin trend. That's why I dislike her (yes, I don't like Sylvie Guillem, and I'm not afraid to say it). Zakharova is much more than extensions and feet. I mean, if that's all she was, I can be more famous, because my feet are better and I can get my legs even higher. And Núñez is very classical. Not really pure English style, but she isn't really English trained, she went to the Royal Ballet School for a year.
@@anastasialenkova-molchalin5874 Can you read and do you not comprehend? Or are you simply trying to lecture someone who is only writing the truth? Svetlana is a marvelous ballerina and artist. She is a prima but I still stand by what I wrote! Please do not address me further! It is pointless! We both see things differently and that is okay. Don't let this cause you to have nightmares! You have a wonderful life! Okay. Man...if I knew what I was writing was going to get your undies in a wad I wouldn't have written anything! Of course I'm kidding!
Zakharova and Hallberg look aristocratic as they should in this role. Nunez simply looks old and no matter how good she is she is not for this role, Muntagirov is as always dull.
I’m sure I’m biased because of my heritage and training but I didn’t even pay attention on Marienela…. I definitely think she’s overrated but again different strokes for different folks. 🇷🇺
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks!
Thank you so much for your support, we're glad you enjoyed this video 🥰❤️🩰
thank you for doing this!!! It was my dream to see the dancers in split screen with synchronized music, and you realized it. Anticipate more!
Wow, that's so great 😍 Feel free to let us know if there are other dreams about ballet we could realize, we would happy to do so 🌟
Nunez and Muntagirov are perfection for me here, and they take more risks (beautifully!) by opting for the fish dives. Every movement breathes throughout its entire extent. You could freeze it at any point and their lines would be harmonious. Plenty of genuine chemistry between them and no emotions plastered on as an afterthought.
Dame Nella looks light as feather and steady as a rock. 😍
Nuñez is such a wonderful dancer. I couldn’t peel my eyes from her to look at the other couple.
Núñez and Muntagirov are wonderful! Thank you!
They are both so beautiful, yet with very different styles. Nuñez reminded me of Fonteyn with her joy, ease and purity of line. Zakharova was lyrical and gorgeous. Maybe I'd give the edge to Nuñez - Muntagirov just because they had great chemistry as a couple, harmonious lines and better choreography (fish dives!).
Fonteyn was the comparison I was making, but then this is the quintessence of English style even though it was staged originally by Sergeyev lol! Even with Zakharova on the other side of the split screen, I can't take my eyes off Nunez!
J'adore la perfection de Nunez et Muntagirov mais la beauté de Zakharova et Hallberg et la perfection de leur danse pour moi est meilleur
Великолепная Захарова!!! Манера, хрустальные движения!! Прекрасно!!! Браво! Брависсимо!)
Я не специалист, мне показалось, что эта хореография была более суетливой, и Захарова отчаянно пыталась попасть во все эти движения, во все ноты. Молодец, попала, но мне аж жалко ее стало. И эта шапочка ужасно раздражала, как будто танцевала не Аврора, а Ния.
I would love to see David and Nela dance the Bolshoi choreography together. To me that would be perfection!
My preference is nearly always for Nunez - she has an extra element of grace. Beyond that I'm no judge of skill. But the costumes and set of the other pair are wonderful.
Nuñez y Muntagirov son mis favoritos no podía dejar de mirarlos, Zaharova y Hallberg no se ven tan compenetrados en estos roles.
I had to watch this video twice because at about the 15th second i concentrated mainly on the left side of a screen. I did glance two or three times to the right (что они там суетятся?), but always returned to Nunez and Muntagirov's performance. After the second watch i understood these couples are dancing different scenes, different moods. The left is a love scene between two people, gentle Aurora, like she is just awake and realized that she is falling in love, and the right is a showing her partner and, mainly, herself off to others at the ball, where Aurora is more flirtatious, young and joyful. I liked the gentle version better.
Wow this is a so interesting interpretation, thank you for sharing 🙏
I love this pas de deux. Thank you for posting this. I certainly prefer Núñez and Muntagirov in this. Núñez portrays Aurora beautifully, and Muntagirov is wonderful as Désiré (also called Florimund). Zakharova, in my opinion, was very exaggerated, and Hallberg was just dull. Thank you, once again, for this video.
Glad you enjoyed the video 🙏 thank you! 😊
The side by side works so well here, I kinda want to see it staged that way with four dancers!
Good idea 😍
Zakharova is so charming and seducing . And Hallberg so Dignified (although dancing with an open mouth doesn’t help). With them We feel in a big event, a royal and public wedding.
there is a special nervousness and grandeur (that the coziness of the RB couple lacks, it is more like an old couple reviving good moments).
It just feels as if Muntigarov and Nunez are more of a team, more in sync and dependant on each other. The other dancers just seem more distant.
Both, Beautiful Bravo💕💕🌷🌷🌼🌼👐👐
Zacharova is my favorite of All time🕊
I didn't realize a lot of the differences till I saw them side by side. I have to admit at 2:03 I've never liked the portage as much as the supported penchee/4th front (or whatever that move is), and I will always prefer the fish dives to the fall, although I know the fish dives weren't in the original choreography. I'm guessing the music track was laid over the video so both kind of "fit" the dancing. That said, wow! does the choreography fit the music differently between RB and Bolshoi even when the couples are doing essentially the same steps! Nunez at 4:37 delivered all I've ever wanted out of an attitude to arabesque balance, and I wish (IIRC) she had utilized this slow, controlled, and above all PERFECT transition in her Rose Adagio. Hard to watch this as a split screen because you literally don't know where to look when 4 such superb dancers are dancing at the same time. Can you do a split screen with the rest of this pdd, or at least with the male solo and coda because Hallberg and Muntigirov? Lovely, and thank you for posting. It's a nice reminder that Russia has more to offer than warmongering!
Согласна, а о войне так прямо в точку!
Both are beautiful. But I LOVE Aurélie Dupont and Manuel Legris (Opera de Paris) version. They are perfect.
Yesss 😍 I guess that's one of the best renditions. So clean and regal
I love them too!! And I also find great Diana Vishneva and Roberto Bolle
Royal Ballet choreography is perfect. Too much action/distraction in the Bolshoi version.
Muntagirov is such a wonderful partner, he always looks as though his chief delight in life is dancing with his partner.
I'm a simple creature; I see Zakharova, I click 💖
Same with Nunez here!
Svetlana is the real Princess Aurora, I like her tenderness, she is the best.
So I LOVE Nunez as Aurora but Fumi is my all time fave Aurora! I also love watching Svetlana dance Aurora because it forces the tenderness out of her! It’s nice to see her with a softer, bubbly, stage presence than the typical ice queen. I mean that with endearment.
Love Marianela and Vadim!!!
Захарова - Звезда . Утонченная, аристократичная . Культура в каждом движении .
I can never find a video of Svetlana zakharova without people spewing hate. Sad. Am I the only one who prefers Svetlana?
I prefer Nunez in pretty much everything.
Nunez-Muntagirov are peaches and cream: her port de bras! Zakharova-Hallberg are sugar candies: hard and brittle. I love nuanced and dreamy sweetness of peachy dessert.
I love this comparison!
I think I prefer David Hallberg (one of the greatest dancers). However the choreography in the Royal Ballet version is cleaner, more authentic and more challenging. Some iconic steps are sadly omitted in the Bolshoi version. This Royal Ballet version is largely the same choreography that Fonteyn danced - Fonteyn’s favorite role. Fonteyn is still revered at the RB as the iconic Aurora. To me Nela just looks too mature. Even though Fonteyn was older she looked like youthful. I find Nela to be a superb technician but she need a little bit of spontaneity. I’m not a huge fan of Zakharova but she brings a youthfulness to the role. Sadly it’s really hard to compare the two PDDs because the Bolshoi version is simplistic and a number of signature steps and poses are missing - not just the fish dives but some more subtle elements. To me Hallberg is the superior dancer and partner although both men are great. Nela has a chance to do more balances and penches, and opportunities to show her elegant lines. Other than Fonteyn whose lines were incomparable, Darcey Bussell was an amazing Aurora,
There is no comparison. Russian school is the best ever. And look at the proportions of the body. Zaharovas body and feet are amazing Although she cannot preferred jumps at all. She does the technical imitation of them
Can you explain your last sentence?
@@minissa2009 Zaharova does not perform the ballon she imitates it with the technique.You’re supposed to be sort of “freeze in the air” The shorter the legs are the easier it is to perform jumps in the air. When your legs are too long you kind of get tangled in them. But she has great technique so she uses her technique to substitute for her lack of natural jump
振り付けやテクニックはよくわからないけど、コスチューム的には右側のほうが好き。なぜかというと、白い髪の毛のカツラに、スカートのデザインやジャケットなどがちゃんとロココのデザインになっているからなのだ。「眠れる森の美女」はフランスがメインで、フランス宮廷ぽくないとだめなんだな。たぶん眠る前は、ルイ13世の時代の衣装で、100年たってから、姫が目覚めたあとは、ロココデザインってのが、時代の差があってよい。普通のドレスだと、どこの宮廷か、時代がいつかなんてぜんぜんわからない。100年差の演出ができてないんだよー。
Dame Nunez sweats musicality and phrasing perfection! And Svetlana?
Just wanna address the music is not synched with both performances for obvious reason. Go look at Zakharova's original video
The right side. Even the choreography is better.
Nunez ' s choreography is so much harder than Zakharava's , and she is amazing dancing it.
Both dances are very similar
???????
I think this is one of the roles that unsuit Svetlana the most, I can't understand why people keep praising her Aurora.
To me, her Aurora looks sweet. It would be better if she had toned down her extensions a little bit
@@dulcinean916 Yes, I agree. I think that's exactly what I don't like about her in this role
However, I must agree with you that Zakharova is not suitable for this role, I prefer her in more lyrical role such as Nikiya. My 2 favorite princess Aurora are Novikova and Somova.
Throwing hate towards Svetlana has become a trend since a couple years. And the worst part is the disrespect you show towards her work. I do not say anything about Nunez, her qualities are stunning. I do however want to point out that Zakharova is now heavily criticized for the sake of it, because she's an old fashion ballerina. Sylvie Guillem was the one who turned ballet into gymnastics but no-one dares to say anything about it. Zakharova on the other hand amazed thousands of people with her art and her serious work. I've always been amazed by her mostly for her port de bras, expression and way of moving, that includes but goes way over the extensions. There are millions of people with Zakharova's body in the world, but there is only 1 Svetlana. The serious work she put into ballet for her entire life is there and should not be discredited. The true passion and artistry she has shall not be diminished by any means.
You talk about sleeping beauty being about pure classical lines. Well Sleeping beauty is a RUSSIAN ballet and Zakharova expresses the absolute perfection of the vaganova russian technique. She does everything clean and precise, exactly the way it's supposed to be. She raised her legs high only in the 3rd part and in 1 ecarté, and her dancing expresses the grandiosity of Russian ballet. Her elegance is beyond comparison, elegance due to her royal movement and to the clean, precise movements. Nunez is more modern, has smooth strong technique, which is more appreciated now in 2022, but theoretically Zakharova's sharp, and yet light movements fit the historical meaning of the ballet the most. I agree that she is very long, which does not help for this role, but I also want to point out that this is 3rd act and Aurora is already basically a queen. Her journey ks towards the and, and she has to act royal. It's different from the act 1 princess, and Zakharova gives the royalty amazingly.
Last but not least, Nunez' movement is again very modern, she conveys a whole more complex physicality in her movement which is typical both of modern ballet and English technique in general. This is very appreciated nowadays but has nothing to do with the classical tradition. And if you talk about pure lines Nunez may NOT be an example. She's an example of perfection and strength, but in a modern way. If you want to see the purity of the lines look at Carla Fracci or Aurelie Dupont. Or go look at any russian ballerina and then come back to Zakharova. And then understand why she's prima ballerina assoluta.
Emanuele Babici Zakharova holds a special place in my heart. She might be not be the best Aurora, the best Kitri I have ever seen but I love her because she is the one and only Zakharova in history. And thank you for your clarification , I could understand the reason now !
Пора уже пересмотреть руские растяжки Вагин. балерин и гимнастику гениталий балерунов. Картинка. Вауууу Е. На сцене под аплодисменты
The role is one of pure classical technique and Nunez cannot be beaten here. She has the pure classical line, Svetlana is hyper extending everything and it does not fit here, at all.
Throwing hate towards Svetlana has become a trend since a couple years. And the worst part is the disrespect you show towards her work. I do not say anything about Nunez, her qualities are stunning. I do however want to point out that Zakharova is now heavily criticized for the sake of it, because she's an old fashion ballerina. Sylvie Guillem was the one who turned ballet into gymnastics but no-one dares to say anything about it. Zakharova on the other hand amazed thousands of people with her art and her serious work. I've always been amazed by her mostly for her port de bras, expression and way of moving, that includes but goes way over the extensions. There are millions of people with Zakharova's body in the world, but there is only 1 Svetlana. The serious work she put into ballet for her entire life is there and should not be discredited. The true passion and artistry she has shall not be diminished by any means.
You talk about sleeping beauty being about pure classical lines. Well Sleeping beauty is a RUSSIAN ballet and Zakharova expresses the absolute perfection of the vaganova russian technique. She does everything clean and precise, exactly the way it's supposed to be. She raised her legs high only in the 3rd part and in 1 ecarté, and her dancing expresses the grandiosity of Russian ballet. Her elegance is beyond comparison, elegance due to her royal movement and to the clean, precise movements. Nunez is more modern, has smooth strong technique, which is more appreciated now in 2022, but theoretically Zakharova's sharp, and yet light movements fit the historical meaning of the ballet the most. I agree that she is very long, which does not help for this role, but I also want to point out that this is 3rd act and Aurora is already basically a queen. Her journey ks towards the and, and she has to act royal. It's different from the act 1 princess, and Zakharova gives the royalty amazingly.
Last but not least, Nunez' movement is again very modern, she conveys a whole more complex physicality in her movement which is typical both of modern ballet and English technique in general. This is very appreciated nowadays but has nothing to do with the classical tradition. And if you talk about pure lines Nunez may NOT be an example. She's an example of perfection and strength, but in a modern way. If you want to see the purity of the lines look at Carla Fracci or Aurelie Dupont. Or go look at any russian ballerina and then come back to Zakharova. And then understand why she's prima ballerina assoluta.
@@emanuelebabici You've copied and pasted this a few times, but I'll respond. It's not throwing hate that Svetland just doesn't compare to Nunez as she just doesn't.
Nunez does have a pure classical line, her technique is more classical than Svetlana, on one hand you even admit she is in the style of Sylvie, which is a more modern style, so you agree there.
Anyway, just because Svetlana is Russian does not mean she has inherited their old school technique. You look at the arabesque, Nunez is in the absolute perfect shape, the line is pure. Nothing is ever forced from her or pushed too far and that's ballet.
What is she meant to do, bend her knees and get injured? If you have hyperextention, that's it, can't be changed. Just as straight knees can't.
@@Emmareads15 yes I have copied and pasted because I didn't have 4 hours to write specifically to each of you. I apologize for that.
It does not make sense to try and find who is more pure. Expecially since we don't even know well how pure original classical ballet looked like.
I am the first to really appreciate Nunez' strong technique and preciseness in her work, but that's what I call modern technique. There's the original ballet, if which we do not have footage, then the gradual evolution through Ksessinskaja, Pavlova, Plisetskaja, Makarova, Fracci (sorry for not mentioning all of them) until Sylvie Guillem, who "opened" the era of extensions and physical qualities, and then it goes further with many ballerinas who value strength and clean technique. If you think Guillem is modern you're very far off.
However, I do not agree that Nunez has no rivals. For instance, her so called "perfection" takes away from the unicity that other ballerinas have. Whenever I see her dancing, I see Marianela Nunez and not the character she's portraying. Which works while she's really good, but you can collect very unique interpretation of each role from different ballerinas. Then you can call Nunez versatile, but not unique
@@emanuelebabici If you believe that Nunez and her perfect technique diminish her, then you really have never seen her dance. The fact she has such a perfect technique allows her to be free and capture every nuance within a dance, you can even see it here with her eyes and facial expressions throughout, they are never set to one thing. She's extremely emotive.
Anyway. I'm out.
Russian ballet is well performed only in Russia.
All eyes were on Zakharova. Nunez was a bore. The Bolshoi choreography was much more challenging and exciting.
Sorry...but I am only 53 seconds in and I have to write this: Svetlana is lovely of course but when it comes to comparing her with Dame Nunez it isn't really worth it! Even with that incredible facility she has she simply lacks all of what Nunez has and that is not me being biased...it is what it is! If they were to ever have a dance off and they won't, Svetlana would have to leave the stage early! I'm not trying to be nasty or shady but come on! That might be the next great reality show...divas out dancing divas!
I agree, they don't sit on the same level, Nunez is pure classical ballet, every line, every step is of the true essence of the art form. Svetlana is just nowhere near Nunez's very high bar.
Completely different leagues here.
Throwing hate towards Svetlana has become a trend since a couple years. And the worst part is the disrespect you show towards her work. I do not say anything about Nunez, her qualities are stunning. I do however want to point out that Zakharova is now heavily criticized for the sake of it, because she's an old fashion ballerina. Sylvie Guillem was the one who turned ballet into gymnastics but no-one dares to say anything about it. Zakharova on the other hand amazed thousands of people with her art and her serious work. I've always been amazed by her mostly for her port de bras, expression and way of moving, that includes but goes way over the extensions. There are millions of people with Zakharova's body in the world, but there is only 1 Svetlana. The serious work she put into ballet for her entire life is there and should not be discredited. The true passion and artistry she has shall not be diminished by any means.
You talk about sleeping beauty being about pure classical lines. Well Sleeping beauty is a RUSSIAN ballet and Zakharova expresses the absolute perfection of the vaganova russian technique. She does everything clean and precise, exactly the way it's supposed to be. She raised her legs high only in the 3rd part and in 1 ecarté, and her dancing expresses the grandiosity of Russian ballet. Her elegance is beyond comparison, elegance due to her royal movement and to the clean, precise movements. Nunez is more modern, has smooth strong technique, which is more appreciated now in 2022, but theoretically Zakharova's sharp, and yet light movements fit the historical meaning of the ballet the most. I agree that she is very long, which does not help for this role, but I also want to point out that this is 3rd act and Aurora is already basically a queen. Her journey ks towards the and, and she has to act royal. It's different from the act 1 princess, and Zakharova gives the royalty amazingly.
Last but not least, Nunez' movement is again very modern, she conveys a whole more complex physicality in her movement which is typical both of modern ballet and English technique in general. This is very appreciated nowadays but has nothing to do with the classical tradition. And if you talk about pure lines Nunez may NOT be an example. She's an example of perfection and strength, but in a modern way. If you want to see the purity of the lines look at Carla Fracci or Aurelie Dupont. Or go look at any russian ballerina and then come back to Zakharova. And then understand why she's prima ballerina assoluta.
@@emanuelebabici Sweetheart you could have saved yourself the grand explanation of why you believe Svetlana is a prima! No one ever said she wasn't! She is but there are primas and there is a prima of the primas! Nunez is that! And as far as Svetlana being a representation of past Russian ballerinas and training that isn't quite true is it! She is however a representative of the ones who are - members of the new and improved Russian training. Sorry to say many of them lack musically and sound like horses when they run across the stage and let's not blame it on the Gaynor Minden pointe shoes! Which, my wife wore who has the highest extensions and hyperextended legs and feet to die for next to Ms. Guillem and she never made a sound like the true ballerinas were known for like Ms. Fracci you mentioned and others from that period! Svetlana is very much appreciated but she is simply not on par with Dame Nunez! That's my opinion and you ranting on about her being as beautiful as she is and she is, is not going to change my opinion, one bit! Let it rest!
@Emanuele Babici
Is she a prima ballerina assoluta? She's a La Scala étoile, which is assoluta, right?
I dislike this trend (undeniable) of constantly saying she's crap with no basis. Zakharova is an undeniably great ballerina.
But she is not old fashioned. She is the style of 10 years ago, which is slowly changing today. But not pure Vaganova. Why don't you ask @John Hall or @Galina Yepanchina or even @John Clifford here on RUclips? They can tell you what pure Vaganova style is. And I'm sure since you're so knowledgeable you can find someone in real life who knows all about such things.
And Aurora gets married. To a prince. Getting married doesn't make her a queen.
Guillem did turn ballet into the overextended, hyperextended, hyper thin trend. That's why I dislike her (yes, I don't like Sylvie Guillem, and I'm not afraid to say it).
Zakharova is much more than extensions and feet. I mean, if that's all she was, I can be more famous, because my feet are better and I can get my legs even higher.
And Núñez is very classical. Not really pure English style, but she isn't really English trained, she went to the Royal Ballet School for a year.
@@anastasialenkova-molchalin5874 Can you read and do you not comprehend? Or are you simply trying to lecture someone who is only writing the truth? Svetlana is a marvelous ballerina and artist. She is a prima but I still stand by what I wrote! Please do not address me further! It is pointless! We both see things differently and that is okay. Don't let this cause you to have nightmares! You have a wonderful life! Okay. Man...if I knew what I was writing was going to get your undies in a wad I wouldn't have written anything! Of course I'm kidding!
Сцена верчу верчу. Наколоть хочу Нае. Зрителя. Вот это сам. Цы
Zakharova and Hallberg look aristocratic as they should in this role. Nunez simply looks old and no matter how good she is she is not for this role, Muntagirov is as always dull.
Svetlana as aurora!!!!!!!!
I’m sure I’m biased because of my heritage and training but I didn’t even pay attention on Marienela…. I definitely think she’s overrated but again different strokes for different folks. 🇷🇺