they are all wonderful in their own way. But for me, Legris is best in precision, technique, musicality ( the music seems to flow from him, rather than he to the music!), strength and grace. Plus I love his style- he has the smoldering energy of a leashed tiger, bursting into dance !
I don't like Nureyev's choreography but if I have to pick one dancer who made the best of it is Mathieu Ganio. He is elegant, graceful and noble. Nureyev looked heavy like a rock, sorry Rudi. If I had to pick the second it's Hilaire. My go to choreography for Sleeping Beauty is Grigorovich
It always seems that Nureyev felt a need to overstuff every moment of choreography, doesn't it? Like, not every count has to have beats and double rond de jambes, Rudi.
I bet you know who is no 1 with me! 😇😇 Ganio, Hilaire, Legris, Nureyev ( but I so admire his style and musicality) and Bolle. I like Bolle, and he is the first one I saw dance this .. But he gives nothing except his beautiful line.. Finger tips to toe tips). Hilaire was technically good but not as good as Legris, yet I rate him higher because he inhabits this character. Legris is wonderful as always, but he does not inhabit this character. And Ganio is just my idea of what this character should be. Sad, melancholy, beautiful, graceful, yearning, gorgeous line and musical but not as musical as Nureyev (thanks to Zoja for allowing me to see and appreciate this musicality in his worst performance). Tmi?? Oh well!!
Hard choice... No ideal Prince for me so far, but some good ones. Nureyev articulates too broadly, but I so like the shape at 0:32, it doesn't fit the character but I still like it. And he has the best arms of all. Legris channels Nureyev but is more restrained. What worked for Hilaire in the pas d'action doesn't in the variation, IMO, he is a very modern dancer. Bolle is still too big for me, it's like watching a marble tower marching on stage... but his technique is secure. Ganio has the advantage of being smaller and lighter than Bolle, and his technique is equally secure. His legs are actually too long for 19th century rep, but that's nit picking.
+ballet janie Mathieu is very young here, only 20, and imo at that age in male dancers legs are often what is seen before anything else, due to all that work that had gone into them during the training. Then later they map out the rest of their body and their face to project.
I meant more that often very young dancers only gradually balance the two halves of their body, and with the face and head expression developing the eye is attracted to both, so the legs do not seem so "long" even if they objectively are. Here Mathieu is imo perfect, although I actually prefer the interpretation of Legris and Nureyev, but because he is young the legs are almost the first noticeable thing whereas now he is seen in physical entirety. On a separate note, I find it interesting how some dancers have compensated for their various physical attributes. Some plain dancers become beautiful and short dancers can appear taller.
+oldoperafan I really meant his legs are _objectively_ longer than what is considered the classical body type, his facial expression didn't play a role. I also added that's nitpicking because _subjectively_ it doesn't matter to me, he has other attributes to compensate for it. I actually mentioned the legs just because the Prince in SB is the epitome of classical perfection and one expects, among other things, perfect classical proportions :) , and other dancers in this montage are more close in body type to the classical ideal.
I think it would be in poor taste to name or list the dancers I consider "short" because in this day of height-ism it is considered an affliction and almost an insult. And as for dancers who went from plain or even just student-goofy to expressive and interestingly beautiful, I would not ever publicly specifically refer to anyone. Most ballet audience can think of examples. Here I also want to point out that it never ceases to surprise me how many dancers look of a different size on stage compared to film, especially an amateur film, and in the context of the corps in the backfround. Usually, smaller and thinner on stage than on screen.
+Navarre Brixen Fateyev's aestetics turned Mariinsky into a hothouse of long, very thin dancers :( He has the right to do it but it doesn't follow that I have to like it. I agree that saying a dancer is small/short isn't an insult if the dancer is indeed so and if the context is factual. If a dance critic can afford to write in a major paper Daniel Ulbricht is short, why shouldn't yt users allowed to do the same? I bet only the dancer's overly sensitive fans perceive facts as insults, not the dancers themselves.
they are all wonderful in their own way. But for me, Legris is best in precision, technique, musicality ( the music seems to flow from him, rather than he to the music!), strength and grace. Plus I love his style- he has the smoldering energy of a leashed tiger, bursting into dance !
Thank you! Legris, Ganio, Nureyev (for musicality), Hilaire, Bolle.
Нуреев !👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Thank you! Bolle, Ganio, Legris, Hilaire, Nureev. :))
I don't like Nureyev's choreography but if I have to pick one dancer who made the best of it is Mathieu Ganio. He is elegant, graceful and noble. Nureyev looked heavy like a rock, sorry Rudi. If I had to pick the second it's Hilaire. My go to choreography for Sleeping Beauty is Grigorovich
It always seems that Nureyev felt a need to overstuff every moment of choreography, doesn't it? Like, not every count has to have beats and double rond de jambes, Rudi.
I bet you know who is no 1 with me! 😇😇
Ganio, Hilaire, Legris, Nureyev ( but I so admire his style and musicality) and Bolle. I like Bolle, and he is the first one I saw dance this .. But he gives nothing except his beautiful line.. Finger tips to toe tips). Hilaire was technically good but not as good as Legris, yet I rate him higher because he inhabits this character. Legris is wonderful as always, but he does not inhabit this character. And Ganio is just my idea of what this character should be. Sad, melancholy, beautiful, graceful, yearning, gorgeous line and musical but not as musical as Nureyev (thanks to Zoja for allowing me to see and appreciate this musicality in his worst performance). Tmi?? Oh well!!
😄😃😀 I am nothing if not consistent!! Be alert for a pm later today!!
I miss you Judith. ❤
Hard choice... No ideal Prince for me so far, but some good ones.
Nureyev articulates too broadly, but I so like the shape at 0:32, it doesn't fit the character but I still like it. And he has the best arms of all.
Legris channels Nureyev but is more restrained.
What worked for Hilaire in the pas d'action doesn't in the variation, IMO, he is a very modern dancer.
Bolle is still too big for me, it's like watching a marble tower marching on stage... but his technique is secure.
Ganio has the advantage of being smaller and lighter than Bolle, and his technique is equally secure. His legs are actually too long for 19th century rep, but that's nit picking.
+ballet janie Mathieu is very young here, only 20, and imo at that age in male dancers legs are often what is seen before anything else, due to all that work that had gone into them during the training. Then later they map out the rest of their body and their face to project.
I meant more that often very young dancers only gradually balance the two halves of their body, and with the face and head expression developing the eye is attracted to both, so the legs do not seem so "long" even if they objectively are. Here Mathieu is imo perfect, although I actually prefer the interpretation of Legris and Nureyev, but because he is young the legs are almost the first noticeable thing whereas now he is seen in physical entirety. On a separate note, I find it interesting how some dancers have compensated for their various physical attributes. Some plain dancers become beautiful and short dancers can appear taller.
+oldoperafan I really meant his legs are _objectively_ longer than what is considered the classical body type, his facial expression didn't play a role. I also added that's nitpicking because _subjectively_ it doesn't matter to me, he has other attributes to compensate for it.
I actually mentioned the legs just because the Prince in SB is the epitome of classical perfection and one expects, among other things, perfect classical proportions :) , and other dancers in this montage are more close in body type to the classical ideal.
I think it would be in poor taste to name or list the dancers I consider "short" because in this day of height-ism it is considered an affliction and almost an insult. And as for dancers who went from plain or even just student-goofy to expressive and interestingly beautiful, I would not ever publicly specifically refer to anyone. Most ballet audience can think of examples. Here I also want to point out that it never ceases to surprise me how many dancers look of a different size on stage compared to film, especially an amateur film, and in the context of the corps in the backfround. Usually, smaller and thinner on stage than on screen.
+Navarre Brixen Fateyev's aestetics turned Mariinsky into a hothouse of long, very thin dancers :( He has the right to do it but it doesn't follow that I have to like it.
I agree that saying a dancer is small/short isn't an insult if the dancer is indeed so and if the context is factual. If a dance critic can afford to write in a major paper Daniel Ulbricht is short, why shouldn't yt users allowed to do the same? I bet only the dancer's overly sensitive fans perceive facts as insults, not the dancers themselves.