Janos Gereben <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Weirdly enough, that's just what I thought of Luhrmann's "Moulin Rouge" -
>weirdness, weirdness and not a drop to like.  And this from a lifelong fan
>of musicals, somebody as far from being a "club member" among operachniks
>as one can go.
>
>Why do I think he is a charlatan? Must be my weirdness.

 From Janos's comments elsewhere, it's unlikely that Janos would like
Baz's Boheme; but at the same time, that doesn't make this indiosyncratic
producer a charlatan (any more than it makes other theatrical lateral
thinkers like Brian Blessed or Ken Campbell charlatans).

To begin with:  he views the work as a theatrical entertainment rather
than merely an opera; so the singers can't simply stand in the middle
of the stage & make a big noise (they actually have to act a little); &
instead of simply placing a backdrop for song on stage, he created (in
Australia, at least) a lushly 50s teen angst set within which the musical
story can be told more effectively than simply with voice & music.  It's
been a popular staging with everyone - except those opera fans who seem
to view the form as a concert with funny clothes.

(Unlike, i have to agree, Moulin Rouge; which for all the hype seems to an
interesting idea to discuss but ineffective to experience)

Live in peace
[log in to unmask]
endeavour2 project <http://www.geocities.com/robtclements/endeavour2.html>