DVD : Verdi - Macbeth (The Metropolitan Opera HD Live Series) |
|
|
see more
Rating:  - * Powerful acting and superb orchestra work overcome the vocal inadequacies of this \"Macbeth\" from The Met ... In reviewing the Barcelona Opera DVD in which Maria Guleghina also appears as Lady Macbeth, I've already expressed my view (not shared by everyone here) that "Macbeth" is one of Verdi's underappreciated operas. Forgive me if I quote what I said there rather than rewrite it: "Verdi took great source material and used it to compose an opera with choruses that range from spooky (the witches) to weary and heartbreaking (the people of Scotland); arias for Lady Macbeth with vocal leaps and pyrotechnics that are Mozartian in difficulty; a great marital spat duet in which Lady M's diabolical hold over her husband is revealed; a final aria for the title character that garners sympathy for him, cold-blooded murderer though he is. The score is taut; not a wasted note." As in her Barcelona Opera performance, Guleghina's intensity and utter commitment to the role go a long way to make up for her vocal difficulties. She struggles with the coloratura requirements of the role and is sometimes sloppy in her execution of the music, allowing her fiery acting to interfere with her singing. Verdi said he didn't want a Lady Macbeth with a beautiful voice, but that didn't mean he wanted one without discipline. (Listen to a Callas CD of Lady Macbeth's arias to hear that perfect combination of "ugliness" and discipline that Verdi was looking for in Lady M's voice.) But despite Guleghina's vocal shortcomings, hers is a Lady Macbeth that will be seared in your memory long after the opera is over; such is the power of her stage presence. Zeljko Lucic does a fine job as Macbeth, although his performance is not as good as that of Carlos Alvarez in the Barcelona Opera production. Alvarez has a deeply mature, burnished baritone voice and creates a more nuanced Macbeth. Lucic's voice is rather generic and dry, although (as is the case with Guleghina) his vocal inadequacies are compensated for by strong acting. By the end of the opera, Lucic has turned Macbeth into a tragic figure. John Relyea (who seems to be in almost every Met production these days) has a powerful deep bass-baritone voice. He excels in Banquo's aria. He may be kept from starring roles due to his stiff demeanor onstage and an irritating tendency to sing out of the side of his mouth. It's a treat to see James Levine at the podium, conducting with great energy and precision right from the opening notes of the overture. The orchestra responds in kind, making Levine and his musicians one of the highlights of the production. I liked the updated 20th Century setting, reflected in the sets and costumes. After all, Shakespeare's play is still one of the best political thrillers ever written. It's timeless: the masses suffer while the powerful plot and scheme. If you love this early Verdi opera as I do, then I highly recommend this production despite its shortcomings. Rating: - * A Surprise Production ... I must admit at the onset that I had no intention of seeing, let alone buying this set, but the local PBS station KCET broadcast it and since I was not planning an outing I stayed in and watched it. I should say at the outset I have only seen this opera twice on stage, with San Francisco,1955 (Borkh and Weede--an under used and utilized singer) and in Vienna in 1972 with Christa LUdwig and Kostas Paskalis, one of the great evenings at the opera).Of course I owned the Verret performance and had heard the EMI edition of Callas. It is best to draw a veil over the Suliotus and the second Verret recordings. A friend lent me a VHS of the Glyndebourne performance with Paskalis and Barstow. I don't hesitate to state that in my pantheon of great performances this DVD is still the leader of the pack in spite of shortcomings and elements that can be criticized. But on to the DVD at hand. First off I had great reservations about the Lady. I was aware that the "bel canto" elements of the vocal line were beyond her capacities so it came as no surprise that parts of the Brindisi were smudged as it were; this occurred elsewhere but then at times she could surprise you and bring it off. What she did have was a committment and involvement that was absolute. Considering that she is not in the first flush of youth and that she has been singing a fairly heavy diet of spinto and dramatic roles she has more voice that I would have expected. At the time of her training in Russia I have no doubt that she was not exposed and trained in the kind of singing that was common in 19th century Italy (It doesn't appear to be taught now there either.) I first heard her Lisa in the Maryinsky's Pique Dame. Not terribly exciting, but the overall performance was dull. I was shocked to read that she was going to sing Abiagile in Nabucco, your basic voice killer role. My recollection is that she was ill that Saturday and Susan Neves deputised; I remember turning in late and and not knowing of the replacement was stunned; here was a very good voice. Of course in true Met fashion Ms. Neves has not returned. But the fact that she was singing the role at all seemed to augur for a short career. Well I do have to eat my words: she is not the second coming nor a contender for the greatest living spinto but she made the time I spent with her more than satisfying. Her partner Zeljko Lucic was totally unknown to me. I seem to recollect that he was a substitute, but I could be off base. Considering the puacity of Verdi baritones he more than filled the bill. At timess the tone could be dry and unresonant, but again there was no gainsaying his devotion to the role and his qualification to sing Macbeth. No, it was not in the same league as Paskalis but then there is not exactly an abundance of this kind of voice. Levine and the Met orchestra were supberb, the chorus as well. The production has more than a whiff of regie about it (what were the chairs doing in the sleepwalking scene? It's true that she was given support but terribly unnecessary). The witches appear as mid twentieth century "demons" and the requisite leather coat/jacket was worn by Macbeth. Niggling points that don't detract from a positive addtion to the discography (can I use that word with regard to DVDs?) of this opera. Rating:  - * Save your money! ... This was one of the most disappointing of all the Met broadcasts. I love this opera, but this performance was extremely disappointing with lackluster singing and unimaginative sets. Rating: - * Verdi's weirdest opera ... For the record, I'm writing this review without having watched the actual DVD, which hasn't been released yet and which I don't plan to buy, I'm basing it solely on having seen the HDTV broadcast at a local cineplex several months ago. Under those circumstances, perhaps I have no right to write a review in the first place, and I'm sure some readers will write comments telling me this. So be it. I'm not reviewing the DVD, I'm reviewing the production and the opera, which are the same as what I saw in the theater. Even though I am a huge fan of Verdi, and the Met, and James Levine, I found this performance to be nonessential viewing. I admit, Macbeth is far from being my favorite Verdi opera. The main reason, Verdi wrote this during his early period, while he was still adhering to many of the elements of bel canto style(at the same time reshaping them into his own unique sound, sure, but at this point he hadn't quite achieved a total transition). Well, bel canto, a rigidly structured, florid, and, let's face it, occasionally shallow style of music is a poor match for vintage Bard, particularly his darkest play. I'm convinced that if Verdi had waited a few more years and written an opera of Macbeth around the time of Luisa Miller, Stiffelio and Rigoletto, he would have given us a great opera. If he'd waited even longer and done it near the end of his middle period, or even in his late period, he might have produced his greatest masterpiece. There is evidence to support this. He actually did revive the opera around the time of La Forza del Destino, and it is the revised version that is generally performed nowadays. The new music(the battle scene, the ballet, Lady Macbeth's act two aria) is probably the strongest music in the piece, it is certainly more mature than the rest of the opera, more suited to the menacing mood of the play. It's a shame Verdi didn't compose a completely new Macbeth during this time, a loss, in my opinion, as great as his failure to produce a King Lear, but that's how it goes. What we're left with is more a curiosity than a great opera, a weird, unsettled attempt to challenge the conventions of the time, adapt them to heady and brooding material that demands a more sophisticated brand of music. The attempt is largely unsuccessful, but still quite entertaining when taken in context, and in the right mood. Given that this is a rather eccentric opera, something of a misfit in the Verdi canon, a transition between his boisterous, unapologetic bel canto hoe-downs(Nabucco, Ernani) and his more thoughtful and mature work, then a camp approach might be just the right way to present the material, and if so I should really like this production. But for some reason I don't. If you like the idea of the witches stomping their feet while dressed as bag ladies, if you like the idea of Banquo strutting around with a machine gun, wearing an artillery belt, if you like the idea of Lady Macbeth's boobs practically hanging out of her sagging wardrobe(well, okay, I'll give you that one), then this Macbeth is for you. Personally, the whole thing struck me as silly, even more silly than Lady Macbeth shrieking about summoning demons from hell in a shrill, manic cabaletta, or she and her husband plotting a murder in perfect bel canto harmony. Maybe that's the problem. The opera is over the top and unwieldy enough on its own, it doesn't need the embellishments of a stage director and set designer and wardrobe head trying to prove how clever they are. This is dumbed down Verdi, not to mention Shakespeare, and I'll politely take a pass. Musically, this is a good performance, though not legendary. Maria Guleghina's performance as Lady Macbeth(without even taking into consideration her lack of underwear) will do nothing to dispel the controversy that surrounds this tempestuous singer. Either you love her wild abandon, her primitive shrieks, the feisty way she attacks a role with spirit and venom, or you don't. I enjoyed her as Abigaille in the Met's DVD of Nabucco, and I enjoyed her here. The other standout performance comes courtesy of John Relyea as Banquo, who sadly bites the dust midway through the second act and only reappears as a non-singing spectre. Relyea is one of those Met stalwarts, reveling in the smaller, non-glamorous roles and making them his own(even his Nightwatchman in Meistersinger is distinctive). Maybe someday he'll snag some of the meatier bass-baritone roles, but if not he'll still have a stellar career to look back on. The whole cast is good. And Levine seems to be having fun with the score - even if it isn't among Verdi's more substantial, Macbeth still offers a certain freshness, a diversity of musical ideas in which to luxuriate and indulge. I was disappointed, however, that the usually cut-resistant maestro chose to do without the ballet, which was part of the revised version and ranks among my favorite musical moments in the whole opera. This production is worth seeing, once, but, for me at least, it isn't worth spending the money, especially with far superior Met productions from this past season being released simultaneously(Manon Lescaut, Peter Grimes, La Boheme). It's good to have the Met back on track in terms of regular broadcasts, and more plentiful DVD releases. It's also good to have another Macbeth on DVD option. I really wanted to love this: Verdi, the Met, Macbeth, Levine. Sorry, but it doesn't quite make the cut. |
