|
Post by kawaiidragonfoe821 on Apr 13, 2006 10:08:22 GMT -5
Yeah it did turn out to be cocaine, but in the beginning, Barek said that 'it might be resin from the violin strings' or something to that effect. Yes I caught the terrible 'conducting' the maestro was doing, geeze! I too a better job in my car listening to the Nutcracker Suite then he did.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Apr 18, 2006 10:07:54 GMT -5
I was talking about this episode with a friend at work. When he watched it, he said he was sure it must have been based on a real case from the 1980's where a musician at the Metropolitan Opera went missing during an intermission and was tossed from the roof down into an air shaft and wasn't found until the next day. He said it got a lot of publicity at the time. Anybody know anything more about the real story?
|
|
|
Post by Patcat on Apr 18, 2006 10:22:23 GMT -5
I believe it happened in the early 90s, and, as is often the case with cases based on real life, real life wasn't quite as complicated. The killer was one of the Met's crew--as I recall he had a criminal record that the Met apparently didn't check on--and he raped and killed the young woman. The case did reveal that the crew at the Met was in the habit of using drugs on the roof of the building.
Patcat
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Apr 18, 2006 14:17:18 GMT -5
Thanks Patcat. Very interesting to know where the inspiration, if not all the twists, came from. I also think "fearsome Phil" might be based on the former conductor at La Scala, Ricardo Muti. He was booted out last year, after years and years as the maestro there. Apparently he was a real terror.
Also, there was a recent article in The New York Times about James Levine, the maestro at New York's Metropolitan Opera, and the article made a big deal about the fact that he's not a prima donna, not a tyrant, not a screamer. So maybe big ego maestros are a subculture within a subculture!
|
|
|
Post by kawaiidragonfoe821 on Apr 19, 2006 21:43:15 GMT -5
LOCIfan>> Yes that are, I can say from personal experience that its is a subculture. My maestro in HS was much like the one in this episode... terrible.
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Apr 20, 2006 10:49:37 GMT -5
kawaiidragonfoe, that's so interesting! If a HS maestro can be such a terror, can you imagine how awful a maestro in a pro opera company could be?! Must be something about giving a guy a stick to wave around....
|
|
|
Post by popularlibrary on Apr 20, 2006 17:19:33 GMT -5
With all the savvy musicians on this board, not to mention the admirers of the wonderful Stephanie Sengupta, why has no one commented on the very witty way the opera references were used in this episode?
The title was at least the third L&O reference to Don Giovanni (someone out there in L&Oland loves it), after its use in the Anti-thesis episode and the Mother Ship episode about a serial killer who calls himself Don Giovanni and gets caught because he owns over two dozen copies of the opera. Here it seems to have referred not only to the tragi-comic nature of the story (actually, Mozart said he thought DG was hilarious), but to our big bad conductor's sociopathic behavior in and out of the bedroom. Then SS happily reinforced the reference with the ME's humming of the equally sociopathic Duke of Mantua's aria "La donna e' mobile" (ie, "Women are fickle") from Rigoletto. Of course, fickle is the one thing the ladies in this episode are not.
The episode starts with a rehearsal of the mad scene from Lucia di Lammermoor, a work about a lady who turns mad and murderous from an enforced marriage and the curses of her beloved, and if that didn't give away what was coming, nothing could. The Lucia references were kept up throughout the episode, including a bit of the first act duet in which the unfortunate heroine and her beloved swear eternal fidelity. And our mad soprano is seen in her Lucia costume even later in the episode.
The ME also makes a pointed reference to a production of Aida, another sad tale of hopeless love, in which the heroine is forced, for patriotic reasons, to trick her lover into treason.
La Sengupta had a fine old time with all of this, and I think she deserves credit and some recognition.
BTW, Muti is hardly the only unholy terror of a conductor out there. One could add Von Karajan, Solti, Toscannini and a number of others. Verdi once commented the tyrannical conductors were a worse menace than egomaniacal sopranos.
Elena
|
|
|
Post by kawaiidragonfoe821 on Apr 20, 2006 17:47:38 GMT -5
Well... Opera has never been my thing.
|
|
|
Post by trisha on Apr 20, 2006 19:55:34 GMT -5
Mine either, so I thank you very much for bringing up these points, Elena
|
|
|
Post by LOCIfan on Apr 21, 2006 12:50:22 GMT -5
popularlibrary, thank you for your illuminating post! I don't know much about opera, but it's fascinating to see the layers and layers of meaning built into this episode, and it says something wonderful about the writer that the episode not only had meaning for opera fans, but was also accessible and enjoyable for those who know nothing of opera!
|
|
|
Post by janetcatbird on Apr 23, 2006 22:39:04 GMT -5
Elena, nice! I don't know enough opera to recognize, but for those interested, "Lucia de Lammermoor" was the opera Madame Bovary saw in Paris with one of her boytoys--I can't remember which. And if you know how Madame Bovary's story turned out, it's definitely meaningful. (Well what'd you expect in an opera, a happy ending?) Thanks so much for that relevant info! I watched this Saturday night, taping it so my parents can see Rogers (sniffle, Lennie, sorry). I noticed how during the final interrogation, Gillian kept touching Deakins for reassurance--his arm or hand--when pleading to know what was going on. Because he was there? Because she hadn't seen him as a threat like the detective or the prosecutor? As to Fearsome Phil's conducting--could that have been a goof in overdubbing? I think it's standard practice to lip-synch/fake instruments while filming, and then lay a nice clean recording over it. If he was waving his hands in time to an audio recording during filming, and they didn't synch up with the editing, that could explain it. Or Reinhardt could have been so overwhelmed in his process of evoking mood and emotion that he couldn't be bothered with something as rote and mundane as the beat. (I've sung for conductors who don't mark the beat, just wave or point or make circles. God-awful Booger to count, but I digress.) --Catbird PS: Again more firmly entrenched on second viewing: Brava to La Sengupta! And on a purely humorous note, Prairie Home Companion did a skit some years ago with Marvin and Mavis Smiley, a fictional bluegrass group (sung by Robin and Linda Williams) who will put out some very unusual records. Go here to listen to "Marvin and Mavis Smiley's DOWN HOME DIVA", classic opera hits done in the familiar bluegrass style. I peed my pants first I heard it. Enjoy! prairiehome.publicradio.org/programs/20010512/mavis.html
|
|
|
Post by kawaiidragonfoe821 on Apr 29, 2006 8:05:37 GMT -5
LOL I always loved watching Lenny's exchanges with Dr. Rogers, it always seemed they were trying to out-snark each other. ;D
|
|
|
Post by filmnoir5 on Apr 30, 2006 17:44:14 GMT -5
I believe Logan questioned the likelyhood of any of Gillian's tears being for her daughter. And I agree about this episode. It was a lot of fun This was one of the best episodes of the season and definitely the best with Logan/Barek. On USA Network they should pair this episode with Unrequited since they both had a bit of dark humor and were written by the same writer. I thought Julian Sands and Alice Krige were wonderful. I think they should make Rodgers a regular. This was one of her best episodes.
|
|
|
Post by Metella on Jun 26, 2006 15:11:07 GMT -5
I just got to watch this - I missed it when it was originally aired - so now am looking here for the first time.
Wonder if the writers gave a snicker when they wrote the line about fainting? Made me think of the fainting episodes VDO went through.
Fashion Experts - Clinton and Stacy say the no white after Labor day has been a thing of the past for decades. I think any rules like that are silly - does it look good? then wear it.
I did think this was an excellent episode - I could get the terror from some pampered diva who is now facing not just death - but total debilitation before that death - I can buy her getting so desperate she would murder. Murder a daughter is a stretch, but I can buy it.
I loved the scene where Phillip shows how disgusted he would be taking care of someone in so intimate a manner. I bet he will have to pay someone when he starts to need his own diapers changed. And where she still thinks he will take care of her until he mentions annulment. Great interplay and really rang true to the characters.
And the L&B questioning Philip for the first time .... when he verbally slammed Logan, B smirked - then looked like she wished she hadn't smirked when he gave her a similar verbal put down. Hilarious scene.
|
|
|
Post by janetcatbird on Aug 16, 2006 21:48:48 GMT -5
I did get my parents to watch this episode some time ago. They like Logan and don't mind Barek. Plus, they're fans of "24" so they knew Reinhardt as Bierko and were interested in seeing him in another role. They're not really fans--they absolutely refuse to watch D'Onofrio--but they sat for this one. And even casual viewers like them loved this episode, which ought to tell you something.
I had already told them about Rogers and Lennie, so they had been spoiled, but it gave them something to look forward to. Mom wished that they had Logan do more of a reaction, but really, is it that surprising? Sniffle--I must go listen to "The Fantasticks" now.
--Catbird
|
|