Caballe Don Carlo DVD

[+ WilliamM]

I recommend highly Verdi's "Don Carlo" on DVD from 1984 (released in 2010) from Theatre Antique d'Orange.

Thomas Fulton conducts. The performers include Montserrat Caballe, Grace Bumbry, Giacomo Aragall, Renato Bruson and Simon Estes. Bumbry is well-know as Eboli; she is in prime form here.

 

I expected excellent sound, but not very good picture quality, so that was a welcome surprise. The big question, of course, is Caballe. There are very few Caballe DVDs of live opera performances. The wonderful "Norma' was filmed at the same venue with Caballe. But, I was still concerned...all the way through the first viewing. Caballe's stand-and-sing acting is far from what we are used to in present day opera DVDs. And once Caballe finds a spot to stand, that's it for a long, long time.

 

Quickly Montserrat Caballe won me over completely with her singing. She is a rare treasure, and received several very long ovations during the opera...all well-deserved. I am surprised that this DVD has received so little attention.

 

I knew the conductor and cast were first rate, and am not disappointed.

 

So if you like "Don Carlo," I enjoyed this version as much, if not more, than the others that are available, as good as various elements of each DVD may be for many. And who knows if another Caballe DVD of this quality will ever appear on DVD!

[+ Charlie]

I didn't realize Bumbry was still singing Eboli at that late date, after she had decided she really wanted to be a soprano. I saw her Eboli a dozen years earlier at the Met, and she certainly was fabulous then.

 

I always enjoyed listening to Caballe, but it wasn't always enjoyable to watch her. My most memorable moment watching her was in "Il Pirata" fairly early in her career (before she had made her Met debut): she held a note for so long at the end of an act that she fainted, and the curtain had to be held for a very long time before they could continue the performance.

[whipped guy]

In the 1980s I saw both Freni and Caballe' in Don Carlo at the MET. Freni sang well and looked and acted every inch the part of Elizabetta. One totally understood why Carlo would want to be with this woman. In contrast Caballe' just stood there like a frumpy bump on a log and sang... and sang.... but sang like an angel. Visually Carlo should have been thankful that daddy got the girl. However, it was absolutely the best performance of the part I have ever heard and ever hope to hear. Her "Tu che le vanita' " in the last act was pure heaven... and I almost didn't get to hear it. The MET did Don Carlo in three acts back then and during the scene change just before the aria I had to run out for a bathroom break. Of course the rule was once you leave you can't be readmitted into the auditorium. The usher guarding the door said I could not go back in. However, I decided to make a break for it as I doubted that he would cause a ruckus and disrupt the performance. I made a run for it and he never followed me in.

 

Since Charlie mentioned high notes, at some of those performances Caballe' held the final note at the very end of the piece forever and a day. I honestly don't remember if that was the case... but whether she did or not her performance left quite a lasting impression on me. Does she perform the same trick at the Orange staging as well?

 

Either way, thanks for the heads up on this DVD...

[+ WilliamM]

Since Charlie mentioned high notes, at some of those performances Caballe' held the final note at the very end of the piece forever and a day. I honestly don't remember if that was the case... but whether she did or not her performance left quite a lasting impression on me. Does she perform the same trick at the Orange staging as well?

 

Either way, thanks for the heads up on this DVD...

 

No high notes held for a long time. But, she is wonderful singing "Tu che le vanita," suddenly holding the stage in a way she had not earlier in the opera. She is singing in a huge outdoor theater. In an effort to stop the applause, Caballe does say "merci" to the audience. I wonder how many people in the theater were aware that she responded.

 

I also want to say that I bought the Rossini DVD, "Mose in Egitto," and, as expected, I enjoy the opera & staging. I had pneumonia in March, but that's no excuse for not thanking you for the recommendation...it has been in my mind.

[whipped guy]

WilliamM... No problem about the Mose' in Egitto... and glad that you enjoyed it. At any rate, that DVD of Mose' made me realize something... While I have always enjoyed Rossini's operas, I never really understood them... The controversial staging made me realize that his style was more universal than I had expected and that it was able to transcend the time and place during which it was composed...

 

Regarding the Don Carlo DVD, it is probably the perfect companion to the above mentioned DVD of Bellini's Norma from Orange in 1974... which DVD I have not watched in some time... Thanks for reminding me about it.

[operalover21]

I have to disagree somewhat here. I've had this on CD for a long time and mostly enjoyed but watching it was a real trial. It just feels so old and creaky. Very spoiled by today's production values even though I grew up on what is represented on this DVD. Also, I'll have to disagree that this is Bumbry "in her prime." Bumbry's "prime" was at least 10-15 years or more earlier. She is really worn by now, the past decade of singing soprano parts has taken a toll on her voice.

 

I must admit, as a theatrical experience, I think this is fairly tepid. I must admit I far prefer the Chatelet version with Alagna and others in French from a decade or more ago and the recent MET version by Hytner is far more involving dramatically.

[operalover21]

I have to disagree somewhat here. I've had this on CD for a long time and mostly enjoyed but watching it was a real trial. It just feels so old and creaky. Very spoiled by today's production values even though I grew up on what is represented on this DVD. Also, I'll have to disagree that this is Bumbry "in her prime." Bumbry's "prime" was at least 10-15 years or more earlier. She is really worn by now, the past decade of singing soprano parts has taken a toll on her voice.

 

I must admit, as a theatrical experience, I think this is fairly tepid. I must admit I far prefer the Chatelet version with Alagna and others in French from a decade or more ago and the recent MET version by Hytner is far more involving dramatically.

[+ WilliamM]

I have to disagree somewhat here. I've had this on CD for a long time and mostly enjoyed but watching it was a real trial. It just feels so old and creaky. Very spoiled by today's production values even though I grew up on what is represented on this DVD.

 

I must admit, as a theatrical experience, I think this is fairly tepid. I must admit I far prefer the Chatelet version with Alagna and others in French from a decade or more ago and the recent MET version by Hytner is far more involving dramatically.

 

We seem to be at odds on many things lately, operalover. I admit that I thought the DVD tepid also the first/second time, but not as I watched again and again. I have seen "Don Carlo" more often than any other opera (both at the the Met and in Paris). I am always involved, but never so much as watching this DVD. The reason is getting a chance to see and listen to Caballe. When she was singing at the Met, I was selecting operas based on the composer, not the casts. So I never saw Caballe in an opera at the Met or anywhere else. That alone might explain our different opinions.

 

Back to a two months old subject. You may remember that in March I saw "Parsifal" on HD on a Saturday, and in person at the Met four days later (March 5). I did not see the original conductor, so that made a difference. I also thought Jonas Kaufmann gave a weaker performance on March 5 than in the HD presentation. But, I enjoyed Act One much more because I could see the entire stage at the Met. To a lesser degree, that was also true of the other two acts. I envy you, seeing so many of the performances of "Parsifal" from an excellent seat.

 

Cheers, William

[operalover21]

We seem to be at odds on many things lately, operalover. I admit that I thought the DVD tepid also the first/second time, but not as I watched again and again. I have seen "Don Carlo" more often than any other opera (both at the the Met and in Paris). I am always involved, but never so much as watching this DVD. The reason is getting a chance to see and listen to Caballe. When she was singing at the Met, I was selecting operas based on the composer, not the casts. So I never saw Caballe in an opera at the Met or anywhere else. That alone might explain our different opinions.

 

Back to a two months old subject. You may remember that in March I saw "Parsifal" on HD on a Saturday, and in person at the Met four days later (March 5). I did not see the original conductor, so that made a difference. I also thought Jonas Kaufmann gave a weaker performance on March 5 than in the HD presentation. But, I enjoyed Act One much more because I could see the entire stage at the Met. To a lesser degree, that was also true of the other two acts. I envy you, seeing so many of the performances of "Parsifal" from an excellent seat.

 

Cheers, William

 

I saw Caballe a lot in the 1970s and early 1980s, mostly in Barcelona. She was a glorious singer but she couldn't act at all. Not once. She was all about the voice. There's nothing wrong with that. But I do think standards have changed and you can't get by on that alone anymore. Sutherland is another of those. Glorious voice, but very limited acting ability. I want -- indeed -- so much more from an opera performance these days. This Don Carlo -- which is my favorite Verdi opera -- doesn't do it for me. I watched it once and it was hard to get through (unless I was looking away!) and I will probably give it away ... it would be fine as a CD, but doesn't work for me as a DVD at all.

 

Parsifal. I saw the first 5 performances. I missed the ones with Asher Fisch. He's not my cup of tea and I was otherwise engaged anyway. I thought it one of the most glorious experiences at the MET in many years. For me, it's a perfect production and it got a perfect performance. Just contrast the dramatic possibilities with that tepid Don Carlo! Boggles the mind how much we've advanced in opera production. Weeks later, I'm still stunned by it all and I've watched the HD SIX more times since!!!!!

[whipped guy]

The only Caballe DVD I have in my collection is the Norma from Orange. I viewed a portion of it last evening and in all honesty I found nothing wrong with Caballe's acting.

 

The role of Norma is larger than life, the venue is larger than life, and the mistral which is certainly an integral part of this performance is larger than life as well. Intermingled in all of this is Caballe , who even if classified as simply large and immovable somehow fits perfectly into the performance.

 

I for one would rather watch this rather than any number of well acted performances of Bellini's opera that I have endured over the past 40 years.

 

I know that we expect more today. However, with such a mindset would Caballe or that gawky Dame from Down-under ever even have been given the opportunity of an audition? I have heard a recording of Sutherland's MET debut. I am not sure how she acted the part of Lucia that evening. However, many years ago I spoke with someone who was there and said that she looked nervous as all hell and was shaking like a leaf... Yet from the audience reaction they certainly knew and appreciated great singing when they my heard it.

 

I most definitely agree that today we want and expect more. However, at times looking for more in the acting department gives us less in the vocal department. As an example, I'm sure that the recent MET broadcast of Don Carlo was acted much better than the Orange DVD. However, in my book the most entertaining portions of the broadcast were the intermissions... That's not saying much for the singing!!

[operalover21]

The only Caballe DVD I have in my collection is the Norma from Orange. I viewed a portion of it last evening and in all honesty I found nothing wrong with Caballe's acting.

 

The role of Norma is larger than life, the venue is larger than life, and the mistral which is certainly an integral part of this performance is larger than life as well. Intermingled in all of this is Caballe , who even if classified as simply large and immovable somehow fits perfectly into the performance.

 

I for one would rather watch this rather than any number of well acted performances of Bellini's opera that I have endured over the past 40 years.

 

I know that we expect more today. However, with such a mindset would Caballe or that gawky Dame from Down-under ever even have been given the opportunity of an audition? I have heard a recording of Sutherland's MET debut. I am not sure how she acted the part of Lucia that evening. However, many years ago I spoke with someone who was there and said that she looked nervous as all hell and was shaking like a leaf... Yet from the audience reaction they certainly knew and appreciated great singing when they my heard it.

 

I most definitely agree that today we want and expect more. However, at times looking for more in the acting department gives us less in the vocal department. As an example, I'm sure that the recent MET broadcast of Don Carlo was acted much better than the Orange DVD. However, in my book the most entertaining part if the broadcast were the intermissions... That's not saying much for the singing!!

 

I want a complete theatrical experience and I'm willing to give up something in the vocal department in order to get something more in the overall dramatic experience. I felt differently in the 1970s and early 1980s but, then again, I didn't know what would become possible in making opera a complete theatrical experience which it often wasn't in those days. There is no right or wrong, just different preferences. For me, a glorious vocal performance with not much going on onstage is not why I go to opera. I might as well sit at home and listen to a record.

 

I've seen that Norma from Orange. I find it a complete dud, except vocally. But Norma is a special case. Hardly anyone can sing it, it's a fairly static opera -- dramatically -- to begin with, so it's a different kettle of fish. It's definitely an opera I can LISTEN to but have little interest in seeing it until some enterprising director can figure out what to do with it theatrically and come up with singers who can sing it (fat chance)

 

That being said, I've never met a single opera fan in my life who thought Caballe was a good or even decent actress. It was all about the voice!!!

[+ WilliamM]

I want a complete theatrical experience and I'm willing to give up something in the vocal For me, a glorious vocal performance with not much going on onstage is not why I go to opera. I might as well sit at home and listen to a record.

 

I've seen that Norma from Orange. I find it a complete dud, except vocally. But Norma is a special case. Hardly anyone can sing it, it's a fairly static opera -- dramatically -- to begin with, so it's a different kettle of fish. It's definitely an opera I can LISTEN to but have little interest in seeing it until some enterprising director can figure out what to do with it theatrically and come up with singers who can sing it (fat chance)

 

That being said, I've never met a single opera fan in my life who thought Caballe was a good or even decent actress. It was all about the voice!!!

 

Once again we disagree. The main reason we disagree so often is the lack of shading in your posts. In this post, you could have writing that Caballe's acting was adequate for the times in which she was singing given her voice. Yet you chose the words good and decent. You do it constantly in this forum and others in this site. The Met "Parsifial" is flawless; "Glee" is terrible on every level. Is that your style of posting on a message board? In real life, do you realize that most everything is neither completely good nor completely bad?

[whipped guy]

I want a complete theatrical experience and I'm willing to give up something in the vocal department in order to get something more in the overall dramatic experience.

I understand your point, but I would err on the side of vocalism vs. acting...

There is no right or wrong, just different preferences. For me, a glorious vocal performance with not much going on onstage is not why I go to opera. I might as well sit at home and listen to a record.

I am not a visual person the aural is more important to me... So as you say there is "no right or wrong".

 

I've seen that Norma from Orange. I find it a complete dud, except vocally.

Actually, if I nitpick I can name a number of vocal flaws in the performance... but there is no such thing as perfection in life... so given the overall panorama it is quite a grand experience... as I noted above even the mistral becomes a prominent and larger than life player in the scheme of things. We are lucky that it was filmed.

 

But Norma is a special case. Hardly anyone can sing it, it's a fairly static opera -- dramatically -- to begin with, so it's a different kettle of fish.

That's exactly what I meant by larger than life...

 

It's definitely an opera I can LISTEN to but have little interest in seeing it until some enterprising director can figure out what to do with it theatrically and come up with singers who can sing it (fat chance)

Since you have the inside track at the MET I guess your advice is to skip the MET revival next season... I know the production leaves a lot to be desired... but I assume that you are giving us a heads up that the singing will not be much better!!!

[operalover21]

Once again we disagree. The main reason we disagree so often is the lack of shading in your posts. In this post, you could have writing that Caballe's acting was adequate for the times in which she was singing given her voice. Yet you chose the words good and decent. You do it constantly in this forum and others in this site. The Met "Parsifial" is flawless; "Glee" is terrible on every level. Is that your style of posting on a message board? In real life, do you realize that most everything is neither completely good nor completely bad?

 

Pot, kettle, black. The fact that Caballe's acting might have been "adequate for its time" bears no relevance on when I'm watching a DVD of it today. George Arliss's acting was considered the pinnacle in 1931, today it's laughable. The fact that it once wasn't considered that doesn't make any difference to me today at all.

 

Nowhere did I say it was "completely bad." And the MET Parsifal is flawless -- why should I not say that if that's what I believe? Nevermind.

[operalover21]

I understand your point, but I would err on the side of vocalism vs. acting...I am not a visual person the aural is more important to me... So as you say there is "no right or wrong".

 

Actually, if I nitpick I can name a number of vocal flaws in the performance... but there is no such thing as perfection in life... so given the overall panorama it is quite a grand experience... as I noted above even the mistral becomes a prominent and larger than life player in the scheme of things. We are lucky that it was filmed.

 

That's exactly what I meant by larger than life...

 

Since you have the inside track at the MET I guess your advice is to skip the MET revival next season... I know the production leaves a lot to be desired... but I assume that you are giving us a heads up that the singing will not be much better!!!

 

I actually don't "err" on either side. I'm selfish. I want it all but I'll give up a little bit vocally for someone who can really inhabit a character like Anja Silja or Karita Mattila. But a beautiful voice with little acting ability does absolutely nothing for me (except on a record).

 

As for not being a "visual" person, then I would have to ask -- gently -- why go to the opera at all? Just listen to broadcasts and records. Of course, these days if you did that you'd be very disappointed as so few voices are worth listening to on the radio. I don't think of it as "visual" vs. "aural." I see it as theatrical compelling vs. not theatrically compelling. I wouldn't go to theater because the actor had a nice speaking voice. I'd go for a more complete theatrical experience.

 

I'll probably go to the Norma revival even though the production is terrible. But, you're right, I have little hope it will be any good.

[whipped guy]

I go to the MET for the same reason I go to Yankee Stadium... It is an experience that can't be duplicated in your living room. Plus, voices sound different in an actual space as opposed to a recording. Often the size, weight, timbre, and hence the overall impact of a voice are quite different live as opposed to being heard electronically. Some voices are not "phonogenic" and sound better live. Others are enhanced by the microphone.

 

Incidentally I sit in the center in the Grand Tier (or Dress Circle) by design... primarily because of the acoustics (as I said I like to hear some space around the voices) and secondarily because it gives a panoramic view of the proceedings... and that includes the orchestra and conductor. Lower or higher just does not do it for me.

[operalover21]

I go to the MET for the same reason I go to Yankee Stadium... It is an experience that can't be duplicated in your living room. Plus, voices sound different in an actual space as opposed to a recording. Often the size, weight, timbre, and hence the overall impact of a voice are quite different live as opposed to being heard electronically. Some voices are not "phonogenic" and sound better live. Others are enhanced by the microphone.

 

Incidentally I sit in the center in the Grand Tier (or Dress Circle) by design... primarily because of the acoustics (as I said I like to hear some space around the voices) and secondarily because it gives a panoramic view of the proceedings... and that includes the orchestra and conductor. Lower or higher just does not do it for me.

 

I assume you mean the "real" Yankee Stadium

[whipped guy]

I assume you mean the "real" Yankee Stadium

Well... the current "real" Yankee Stadium... While I saw many games at the old Stadium... I was never at the old MET...

[+ WilliamM]

Pot, kettle, black. The fact that Caballe's acting might have been "adequate for its time" bears no relevance on when I'm watching a DVD of it today. George Arliss's acting was considered the pinnacle in 1931, today it's laughable. The fact that it once wasn't considered that doesn't make any difference to me today at all.

 

Nowhere did I say it was "completely bad." And the MET Parsifal is flawless -- why should I not say that if that's what I believe? Nevermind.

 

I would not have purchased a ticket to the HD Saturday afternoon "Parsifal," but for your comment about Kaufmann's concern about standing in water for much of the second act. The combination of seeing the HD performance and the live performance a few days later worked out exceptionally well. It was one of the most enjoyable opera experiences in several years. Instead of nitpicking, I should have thanked you.

[operalover21]

Well... the current "real" Yankee Stadium... While I saw many games at the old Stadium... I was never at the old MET...

 

I can't bring myself to go to the "new" place ... too many fond memories of the old. I only went to the old MET, as a child, once or twice.

[whipped guy]

I can't bring myself to go to the "new" place ... too many fond memories of the old. I only went to the old MET, as a child, once or twice.

I know what you mean. I have not totally figured out the new Stadium as of yet regarding where I like to sit. Trying to replicate things from old to new has not yet been successful... other than knowing that I need to sit on the first base side... as otherwise I feel that I am watching the game backwards. And by the way, am I the only one who ifs thrilled that the Yanks now have Travis Hafner and not just for the way he swings his bat.

 

Sorry to go off topic... but to get back on topic... WilliamM mentions comparing the HD broadcast to being there live. Both are valid ways to experience opera. Both are different however. The same goes for sporting events... This from someone who once saw an afternoon game at thd old Stadium and then went home to watch the replay in the evening... and enjoyed comparing the two experiences. I have similarly compared several operatic experiences as well and it can be interesting to do so.