So Paul McCartney wrote a ballet, as Iman mentioned it last Wednesday, and the critics are in. Iman mentioned some elsewhere but here's a round-up. In brief:: it is not very good. Here is what the New York Times wrote
‘We can blame the new ballet’s scenario: it’s trite. We can blame the ballet’s costumes, by Mr. McCartney’s daughter, the fashion designer Stella McCartney: they’re intrusive, unflattering and clichéd’
‘Ocean's Kingdom' isn't offensive: it's just harmless, forgettable, bland, thin and occasionally incompetent’
‘No dancer is made to look any lovelier by this apparel. Sara Mearns, as Honorata, is one of several women whose costumes are cut in a way that makes their upper bodies look heavier above the waist than they are.’
Ouch!
The Los Angeles Times is not much more enthusiastic:
‘All of this fits well with the score, which at its best sounds like competent Hollywood soundtrack to fairy-tale themed film. Unlike his first major classical work, 1991's "Liverpool Oratorio" which had traces of minimalism and modernity, "Ocean's Kingdom" (despite being composed with the help of a computer) feels like court entertainment from decades past.’
‘You might not want to listen to the whole thing on your iPod, but that's the case with a number of classic ballets. Give McCartney credit — his music does manage to convey the setting and underscore the action. If only the action was worth watching. Peter Martins' dances are not just forgettable, they're boring. There's running around in circles and cheerleader-style symmetry that looks as if the choreographer were setting the piece on student dancers — not one of the finest companies in the world. Besides a brief acrobatic duet by Megan LeCrone and Craig Hall, there was nothing that showcased the artistry of the City Ballet principals or corps.’
Actually, the critics slammed more the choreography and the costumes more than the music! Oh well, Paul jis about to get married and he may be just too happy to care about all this.