The Nutcracker
Tags: fantasy

Plot synopsis:
Below is a synopsis based on the original 1892 libretto by Marius Petipa. The story varies from production to production, though most follow the basic outline. The names of the characters also vary. In the original E.T.A. Hoffmann story, the young heroine is called Marie Stahlbaum and Clara (Klärchen) is her doll's name. In the adaptation by Dumas on which Petipa based his libretto, her name is Marie Silberhaus. In still other productions, such as Baryshnikov's, Clara is Clara Stahlbaum rather than Clara Silberhaus.
Act I
Scene 1: The Stahlbaum Home
It is Christmas Eve. Family and friends have gathered in the parlor to decorate the beautiful Christmas tree in preparation for the party. Once the tree is finished, the children are sent for. They stand in awe of the tree sparkling with candles and decorations.
The party begins. A march is played. Presents are given out to the children. Suddenly, as the owl-topped grandmother clock strikes eight, a mysterious figure enters the room. It is Drosselmeyer, a local councilman, magician, and Clara's godfather. He is also a talented toymaker who has brought with him gifts for the children, including four lifelike dolls who dance to the delight of all. He then has them put away for safekeeping.
Clara and Fritz are sad to see the dolls being taken away, but Drosselmeyer has yet another toy for them: a wooden nutcracker carved in the shape of a little man, used for cracking nuts. The other children ignore it, but Clara immediately takes a liking to it. Fritz, however, accidentally breaks it. Clara is heartbroken.
During the night, after everyone else has gone to bed, Clara returns to the parlor to check on her beloved nutcracker. As she reaches the little bed, the clock strikes midnight and she looks up to see Drosselmeyer perched atop it. Suddenly, mice begin to fill the room and the Christmas tree begins to grow to dizzying heights. The nutcracker also grows to life size. Clara finds herself in the midst of a battle between an army of gingerbread soldiers and the mice, led by their king. They begin to eat the soldiers.
The nutcracker appears to lead the soldiers, who are joined by tin ones and dolls who serve as doctors to carry away the wounded. As the Mouse King advances on the still-wounded nutcracker, Clara throws her slipper at him, distracting him long enough for the nutcracker to stab him.
Scene 2: A Pine Forest
The mice retreat and the nutcracker is transformed into a handsome Prince. He leads Clara through the moonlit night to a pine forest in which the snowflakes dance around them, beckoning them on to his kingdom as the first act ends.
Act II
Scene 1: The Land of Sweets
Clara and the Prince travel to the beautiful Land of Sweets, ruled by the Sugar Plum Fairy in his place until his return. He recounts for her how he had been saved from the Mouse King by Clara and had been transformed back into his own self.
In honor of the young heroine, a celebration of sweets from around the world is produced: chocolate from Spain, coffee from Arabia, tea from China, and candy canes from Russia all dance for their amusement; Danish shepherdesses perform on their flutes; Mother Ginger has her children, the Polichinelles, emerge from under her enormous hoop skirt to dance; a string of beautiful flowers perform a waltz. To conclude the night, the Sugar Plum Fairy and her Cavalier perform a dance.
A final waltz is performed by all the sweets, after which the Sugar Plum Fairy ushers Clara and the Prince down from their throne. He bows to her, she kisses Clara goodbye, and leads them to a reindeer drawn sleigh. It takes off as they wave goodbye to all the subjects who wave back.
In the original libretto, the ballet's apotheosis "represents a large beehive with flying bees, closely guarding their riches". Just like Swan Lake, there have been various alternative endings created in productions subsequent to the original.

Review: I AM FARE.The director of "Dirty Dancing" could have done a better job in filming this production.
The is not the first feature film to showcase the world's most beloved ballet.This is a huge chore to watch this interpretation of the holiday classic ballet!
The Nutcracker tells the story of a young girl whose love for a toy turns it into the handsome prince Macaulay Culkin ("Richie Rich," "Home Alone"), and together they are brought to the Land of Sweets, where an enchanting spectacle awaits them.
I am a ballerina and I have played both the Sugar Plum Fairy and Marie in numerous productions of this, but I have to admit that this is IT.
As far as I can recall, Balanchine's alterations to Tchaikovsky's score are as follows:1) The final section of the Grossvatertanz (a traditional tune played at the end of a party) is repeated several times to give the children a last dance before their scene is over.2) A violin solo, written for but eliminated from Tchaikovsky's score for The Sleeping Beauty, is interpolated between the end of the party scene and the beginning of the transformation scene.
Balanchine chose this music because of its melodic relationship to the music for the growing Christmas tree that occurs shortly thereafter.3) The solo for the Sugar Plum Fairy's cavalier is eliminated.It seems to me the accusation that Balanchine has somehow desecrated Tchaikovsky's great score is misplaced..
As excellent and accurate a film of the Balanchine production as could be made, despite Macaulay Culkin.
Those who have given this production such a low rating probably have never seen the celebrated George Balanchine production live onstage, or are letting their disdain for the star casting of Macaulay Culkin influence their judgement.
The Atlanta Ballet was fortunate enough, from the 1960's to the 1980's, to be the first ballet company authorized to stage this production other than the New York City Ballet, and I have seen it live onstage several times.
I can assure readers that the film is a quite accurate rendering of this production, and that the use of a child with limited dancing abilities in the title role is not a cheap stunt dreamed up to showcase Culkin; it was Balanchine's idea to use a child in this role, just as it was his idea to use a child for the role of Marie.
The "heavy" dancing is left to the adults in the story.This is deliberately a stagebound film; in a way, it resembles Laurence Olivier's "Othello".
Exactly as in that film, the sets of the stage production have been enlarged to the size of a movie soundstage, but not made any less artificial, and the ballet is straightforwardly photographed with discreet closeups, and without the distracting "music video" quick cuts featured in the 1986 overrated Maurice Sendak-Carroll Ballard version.
Those sound effects are never heard in any stage production of any "Nutcracker", and they have been put in as a cheap concession simply to appease unsophisticated audiences who may not relish the idea of watching a ballet on film.The other false step is Macaulay Culkin's nutcracker make-up, which looks absolutely ridiculous.
When he is on screen as the Nutcracker, rather than wearing a huge mask (as is always done when the Balanchine production is performed onstage), Culkin is actually made up as the toy - he wears what looks like a bald cap, as well as a white wig, whiskers, and a beard.
And a comparison with Baryshnikov's nutcracker in *his* production shows how wonderfully creative Baryshnikov's nutcracker mask was - the "jaws" actually seemed to move whenever Baryshnikov tilted his head back.The dancing itself in the Macaulay Culkin version is excellent, of course, except for Culkin himself, whose dancing, as I said, isn't meant to even be spectacular.
(The Sugar Plum Fairy and her Cavalier are the prominent dancing roles in Balanchine's production of "The Nutcracker".) The film's colors, though, could be a bit brighter since this IS a fantasy.
The choreography is also brilliant, and the adaptation of it is so faithful as to include the sequence that features additional music from Tchaikovsky's ballet "The Sleeping Beauty" - as Marie sneaks downstairs, falls asleep on the sofa, and dreams that Drosselmeyer is "repairing" the broken Nutcracker (this sequence was, of course, never included in Tchaikovsky's original ballet---it is the only sequence in this production which features music from a work other than "The Nutcracker").Those who have missed out on this film, or those who despise (or loathe it) should give it a chance, despite its two big drawbacks.
But this is, of course, what Russian ballet is all about.I was mostly interested in seeing if Balanchine would keep the music up to speed and I find he has.
After seeing the traditional performances where everything is slowed down to a glacial pace to accommodate the dancers, this is most refreshing and as a record of Mr. B's approach, this video production is invaluable.Others have mentioned the music-tampering but this is not unusual in the dance world or even in Balanchine.
In all fairness, Balanchine assumed that his own works would be forgotten with time and would not become the monuments they have.Is the 12 year old Culkin as bad as all that?
(He later used that quality in "Party Monster" for example.) And, with almost nothing to do except lend his presence to the second part, whenever they show him in passing I find the effect jarring.Mack aside, the photography is good in general though awkward in the pan-and-scan version close-ups.
Technically the production is visually stimulating and the special effects are both imaginatively devised and creatively achieved in a traditional stage setting.
A great film for all the family at Christmas time and a most delightful discovery which will withstand multiple viewing..
I'm not a ballet expert, but I love this production.
It's interesting to dissect because there are two camps for this very famous 110 year-old ballet: those who like it as a children's story and those who like it as an adult's.
This version allows the kids to be front and center, but it has some stellar, sophisticated moments in it as well: the Act 1 finale dance of the snowflakes is a stellar moment of beauty and style, with its ice-blue lighting and costuming and multi-racial Corps De ballet.
In Act 2, there's no contest: amongst the innocent dances of the sweets, 'Arabian Coffee' soloist Wendy Whelan sexily attacks the stage in cat-like fashion.
The pink-and-purple lighting and floating cinematography and the dancer's serpent-like movements do not resemble any other moment in this already polished film, and one can't help but think that director Emile Ardolino deliberately planned it that way.
(It's like watching Ann Reinking or Carol Haney on the Broadway stage.) As far as the smirking Macaulay Culkin is concerned, his presence didn't bother me since he was the right age at the time of filming (and did have some ballet background) and frankly, he smirks in most films he's in.
This 1993 Balanchine version is not as good as the 1985, 1989, 1994, 2001 and 2009 productions, all of which are just magical and entirely captivating.
Macaulay Culkin is rather stiff as the Nutcracker(and I do agree he overdoes the smirking too much), and there is some overacting from Drosselmeyer.
However, I did like the rest of the costumes,- well maybe except for Sugar Plum Fairy's tights- the production is well lit and the sets were enchanting.
The photography was fine I thought, I highly doubt there'll be a Nutcracker production as poorly shot as the 2012 Mariinsky version.
I do love the story, always have, and on the most part the production is faithful to the ballet, with some touches like Marie sneaking downstairs, falling asleep on the sofa and then dreaming of Nutcracker and Drosselmeyer.
The choreography is outstanding, with Balanchine's musicality and style all over it, the standouts being the Soldier Doll, Snowflakes, Arabian and Waltz of the Flowers dances.
Culkin aside, the dancing was exemplary complete with an impeccable Corps De Ballet.
To begin with, let me first say for the record that I understand that this film was made with the non-Ballet-going public in mind, much as 'E.R.' is made for the non-medical public.
As a professional dancer for many years and, now, a choreographer and director of Ballet, I can not add my voice to the choir of approval that this film has received.
Indeed, I have found the production, from front to back with rare exception, to be an ineffectual copy of a classic ballet.
The Horror that is Macauly Culkin (who was obviouly cast to bring the film "star-power" rather than talent) aside, the wrongs against Ballet abound aplenty in this film.
The choreography is tipical Latter Balanchine (for the un-trained; make it fast, make it sharp and remove any and all elements of Emotion, the core of dance, in favor of a technicality that will highlight the flaws of even the best dancers), the score (considered by many to be their favorite Tchaikovsky piece) is so badly edited and re-arranged that I doubt if the composer would regognize it, leading to the re-arrangement of the staging into a non-linear hodge-podge of dances that tells no deffinite story, but simply ambles through the remains of a once-great narrative and the camera work, while professional and clean, is more distracting than helpful, always cutting away at inopportune moments in favor of another vantage point.
One of the wonderful things about watching ballet on tape is being able to see a variation continualy without edits, there-by showing our hero or heroine actually completing a difficult step or combonation, there-by showing off their talent.
His obviouly lack of balletic talent or grace and the ham-handed choreography imposed on the child makes his scenes painful to watch and an embarrassment to not only Mr Culkin and the NYCB, but to the entire dancing world.
Would it have not made better sense to have cast an actual dancer in the role and let the art form speak for itself rather than trying to "glam" it up with a familar face?
Brilliant and incredible!Needless to say, however, I was disappointed the first time I saw this film and continue to be so now, years later.
If you are interested in seeing a quality production of "the Nutcracker", I would like to recomend either the classical and technically perfect Royal Ballet's version or the more visially oppulant Pacific Northwest Ballet's production, both available on video..
I have seen many, many productions of The Nutcracker.
I'm sure people in the specific business of ballet choreography find this production impressive but from a purely theatrical perspective I found everything from design to choreography to be lackluster and unbefitting of a "motion picture".
This movie is a perfect portrayal of The Nutcracker; the dancing is wonderful, the scenery in the background was excellent, and I LOVED THAT FLOATING BED.Oh, and the costumes...
Except for the king, I suppose.If you're a thoroughly masculine person, you won't enjoy this, but this is a very good movie that's good for all ages - just not all levels of testosterone.But I have a few complaints.Firstly, why did they have to put the Sugar Plum Fairy's partner in those terrible tights?
Wendy Whalen's performance as Coffee is the best that I've seen.
I recently the San Francisco's Ballet rendition of Coffee and although entertaining, it was not as awe inspiring as Wendy's caressing of the earth with the soles of her feet in this film version of the Nutcracker.
I will continue to see different versions of the Nutcracker performed by various troupes until I am satisfied.
I hear there is a Barishnikov version of this film recorded in 1976 that is really out of sight.
The best thing about this movie was the Orchestra and the incomparable Tchaikovsky score.
The staginess of the production was very evocative of a live performance.
Of course, inserting a non-dancer into a ballet is like asking Rosanne Barr to sing at the Met. It is sure to elicit the exclamation: "What WERE you thinking?!?!" and it did.
"The Nutcracker" is a Family - Fantasy movie in which we watch a little girl who falls asleep after a party and she is dreaming herself into a fantastic world where toys are larger than life.
Her favorite toy Nutcracker comes to life too and works as a guard who protects her from the Mouse King.
After the Nutcracker saves her life, he is transformed into a Prince.I liked this movie because I have combined it in my mind with Christmas, a Christmas tree and hot chocolate as I used to watch it when I was very young.
I also enjoyed this movie because it has an interesting plot and follows some parts of the original Nutcracker.
Regarding the interpretations, I have to mention the interpretation of Macaulay Culkin who played as The Nutcracker / Drosselmeier's Nephew and he was simply amazing and Jessica Lynn Cohen who played as Marie and she was equally good.To sum up, I have to say that "The Nutcracker" is a great family movie to watch, with great interpretations and an amazing direction.
I recommend everyone to watch this movie because I am sure that you are going to enjoy it.
If you have young children then I believe that you should watch this movie with them because they are going to love it..
If you're gonna do a movie version of a ballet, you need to do one of two things: utilize the film medium in ways that make the story unique from the stage version, or make sure the production is the absolute greatest version of the stage play possible.
It's merely an unremarkable filming of an unremarkable stage production..
BEST NUTCRACKER TURNED INTO FILM TO THIS DAY!.
After all the disastrous attempts at a live action nutcracker film, it makes me appreciate this stage production film even more!
Not only is it the best dancing of the nutcracker, but also has the 90's flair of Macaulay Culkin as the adorable nutcracker prince!
I love "The Nutcracker", I really do, but after seeing it live on stage so many times, I've come to expect more!
Ballet features no dialogue, and musicals feature people singing, so this classification makes absolutely no sense to me!
They are not featured in any other production of "The Nutcracker" that I've ever seen!
And thirdly, why did they feel the need to zoom in on Macaulay Culkin's face all the time he's on screen?
All in all, not my favorite version of "The Nutcracker"!.
This is Warmer Brothers' film version of composer Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky's famous ballet, The Nutcracker, filmed at New York City.It tells the story of Marie, who dreams about her Nutcracker Prince.
There, the Sugar Plum Fairy honors Marie and the Prince's presence by hosting them a number of dances - Spanish Dance, Arab Dance, Chinese Dance, Russian Dance, Dance of the Clowns and Waltz of the Flowers.
These sequences are probably the highlight of the entire Nutcracker Ballet.The special and visual effects were great and the costumes were colorful.
The film's coda was brilliantly done, with the neat carriage in midair and all the dancers coming out to dance in one extravaganza number.Tchaikovsky's music is rich and beautifully performed by the New York City Ballet Orchestra.
While the adapted story line was interesting, the film in general starts off really slow, with too much focus on the children and their greedy personalities.
George Balanchine's The Nutcracker (1993).
this is no spoiler I think people have seen this movie The Nutcracker...it was good I loved it...in fact I loved The Nutcracker since I saw it live at the historic Jefferson Theater in Beaumont, Texas in December 1980 when I was 11....loved the music and the growing tree in fact everything in the film was what I remembered seeing live except it was in a movie and I don't understand that person griping cause Macaulay Culkin's outfit was pink it was a nice color....wonder what happened to Jessica Lynn Cohen who played Marie????!!!..is she not acting now????!!!....I know Darci Kistler turned 50 this year and quit the ballet...wonder if any of the other ballet stars who were in the film are still dancing especially Bart Robinson Cook who played Drosselmeier who was Marie's godfather who gave her the Nutcracker who became the prince...I would recommend this movie for anyone for Christmas it's fun and clean and can be seen by anyone.
A Macaulay Culkin Movie that's not Home Alone?.
If you're going to make a movie about a ballet, either have it be ballet, or keep the story but change the presentation.
And not sure why anyone would want to watch a Christmas Macaulay Culkin movie that's not Home Alone.
The Nutcracker has always been a somewhat problematic ballet.
It bears little resemblance to ETA Hoffman's original story on which it is based.In the ballet, the story is essentially over by the second-half when Clara (or Marie in this version) travels to the Kingdom of Sweets to watch a series of character dances.There's an infinite variety of stage productions that re-interpret the story in myriad ways (not always successfully) to compensate for the ballet's weak libretto.Balanchine's version doesn't really have any sense of drama or story at all (despite the fact that there is plenty of drama and mystery in Tchaikovsky's wonderful first-act music).
The result is a completely forgettable first-half Christmas party where hardly anything happens and where even the dancing (the little that there is of it) isn't particularly memorable.The pantomime over-acting, particularly of Drosselmeier, which might look passable on the stage, just looks silly filmed for the big screen.Unfortunately, things aren't much better when we get to the Kingdom of Sweets (Act II in the stage version).
Watching this film version of his stage production of The Nutcracker has only re-affirmed this view.