Elizabeth-Francesca da Rimini was possibly the most forgettable opera I have seen yet.  Though it is possible, of course there may be others that I have seen and already forgotten.  The staging and costumes were gorgeous, particularly Act I.  I loved the giant courtyard with ornate gates on the ground floor and the marble stairs leading down to huge stone urns filled with flowers.  The flowing light colored dresses of Francesca’s attendants were lovely, especially with the rings of flowers in their hair.  The same held true for Acts II, III and IV.  Gorgeous sets—and the dichotomy between the bright open first Act and the dark, war like, mechanical set for Act II when the Malatestas are in battle was great.  But that was the problem here.  There were many gorgeous sets and costumes and really the voices were great, but the music is so completely forgettable that the opera seems to be going nowhere the entire time.

Essentially, I found it musically boring.  I was trying to figure out why this was so boring to me and I think a great deal of it has to do with not being interested in the characters.  Yes, Francesca has the great scene at the end of Act I where she lays eyes on Paolo and they fall instantly in love.  But there was no emotional aria to accompany it, to convey to the audience what it was about him that made her fall in love with him at first sight.  We, the audience, are told she falls in love with him, but there isn’t much else.  The themes in this opera really aren’t that different from most other operas—love, betrayal, unhappy marriage, etc.—but the lack of arias and proclamations of feeling left me feeling little for any character.

Additionally, a lot of the action that does take place such as Paolo leaving Francesca because he cannot bear to be around her and not have her, are told to the audience and not shown.  I only knew that Francesca ended up being married to Gianciotto because I read the Met notes.  I think it would have been much more effective to cut a few of the pieces about Spring and how handsome Paolo was and lucky Francesca was to instead show us some action.

Overall I think the Met did a gorgeous job with a mediocre opera.  The question is, why was this even put on? 

Shawn – I was not familiar with Francesca da Rimini.  It has not been performed at the Met since 1986, so I was keenly interested. 

The music sounded more like a film score which backed the singers if that makes any sense.  I did like the cello, clarinet, and mandolin onstage players very much.  However, narratively there was too much going on offstage between acts.  Too much backstory crammed between acts.  It made the action feel jarring to me.  More of a hurry up and get to the peaks so we can have some high notes.  I know opera has big offstage plot points often but it felt particularly disruptive here.  The singing of the two leads is nearly non-stop and both Marcello Giordani and Eva-Maria Westbroek performed admirably and were rightfully very well received by the audience.  And all their lovely high notes were super zingy.  However the discordant narrative made it feel thematically too much like sound and fury signifying too little no matter how expertly executed vocally. 

The production was very beautiful to look at, if a bit static.  The act two war tower set was impressive but didn’t make a lot of sense to me spatially.  For example, where exactly is the wall of the castle if the trap door entrance to the parapets is downstage center?  Also why is Francesca standing EXACTLY where the arrows are flying?  Surely someone would have removed her.  And I am unclear as to what the fiery ram cauldron was.  I assumed by cauldron they were going to pour boiling oil down on the enemy.  I’m not sure what use a fiery ram would be as they were not laying siege to a castle but were under siege themselves.   

Regardless, Mark Delavan with a battle-axe sold the whole scene for me.  I love Mark Delavan.  Too few world-class singers can sell full body armor and battle-axes anymore.  Seriously.  Too many look like they are playing dress up in daddy’s armor costume at a Renaissance Fair.  Not Delavan.  And vocally he is, as I said, World Class of course.

Which brings me back to Marcello Giordani.  I have seen him several times now.  Vocally he, too, is world class and greatly beloved at the Met with over 200 performances of 25 roles since 1995.  However there is just something off about him physically.  Not that he is unattractive or odd looking in any way, just off.  Awkward.  Like he is playing dress up.  And I’ve seen him in a variety of roles and periods and costumes.  None seem to fit physically.  But vocally…if I close my eyes and just listen all is well.  Just something about him onstage.  Or maybe it’s just him in costume.  I will endeavor to find footage of him in a concert setting.  I just don’t buy him physically for some reason.  I realize that I may be the only person that feels this way as vocally he is on the damn money.  Maybe it’s the hair.  But his hair is awesome.  Not Dmitri Hvorostovsky level of awesome, but awesome.  I will reflect upon this further.

 – Elizabeth Frayer and Shawn E Milnes