|
Adams: Doctor Atomic | 
 enlarge
| Directors: Sellars, Renes
Actors: Finley, Rivera, Owens, Fink, Maddalena
Studio: Bbc / Opus
Category: DVD
List Price: $39.99
Buy New: $30.77
You Save: $9.22 (23%)
New (21) Used (6) from $30.77
Avg. Customer Rating:  9 reviews
Sales Rank: 2279
Format: Classical, Color, Dts Surround Sound, Dvd-video, Ntsc, Subtitled, Surround Sound, Widescreen
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Unknown), German (Unknown), French (Unknown), Dutch (Subtitled), English (Subtitled), French (Subtitled), Italian (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled)
Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Number Of Items: 2
Running Time: 230
Discs: 2
Aspect Ratio: 1.77:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: 998
UPC: 809478009986
EAN: 0809478009986
ASIN: B001BSH18O
Theatrical Release Date: 2007
Release Date: September 30, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand new Item. CD, DVD, Book, VHS more than 400 000 titles to choose from. ALL days Low Price !
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The longing to overcome human boundaries lead the physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer to begin an experiment that formed a threat to the whole of humanity, and whose scientific results still do today. The question of the moral implications of the atomic bomb is raised in John Adams opera, just as much as that of the influence on the private lives of the main characters. Doctor Atomic is the fifth work to result from almost twenty years of collaboration between the American composer and his fellow American director and Erasmus Prize-winner Peter Sellars. Doctor Atomic concerns itself with the work of J. Robert Oppenheimer and his team of scientists at the test site of the first atomic bomb outside Los Alamos, New Mexico during the lead-up to the first detonation. As Zero Hour relentlessly approaches and conditions become less and less favorable, individual tensions build feverishly and Oppenheimer and his staff struggle with the moral implications of their work on 'the Gadget', and the strong possibility of global annihilation. Recorded in high definition video and true surround sound, John Adams' fascinating, overwhelming score and Peter Sellars' forceful staging (and TV direction) portray Oppenheimer, exquisitely sung by Gerald Finley, as a profoundly troubled man, at odds with himself but moving inexorably forward, representative of the great ethical dilemmas of humanity itself.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 4 more reviews...
 Finley's aria is fantastic, but it's in the wrong opera November 16, 2008
When a local theater subscribed to the Metropolitan Opera's HD LIVE series and broadcast DR. ATOMIC on November 8th I decided I shouldn't miss it. I'm not a fan of Adams, but the subject matter is so important, and it had been brought to my doorstep...
DR. ATOMIC has its moments. The first act builds up to a tremendous aria, Gerald Finley singing "Batter My Heart," one of the Holy Sonnets of John Donne, as the character of Robert Oppenheimer. The first scene is the assembled throng of Manhattan Project workers. I was decidedly underwhelmed. The second scene is a love scene with Oppenheimer and his wife Kitty -- much better, with Finley in fine form. Then back to the bomb, with the test blast impending and a rainstorm, building tension. Finally, the Faustian scene with Oppenheimer singing to God. The problem with this is that Oppenheimer was Jewish, and not observant. Yes, he did in fact use Donne's sonnet for the name of the Trinity Test Site in southern New Mexico, but this discrepancy undercut the power of the most powerful scene in DR. ATOMIC for me.
The second act I found to be poorly conceived. The weather and the delay in the test, which took place July 16th, 1945, drives the action, which strikes me as a small and mundane aspect of such a literally earth-shattering series of events. The best part of Act II is Kitty, who in real life was a committed leftist and opponent of the Project, and who in the opera symbolizes the human conscience as well as the archetypal Woman standing against the deadly plans of the men, generals and scientists alike. I was not at all convinced by the addition of a Noble Savage role for the Indian maid Pasqualita and a gallery of impassive male Indians in full regalia. The ending is weak, with a pointed message about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, yes, (148,000 people were killed immediately by the only two atomic bombs ever to have been used in war, and 340,000 including those killed later by radiation poisoning and other effects), but not nearly as effective as the ending of Act I.
Of course the Met's production is not the same original Peter Sellars staging as in this DVD of the Netherlands Opera. I haven't stressed those details, only the basic plot elements. Finley continues in his role as Oppenheimer -- he has sung the part in every production so far, in San Francisco, Amsterdam, Chicago and New York.
As far as Adams's position as a leading American composer, I remain underwhelmed. Minimalism has become merely one element in his eclectic but tonal style, now a sort of audience-friendly PoMo Lite, an acceptable badge of hipness, and Adams continually strives to be a contemporary composer for those who don't like New Music.
 Finley alone worth watching November 12, 2008
This is an excellant production. If you don't like modern, dissonent opera, then this might not be for you. The production is powerfully done and the singing and symphonic quality top notch.
Is it History or Opera? November 9, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Thanks for the history lesson, Tom, but Holy Cow! If the only acknowledgment of the music you heard today is "While the score is certainly engaging and momentous at times.." and your best recommendation is to forget the opera and read a book chronicling the Manhattan Project, why did you spend the money to go to the opera? Like any theater piece, opera is at its best dealing with human passions and the conflicts which arise between people in relationship to each other. Words, music and visuals combine to create a vivid metaphor for the human condition, and perfect historical accuracy need not be part of the equation. The hopes and fears of the scientists as they struggle with creating a device they hope will save lives but may indeed pose the threat of annihilation; the personality conflicts between two scientists working toward the same goal while harboring different personal agendas; the costs that single-minded dedication to an urgent goal may exact on a precious personal relationship; the contrast between hard concrete left-mind science and mysterious, numinous native spirituality; and above all, the struggle of a sensitive and artistic temperament to reconcile his sense of beauity and love with the monstrosity he has created--these are the business of opera, and Doctor Atomic is a riveting exploration of those issues.
Adams' music reflects these struggles magnificently, flowing through them all, from love and passion to lurking menace and fear, like a river. I, too, was in the theater today for Doctor Atomic, and I was knocked flat by the electrifying scene at the end of Act I, as Oppenheimer, alone with his creation as it looms over him, writhes in an agony of conscience over what he has done. The historical record supports this idea, and you can see it there on his face in any portrait of the man even if he didn't really stand there alone in the moonlight. But even if it wasn't real fact, it is a perfect way for the artist to illustrate one of the major cosmic themes of the opera and of our day. Any viewer/listener with the equipment to allow the music, poetry, and images to work their triple magic on one's conscious and unconscious being would have to be struck dumb by the power of that scene. This is great theater--cosmic questions made real in the passions of human beings--so, who cares about history at a moment like that? On that level, Doctor Atomic is a work of genius which takes one's breath away.
I've read my World War II history as well, and it has enriched my experience of this opera; for example, I am inspired to revisit the historical record to see if my memory of the characters of Oppenheimer and Teller should be adjusted because of the surprisingly different angle on their personalities and conflicts which the opera presents. But that's only an interesting sidelight compared with the overwhelming emotional experience of surrendering to the sights, sounds and words of great human passions, illustrated as only a great opera can do.
If these live transmissions by the Met can help people learn to park their preconceived ideas at the door for a couple of hours and open themselves to such powerful experiences, they have done their job. Leave the history books next to your easy chair for some other cold day in front of the fire.
Almost perfect November 9, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
The plot is based on the last days of the Manhattan project, but in fact the greatness of this opera is the portraying of the human struggles of the people involved in the project. The plot itself is the reason to get into those very human emotions and struggle, so the full accuracy of the plot doesn't seem to me of crucial importance. The best music is for those internal looking moments, with the necessary "actions" to put everything in perspective (sounds familiar?). Some of the tense moments in the plot are for music only, masterly composed by John Adams.
I have the feeling the production is over played which sometimes disturbs and distracts. In addition, some of the close-ups (for the DVD) are over-dramatic veering the attention from the poetry and the music. The music and the lyrics are beautiful and strong enough. It doesn't need over-acting and distractions like people moving fast on the scene.
The last scene of first act is impressive, in particular when Oppenheimer silhouette raises his hand and finger to the "Gadget" (God?)... but there is no finger responding this time.
Remembering that all music (and opera) was once new, this DVD is recommended for all Opera lovers and enthusiasts.
 Get the History Straight Please November 8, 2008
4 out of 20 found this review helpful
My wife and I had the opportunity to see this through the Met HD Live program in November 2008. Having studied the history of the atomic bomb development extensively as part of a graduate history degree including a week long trip to Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the annual anniversary of their destruction, we were both looking forward to seeing this show. It is always intereting and enlightening to see a gripping historical story told via a different medium.
We were both deeply disappointed. While the score is certainly engaging and momentous at times, the story that Mr. Adams has opted to tell is extremely one-sided and almost wholesale adopts the new revisionist history that many scholars are pushing that paints the United States as aggressor. For those of you who may have less familiarity with the events in the Spring and Summer of 1945 in advance of the Japan bombings, some background is necessary. While initial development of the bomb was started to parry what was believed to be an active and fast-moving German atomic bomb development effort. However, it became fairly clear even before the Allies had Germany on the run that any such bomb effort was small at best and was likely cancelled due to cost and a belief that such a weapon was simply not feasible. For a far more engaging artwork that explores the German bomb program, pick up a copy of Michael Frayn's Copenhagen.
With an investment quickly climbing into the billions, the US decided to continue with the Manhattan project with hopes that the weapon could be completed fast enough to bring an end to the War in the Pacific without an invasion of Japan. It is here where modern historians bifurcate into two main camps. What is clear is that the war was largely won by the Spring of 45 with the Japanese on the run, out of resources, and making at least some overtures for peace through back channels. What is less clear is how serious such peace pursuits were as the public face of the Japanese war machine continued to call for every Japanese to give their life if necessary to continue the prosecution of the war. Some historians (e.g., Gar Alperovitz and Peter Kuznick) have argued that the US pushed ahead with the bomb development while essentially ignoring the Japanese entreaties for peace. The reasons given for such an aggressive position range from the need to demonstrate the bomb as a warning to Russia to simple blatant racism on the part of Truman and others in his administration toward the Japanese. If one adopts this view, then it is a short and slippery slope to considering the US decision as an act of genocide. Proponents of this view downplay the possibility of a Japanese invasion with the subsequent loss of Allied troups as little more than US propaganda.
While I personally believe there is reason to question the US actions, their timing, and the public vs private justifications recorded at the time, there is also extensive evidence to show that Japan was willing to go on fighting indefinitely if they were unable to reach acceptable terms of surrender possibly creating a clear need for some form of invasion. It is this second view that is absent in John Adam's work. Aside from having various storytelling elements that seem to make almost no sense to the main theme of the work, Oppenheimer, the US military, and the US overall are made to look as though they were hell bent to drop atomic bombs on Japan no matter what.
Art of any form is always subjective, representative of the artist viewpoint, and open to a variety of interpretations by the audience viewing the art. In this case, the artwork purports to tell the story of Robert Oppenheimer stating clearly and boldly that his is a modern Faust. The analogy simply does not hold. The history presented is highly skewed. Much of the imagery and allusion is off base and the texts used to create the libretto simply do not work. Save your money on this one. If the topic really interests you, spend the almost four hours of your life that watching this takes to instead read Richard Rhodes' Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The Making of the Atomic Bomb.
Epilogue: A number of individuals have taken issue with my focus on history and not the artistry, i.e., it's an opera not a history textbook. I have added this epilogue to simply note that John Adams goes out of his way to talk about how he spent significant time determining which historical documents to include as part of the libretto. My point was/is that his selections are highly skewed in my opinion. I did not see the open and purposeful ambiguity to foster thought on the part of the audience that others claim to have seen.
|
|
|
|
