Thanks, Jane, for being so clear ... and so prompt!

Here are a couple of more hot-off-the-press reviews:
Mark Monahan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culture...n---review.htmlQUOTE
Isadora's steps look dated, one-dimensional, and even irritatingly self-indulgent – to the point where one wonders if the problem is largely that MacMillan is conveying Duncan's essence too potently in a world that's moved on.
Like her life, the piece drips in melodrama, and the voiceover swells the impression of a galloping egomaniac. What's more, caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of sugar-coating her racism or declaring it, the piece opts for candour, with alienating results. But, above all, there's the knowledge of how much more sublimely stirring Rojo usually is, when performing the "stiff and commonplace gymnastics" that Isadora herself so squarely rejected: ie, ballet
Judith Mackell:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2009/mar/1...l-ballet-reviewQUOTE
There is just so much wrong with this. The surviving chunks of MacMillan's choreography - Isadora's solos, her pas de deux with her lovers, the stark dance of mourning for her two dead children - are now squeezed in between the film footage, so they look like low-budget snippets of "live reconstruction". And while the language rises to occasional vintage MacMillan poetry, it is nowhere near as detailed as the choreography in Mayerling or Manon.
The dancing is also dwarfed by the voiceover, which gives us long passages of Duncan's own writings. These are entertaining enough - Isadora was the DH Lawrence of dance, with her raging against the modern machine. But back in 1981, MacMillan couldn't find the language to communicate what made Duncan's beliefs so earth-shattering when they were embodied in her dancing - and this inert revival does nothing to address that.
Both seem to give points to Rojo for trying her best -- and to dislike the voiceover that accompanies the dance.