Downton Abbey, the epic drama by writer Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) returns to Masterpiece with Episode Two.
As Matthew and Isobel settle in to life in the village, a series of events threaten to put the fate of Downton Abbey on even less stable ground.
Downton Abbey stars Hugh Bonneville, Maggie Smith, and Elizabeth McGovern.
Episode Two airs Sunday, January 16 at 9 p.m on THIRTEEN.
Watch a preview:
(View full post to see video)
Gail Levin
Inside Thirteen recently sat down with Gail Levin, director of American Masters’ upcoming film, Jeff Bridges: The Dude Abides.
Here, Levin discusses what it was like working with the legendary actor, whose appeal, she points out, spans the generations. An Academy Award winner, Bridges is also an accomplished musician, painter, and photographer. Learn more about his work on his official Web site.
American Masters‘ Jeff Bridges: The Dude Abides premieres January 12 at 8 p.m. on THIRTEEN.
Inside Thirteen: What was Jeff Bridges’ reaction to American Masters’ decision to make a film about him?
Gail Levin: One of the main points in the film is his reticence to take on projects all the time. So, I don’t think this one is really different for him. But, the twofold of it is that he’s always a little hesitant and he’s always a little bit halting, but once he’s in, he’s in. I think that can be said about this. I think that he was not sure what this meant – when you put this kind of a magnifying glass on somebody, it makes them feel a little awkward. But, having said that, I think he also just decided to get out of the way of it and let it be. So, I would say that’s how he approached it and that’s how I approached it as well – to not be in his way about it, but let him realize that this is his story.
IT: Was there anything that you were surprised to learn about him during the making of the film?
GL: I was surprised to learn that what seems to be an easygoing guy is kind of a guy who frets a bit. He appears to be so easy and “dude-ish” in a way, but he’s not that laid back. He’s not uptight, be he’s intense and he thinks about things…it’s not an easy task for him to just give over to it. In the film, Mercedes Ruehl made this statement about how she felt that there was a sort of melancholy about him – then in the next part of the statement she said, she felt he was not a stranger to sadness. And I think there’s something about that that’s true – there’s another side to him. There is a joyfulness and a kidding around, but I think there is also a part of him that is very thoughtful, very pensive, and a bit darker – a bit more complex than you might expect. He’s not a guy you can take at face value at all.
(View full post to see video)IT: What was the most challenging part of making this film?
GL: Exactly the same things! I didn’t know him at all, and we had a very short window to make the film in. That was both good and bad. I think it would be very hard to take on a film with somebody that you know well. That’s never a good idea. But also, you have to have time to build some sort of trust with someone and have the feeling that they know you’re going to be okay with them and that you feel that they’re going to be okay with you. We had very little time to establish that. The producers on this film – Neil Koenigsberg, Nikki Silver, Orly Wiseman – they’d worked with him for some time trying to do a feature film on a young adult book called The Giver. They know him very well, but I didn’t know him at all. But I think based on him knowing them, he was willing to assume that I was okay for this. Hopefully, that all worked out. Still, he and I didn’t have a relationship. Luckily enough on my end, I’ve watched his films all my life, so I knew his body of work, which was a big plus. But I was not an intimate of his at all, so there was a little bit of that – he had to sort of decide if I was okay, I had to hope he thought I was okay. It’s nervous making to do these things! What’s also good is that I didn’t develop a crush on him. (Laughs)
IT: Bridges not only acts, but also is a musician, artist and accomplished photographer. How much of this is this reflected in the film?
GL: It is. He’s extremely talented, and not just as an actor. I think he himself had hoped that he would be a musician – music is not something that just came with Crazy Heart. He’s played guitar since he was a kid, and loves it. So that was something to learn, because I always just thought – he’s a great actor, and he was able to learn enough guitar to really pull it off in Crazy Heart. I didn’t realize the extent of his love for music and how much he played and how much a part of his life that had always been. So, it’s really his double muse, music and acting. I think what he loves now and what is extremely wonderful about having won an Oscar for Crazy Heart is, he wins the Oscar playing a part of something he always wanted to be, which is a musician. He’s also got a little band now and does some public appearances, and I think that bridging (pardon the pun) of the loves in his life is nice.
In his paintings, he’s really rather Picasso-esque – he’s very free and fluid. It’s beautiful stuff. We devised to do this plexiglass idea in the film, which is from Picasso. I’ve always wanted to duplicate it, and he was the perfect person to do it with; he really got into it, which was fun.
IT: You have directed and produced a number of shows for THIRTEEN, including previous American Masters films on Marilyn Monroe and James Dean. What first drew you to documentary film making and public television?
GL: For me, the arts are just an endless source of intelligence, brilliance, imagination, and originality. How people do what they do is so fascinating to me. I think it’s mysterious; it’s not something people can explain to you. So, if there’s some way to hang around, get some access, and get some ability to watch some of what happens, I think that’s very compelling stuff and we’re lucky if we can see some of that. I think the beauty of documentary work is that it’s a mystery too – you never know where it’s going to lead you. You start out with some notion of it, but it’s very different from a script. A script you write, you shoot against, and you know what the story is going to be. There’s always the element of surprise, but the surprise comes from performance, from something that’s improvised, it comes from someone who sees it inside an already determined framework. In documentary, it’s never determined. It’s never the same, and affords enormous possibility.
(View full post to see video)IT: Is there anything else about the film you would like viewers to know?
GL: I would love people to know about John Goodman’s interview. In The Big Lebowski, John Goodman was hilarious, but he was a little bit hard to interview – he came in a little guarded. We started talking and all of a sudden, he started to laugh about Lebowski, about the character and about Jeff’s performance – he started to laugh in that way you laugh as a little kid, you start giggling and then you can’t stop. So we started laughing, but we didn’t want it to get picked up on the track…but I also wanted to keep him laughing. It was great!
Another thing I’m sorry didn’t happen was that we missed getting in one of Jeff’s friends since the 4th grade. Jeff has very long friendships. And these are not with movie stars – I’m sure he has those as well, but these are friends that he’s very loyal to, they’re very loyal to him, they still hang out…it’s very cool, and I’m sorry that that didn’t get enough real play in the film. He also has a strong family life, which we didn’t get to show enough of.
One other thing we didn’t get to do enough with is Jeff’s charitable and humanitarian work. He’s been working now with a group called No Kid Hungry, and I know he’s very strongly advocating to be sure that children eat in this country – there are hungry children on a level that we would not believe here.
What is your favorite Jeff Bridges film?
GL: My favorite Jeff Bridges film, aside from Lebowski – which is just a masterpiece – is Cutter’s Way… it is a small, noir-ish film, from the early ’80’s, and it is superb. Aside from that, my next favorite is The Fisher King, also because I adore Terry Gilliam, the director.
Dylan Williams, the director and one of the Swim Gents in the film Men Who Swim, joined Independent Lens to discuss how directing and appearing in his own documentary sometimes meant that life imitated art, and vice versa.
Men Who Swim airs tonight at 10 p.m. on THIRTEEN.
Interview courtesy of Independent Lens. For more interviews and other Independent Lens film content, visit their blog.
What made you start filming the Stockholm Arts Gents?
As soon as I became a member of the team I knew there was a film to be made — I mean who wouldn’t? However, it took a number of years to actually generate some interest in the project, which I believe in retrospect was a good thing since it gave me more time to settle in to the team.
I refused to accept the many rejections from funders who believed it to be too frivolous a subject for a documentary, and I just continued to film. The team merely laughed at my constant filming and became very relaxed in front of the ever-present camera. I started by filming the training sessions and then our regular parties. When I realized that we would all be turning 40 around the same time, I just knew that I had to make the film. I decided to really come up with a strategy and start production — single-handedly if need be. Fortunately the hook of the championships in Milan arrived and helped me get the amazing support that helped make the film a reality.
(View full post to see video)The characters on the team were also a huge motivation. With a good character one can rarely go wrong, and in this case I could have chosen almost any of the team to feature as characters, although Rickard was a clear choice because he wore his heart on his sleeve and put in so much energy into the team.
What do you think the film is about?
Apart from being a sport documentary, I guess it’s a film about change and how we come to terms with it. Personally, those changes involved moving to another country and all the related adjustments, becoming a father, and last but not least, becoming middle-aged.
At the beginning of the Men Who Swim, Rickard beautifully sums up a state of mind that lies at the core of the film. He says he feels that in middle age life has slowed to the practicalities. Deep within us we still have our 25-year-old selves or even our 15-year-old selves, who still seek change and action, but outwardly we are responsible middle-aged people with duties to fulfill and routines to follow. While we are blessed to be living in a part of the world that allows us to live in luxury, there is nonetheless a small part of us — or at least of me — that feels a bit sorry that youth has passed by and that life has become a long list of things to do. Turning 40 is a symbolic milestone, which often makes one realize that life really is passing one by, and a time to wonder whether it is too late to change. I am loathe to use the expression mid-life crisis because it is altogether a more low-level variant.
Thereafter the film is a reflection on this state of mind and a slow dawning that life really isn’t so bad after all, and that
the new stage is not worse, just different. Personally, it was a journey to start looking at life from another perspective and to be grateful for the things that I have in my life rather than focusing on all the things that I haven’t done or don’t have anymore.
It’s also a comedy about men — how they hide themselves behind superficialities like graphs and charts. It didn’t matter how silly synchronized swimming was; there was an enjoyment of ourselves as a company of men, smoking cigarettes and wearing suits that gave us a release from our normal lives.
What’s it like being both the protagonist and director of the film?
It’s very strange to be the protagonist and the director; it seemed to build in me a double identity. I was always wondering whether I should film myself, and thinking weird thoughts such as, “Maybe if my wife Anna became pregnant it could make for a good ending?” Suddenly my whole life was an opportunity for a scene. After I was sacked from work as a care assistant, the project had no financial support at all, so it had dire circumstances for my family in the short term. Simultaneously, I was delighted that I’d managed to set up the camera and record the conversation as I lost the job.
But however much I tried to construct things, the best scenes were the most spontaneous moments. I was sitting in our small ateljé when Anna called me and said she had bad news. I had no idea what to expect. Fortunately Erik (our producer and the director of photography) shouted at me to hang up and call her back, which I did five minutes later. The subsequent conversation about the need for an operation on the cat to extract a rubber monster from its stomach at a cost of 14,000 kroner was great. Working closely with Erik has been the lifeline. Without him I would have found it very difficult to have any space to myself.
How did making the film affect your relationship with the team?
It was more problematic than one can imagine for such a feel-good film — although everyone was very relaxed when we were filming, it was when I began to edit the film that they all started to get nervous. Of course I had filmed about 80 hours of material in all manner of situations, and I had interviews recorded which they preferred not be shown. I could easily have made a film that was much edgier in tone, but I really didn’t have the heart to start ripping into people and their relationships and use my deeper knowledge of them to their disadvantage. My relationship with these people is way too important for me to betray that trust.
What was the biggest challenge for you as a director making the film?
I have never made a film about a team before, so it was a real learning curve for how to develop identities for differing members of a group so that the audience has a sense of them without giving any one too much attention and taking the focus away from the central characters. It was a really difficult balancing act.
What do the team think about seeing themselves on camera?
I think they were surprised to see how good it looked — thanks Erik! For years they’ve just been teasing me about my failed film career and so when I eventually made the film they were really surprised. They really like it and have laughed at a lot of the situations. Memories that would otherwise have dimmed with time, now exists on a DVD on the shelf.
What do you hope the audience will take away from seeing the film?
Hopefully I have conveyed the importance of appreciating the witnesses of one’s life. These are the people who surround you in your everyday life and share the ups and downs that can’t avoid. I try to appreciate them in as many different ways as I can.
What’s next for the team and for you?
The team, as ever, has lots of projects in the pipeline. Of course, the main priority is preparing a whole new program for the next world championships that will take place in Amsterdam next year. The arguments are more intense than ever now that we feel that we really have something to live up to. Perhaps we will have perfected the the flying lift by then.
We perform quite regularly on the synchronized swimming circuit in Sweden, and we recently swam to the accompaniment of a 40-piece orchestra. We dream of one day performing in the Mermaid Parade Celebrations in Coney Island, New York.
I am personally developing a fun project back in Wales entitled The Laughing Welshman. In the short term I am also making a children’s series for 3-to-5-year-olds, which is a real challenge!
American Masters’ upcoming film, Genius Within: The Inner Life of Glenn Gould takes a look a the life of 
Glenn Gould, one of the most celebrated classical pianists of the 20th century.
The program explores the various misconceptions about the eccentric musician, and features never-before seen footage of Gould, as well as personal memories shared by those who were closest to him.
Genius Within: The Inner Life of Glenn Gould airs Monday, December 27 at 9 p.m. on THIRTEEN.
Watch a preview:
(View full post to see video)Independent Lens sat down with director Danny Alpert to talk about the intense and long process of creating 
The Calling, and what made him tackle such a nuanced and sometimes touchy subject. The Calling is a two-part film airing December 20 and 21 at 9 p.m. on THIRTEEN.
Join Independent Lens on Tuesday, December 21 at 2 p.m. for a live chat with Danny on the Independent Lens blog.
Interview courtesy of Independent Lens. For more interviews and other Independent Lens film content, visit their blog.
What impact do you hope this film will have?
I hope that this film will compel viewers to take a fresh look at the relationship between modernity and faith. I hope that the film will break stereotypes — for both secular and religious viewers — about the reality of what it means to be a religious leader and who is filling these roles today. It also makes more “common” the language of faith. By doing both of these things I hope that the series will build bridges between secular and religious viewers.
What led you to make this film?
I was brought up in a nurturing and positive community of faith and, as a teenager, I went through a period when I considered becoming a rabbi. Obviously I didn’t, but I was always left with that “what if?” question. As I continued to grow, I became a student of all faiths and began to question the balance between modernity and faith. When I produced a film called A History of God (based on the best seller by Karen Armstrong) I had the opportunity to meet some amazing religious leaders and their assistants — who were really interesting and mostly clergy-in-training. Their stories led me to discover The Calling as a way of exploring faith and modernity through personal, verité stories.
What were some of the challenges you faced in making The Calling?
One big challenge was the politics around the choices we made about who to include in the series. There are many denominations and schools in the faiths we profiled and, no matter what we did, there were going to be those who felt excluded. Another challenge was that a film that explores faith, which really is an internal process, is forced to test the definition of cinematic language around conflict and change. The nature of film also challenged us to balance our need for “story” with respect for the faiths and their communities. Another big challenge was in interweaving the stories of so many characters into a cohesive narrative, within the allotted PBS run time, while making sure that we gave each story its due — particularly when we were working with more than 1,400 hours of footage.
How did you gain the trust of the subjects in your film?
I had the privilege to work with a team of directors — Alicia Dwyer, Yoni Brook, Maggie Bowman, and Musa Syeed– who are all great at this. Overall, I do not think that trust with subjects is any different than trust with anyone in your life. It’s about honesty, transparency, and a willingness to trust them and be vulnerable to them.
(View full post to see video)What would you have liked to include in your film that didn’t make the cut?
The editing process led to us cutting a story from the series, which was one of the most difficult decisions I have had to make as a filmmaker. I would have given a LOT to be able to have more time and include this story.
Tell us about a scene in the film that especially moved or resonated with you.
I think that the scene where Yerachmiel prepares for and hosts his first Shabbat dinner for his congregation speaks to me personally, as I can see myself and the rabbi I might have been, in this scene.
What has the audience response been so far? Have the people featured in the film seen it, and if so, what did they think?
The response thus far has been very positive. The subjects have all seen the film and are, by and large, enthusiastic.
The independent film business is a difficult one. What keeps you motivated?
I love to collaborate.
Why did you choose to present your film on public television?
PBS is the only place for this film — in terms of its style, length, and subject matter. And it is the only place that really gives the filmmaker creative control over the vision of the film.
What are your three favorite films?
It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown , Sink the Bismarck. and The Godfather
What advice do you have for aspiring filmmakers?
Woody Allen says 99 percent of success is showing up. In documentary filmmaking, 99 percent of success is showing up and then bugging “them” until they give you what you need. Perseverance!
What do you think is the most inspirational food for making independent film?
Hummus is the most inspirational food for anything.
Sherlock fans: now through December 27, watch full episodes of Masterpiece: Sherlock online! Whether you missed it the first time or once just wasn’t enough, get caught up with the show below.
Masterpiece: Sherlock brings Sherlock Holmes from the Victorian era to the 21st century. Created by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, the film stars Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock), Martin Freeman (Dr. John Watson) and Rupert Graves (Inspector Lestrade).
(View full post to see video) (View full post to see video) (View full post to see video)
Bill and Turner Ross have been hailed as up-and-coming auteurs for the fly-on-the-wall vérité style with which they made their debut film, 45365. The film, which Roger Ebert called “achingly beautiful,” won the 2009 SXSW Grand Jury Award for Best Documentary Feature. They spoke to Independent Lens about what strange trip it’s been, and the trouble with leaving Grandma on the cutting room floor.
45365 premieres on Tuesday, December 14 at 10 p.m. on THIRTEEN.
Interview courtesy of Independent Lens. For more interviews and other Independent Lens film content, visit their blog.
What impact do you hope this film will have?
Bill and Turner Ross
The impact that this very personal, handmade film has had already surpasses anything we could have anticipated or imagined. We worked together to finish a goal, make tangible a dream, and the reception of it has been overwhelming.
What led you to make 45365?
There’s always been this hidden need for us to document – an unquenchable interior desire to make sense of the fleeting and intangible moments that we live through. Our first feature film is an extension of something that we’ve been doing since we were children. The medium hasn’t always been film, but the idea has always been the same – capture the feeling and the moment and share it.
What were some of the challenges you faced in making the film?
We had to learn everything for ourselves. We just went out and did it with no guiding voice and no funding. The hardest part has been getting by with no money and no real home base. We’re fortunately wealthy in friends.
How did you gain the trust of the people of Sidney, Ohio?
We try to approach everyone with the same dignity and decency – whether they’re on camera or off. Without sincerity, it would be hard to capture honesty. We make a lot of friends.
What would you have liked to include in your film that didn’t make the cut?
So much of what we capture never makes it to the end piece. We filmed 500 hours to make a 90-minute movie. Some of the greatest moments and experiences didn’t make it in. Some of the best stories weren’t even filmed. It’s an unfortunate reality. As well, some of the most wonderful people that allowed us into their lives weren’t able to support a story line. Our grandmother was one of them. We took a lot of heat for that.
Tell us about a scene in the film that especially moved or resonated with you.
It’s not so much the scene that we share, but the actual experience of filming it – living through it – that’s the real edifying experience. It was especially hard to see Justin walk out the door of the courtroom and into prison. It’s a very stark reality.
(View full post to see video)What has the audience response been so far? Have the people featured in the film seen it, and if so, what did they think?
The response has been overwhelmingly positive. Most of the key players in the final cut have seen it – most of them together in an audience in Dayton, Ohio where we had our ‘hometown’ screening. There are some folks who don’t feel that way, but most in that case were anticipating a more traditional ‘documentary’ about Sidney, Ohio the town and not an ephemeral character study.
The independent film business is a difficult one. What keeps you motivated?
The part that isn’t business.
Why did you choose to present your film on public television?
We need every outlet to survive. Also, we grew up on Sesame Street.
What do people commonly ask you after they’ve seen the film?
Filming with that many people over that amount of time there are many stories as you might imagine. We’re often asked what happened to this person or that person. We like to leave those questions unanswered because their lives are their own and they don’t start and stop within the framework of a 90-minute film. We only show a couple minutes of their experience, the film is not meant to define them.
What didn’t you get done when you were making your film?
There’s always stuff you wish you had gotten or that you missed, but that’s going to happen and happen a lot. Just have to roll on because if you get caught up in it you’ll constantly break your own heart.
What are three films you’ve seen lately that you particularly enjoyed?
Beetle Queen Conquers Tokyo
Brock Enright: Good Times Will Never Be The Same
Marwencol
What advice do you have for aspiring filmmakers?
I (Bill) overheard this piece of advice while working in a kitchen in Savannah, GA. An older guy told a younger guy who was slacking and making excuses “Don’t talk about it, be about it.”
What do you think is the most inspirational food for making independent film?
We’d say beer but our mom might frown upon that. Let’s say fried chicken.
Perry Miller Adato
Inside Thirteen recently had the opportunity to sit down with veteran filmmaker Perry Miller Adato, whose successful documentary film career spans nearly six decades.
Among her most successful films are Dylan Thomas: The World I Breathe and Gertrude Stein: When This You See, Remember Me, for which she won an Emmy Award and two Emmy nominations, respectively.
In her latest film, Paris: The Luminous Years, Adato explores the unique time from 1905 to 1930 in which gifted artists (such as Pablo Picasso, Igor Stravinsky, and Gertrude Stein, among others) settled in Paris and revolutionized the modern arts.
Paris: The Luminous Years premieres Wednesday, December 15 at 9 p.m. on THIRTEEN.
(View full post to see video)Inside Thirteen: What first interested you in making Paris: The Luminous Years?
Perry Miller Adato: I have wanted to make Paris: The Luminous Years for 30 years; actually, it’s a little more than 30 years. What happened was, I’ve made five films in Paris, and I made a film, which is still my favorite film – Gertrude Stein: When This You See, Remember Me. That was on the air in December 1970. At that time I began to find out in doing my research for the film, all these artists who were in Paris.
Then, in 1980, I was interested in doing a film because the Museum of Modern Art was doing an exhibit on the work of Pablo Picasso. I got all the cooperation in the world from the museum. I worked a year on that film [Picasso: A Painter's Diary], and I had, for the first time, unlimited money to get incredible research and books and pictures from Paris, and I began to find out – all these people from every country, how many people were in Paris all at the same time! It turns out that from 1905-1930, I would say that anybody who did anything which is important in any of the arts at that time were there. It was the place to be. As Gertrude Stein said, “We all came to Paris – it was where we had to be.” It was the first really international avant-garde in history. It was the beginnings of modern art – the center of the storm was Paris. Artists all over Europe knew what was happening in Paris, and they wanted to be there. For however long they were there, it changed their life and it changed their work.
IT: Is there anything that this diverse group of artists had in common?
PMA: I think what they had in common was the feeling, that this was the 20th century, and the world had changed so much that suddenly even recent art, like Impressionism, seemed obsolete. We needed forms that expressed the new, modern world. That’s what they had in common. They were exposed to all the new things that were going on in Paris and this affected how Hemingway, E.E. Cummings, John Dos Passos, and others wrote. It was in the air. Innovation and experimenting with new forms – Paris was a laboratory for trying new things. Paris not only allowed you to do something new and astonishing, but demanded that you do. You felt that you had to do something new, because that was the new world.
IT: What was the hardest part of making this film?
PMA: No question about it – it’s cutting it down to size. There was so much marvelous material that I couldn’t use. If you’re going to do a film about two hours long, you have a rough cut of three hours. The whole time, there was this pressure – “Perry, how long is the film now?” my executive producer would say. The things that you have to give up, that’s the most difficult thing. And then a few things that I couldn’t get that I was unhappy about. Some things you just can’t clear. But, on the whole, we were very lucky. One of the exceptional things about the film is the footage that we have of all these people while they were alive. I wish that I had time to use more – I mean there are people that should be in the film, but you had to make choices. When I started working on the script, I knew that I could not do everything. I handled it by thinking about who were key people in that period – the most influential.
IT: You have had a long and successful documentary film career. What keeps you motivated?
I don’t have just a general urge to make films – there’s a film that you want to make. In this case, I wanted to make a film about Paris in that period. Sometimes it’s your passion, and sometimes somebody comes to you and says, “we would like a film on such and such.”
IT: Are there any topics or people you still would like to cover that you have not yet?
PMA: I always wanted to do a film on Cézanne. Not a very original subject, but I always felt that was a great story there. It’s always the story that you have to look for – what is the story? What is the struggle? Before you can do a film, you have to find that out.
Throughout the holiday season, Great Performances will be featuring a wide range of programs to kick off the new year. Here are a few highlights of what’s to come:
Peter and the Wolf: an Oscar winning stop-motion animation film of Prokofiev’s musical tale. Tonight at 8 p.m.
(View full post to see video)Dance in America: San Francisco Ballet’s Nutcracker: The San Francisco Ballet performs the holiday classic, hosted by Olympic champion Kristi Yamaguchi. Sunday, December 12 at 9 p.m. and Thursday, December 23 at 9 p.m.
(View full post to see video)Andrea Bocelli & David Foster: My Christmas in Concert: Legendary music producer David Foster joins Italian tenor Andrea Bocelli for a Christmas concert, with musical guests Natalie Cole, Mary J. Blige, Reba McEntire, and more. Wednesday, December 22 at 9 p.m.
Celebracion! Gustavo Dudamel and the L.A. Philharmonic with Juan Diego Flores: An opening night gala featuring bel canto arias and Latin canciones, hosted by actress Eva Mendes. Wednesday, December 29 at 9 p.m.
(View full post to see video)From Vienna: The New Year’s Celebration 2011: Georges Prêtre conducts the Vienna Philharmonic New Year’s Day Special, hosted by journalist Paula Zahn. Saturday, January 1 at 8 p.m.
(View full post to see video)Stay tuned for more information about the upcoming season of Great Performances at the Met, which begins on January 5 with the Donizetti comedy, Don Pasquale, starring Anna Netrebko.
Yesterday evening, WNET participated in the Eleventh Annual Winter’s Eve at Lincoln Square, New York City’s largest holiday festival.
WABC-TV anchor Sade Baderinwa and special guests John Pizzarelli, Eileen Ivers, and Chia’s Dance Party kicked off the festivities with the annual tree lighting. The evening also featured street performances, food tastings, in-store activities, and shopping from Columbus Circle to 68th Street.
WNET opened the doors of its new Tisch WNET Studios at Lincoln Center for guests, offering studio tours and meet and greets with Digit, from THIRTEEN’s hit kids show, Cyberchase.
Check out photos from the event here:
