I love this movie so much

best movie i've ever seen.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

This was pretty disappointing. There is just not enough dance and too much filler (or cinema verite) as in:Justin Peck (choreographer) walking down empty corridorsthe orchestra being conductedtoo much on costume assemblage (there is footage of a washing machine)NYC subway stationsThere is not much on the inspiration for the dance and the choreography; there is some perspiration (some short dancing scenes), but very little on the creative process. It's like seeing architects and engineers walking and talking, but never seeing the finished product(the building - in this case the dance).For dancers only. Not for the audience. I pressed fast forward several times. Badly assembled and edited.

I came into this documentary with open arms as a previous critic here had left a glowing review. I love ballet. In another life, I would have pursued it as a profession. It makes a great foundation for the documentaries of late. Classical music combined with top-notch cinematography and beautiful movements--think David Gelb of "Jiro Dreams of Sushi."But this gave us all of that with no story. The audience barely gets any background. Justin Peck is set to choreograph a new ballet for the New York City Ballet. The ballet's name and substance is mysteriously hidden from the viewer. The dancers and outside collaborators also remain anonymous. I had a difficult time remaining engaged. While the dancers move beautifully and the process of creating itself so intriguing, without any commentary from the "characters" in this lack of "story," I was left bored and unfulfilled. I suggest watching it during some downtime or while doing chores, because there are moments that you cannot help but watch. But others, less worthy, are left, perplexingly, uncut. We stare for what seems likes minutes on end at the minutely expressive faces while they look on at the real action to see.

Many successful Hollywood movies follow the storyline of how a new ballet is prepared. Most have subplots based on the motives and after hours experiences of ballet company members. This film brilliantly ignores the sub plots to focus on the internal workings of the much admired New York City ballet at Lincoln Center's David Koch theater. Every camera angle and every bit of dialogue is fascinating to balletomanes though may be an unfamiliar experience to those who perhaps don't care for the performing arts or aren't enthused about ballet. We get intimate looks at the creative process, the way the corps de ballet prepares new choreography and the inner workings of a major ballet company with 91 dancers. The revelation seems the way the dancers and the house staff seem to direct in committee consensus without line boss artistic management as is traditional in a ballet company once run with an iron hand by George Balanchine and then by Peter Martins.The surprise expose is company ballet performance tweaked by many hands working to guess performer plus house staff consensus at the heart of why some fans adore NYCB and why some fans avoid its surface sameness week after week and year after year.

I just saw this film at Filmlinc (Feb 6, 2015). Let's just say that Jody Lee Lipes is no Frederick Wiseman. The film just not have the length of a Wiseman film (Ballet 422 is 72 minutes; Wiseman films run 3-4 hours). Wiseman usually spends at least 3 months with his subjects. Lipes explained he really knows nothing about ballet (though he is married to Ellen Barr, a former NYCB soloist and current head of their media operations). I think it really helps if you are (and have been) a NYCB frequent viewer. I was able to identify most of the dancers (even the corps). Albert Evans (who helps Peck) is a former NYCB principal and current ballet master. He is obviously in charge of Peck's work (in that he could set it on new dancers or another company). The person who talked to Justin about talking to the orchestra in Cameron Grant, a company pianist who both plays for rehearsals and class but also performances (Pictures At An Exhibition).When I see a a Wiseman film I feel I really understand the institution he is portraying. Here, I didn't really feel I had any better understanding of the choreographic process. How did Justin pick this music? How did he pick the dancers? What were the money constraints? What was Peter's role (you know he had one)? There were also a few things I really didn't like. One was Lipes showing Justin complaining to Albert about Amar Ramasar, one of his leads. Amar seems like a relaxed, good guy, but no dancer wants to be called out like that on camera. The other was Lipes final shot, which was of Concerto DSCH (which Justin is preparing to dance) with Bizet's Symphony in C (NOT its music) playing over the visuals. We only get about 2 minutes of what Paz DE la Jolla looked like on stage. That was really a letdown and something a Wiseman would never do. I mean, the whole film is about the creation of Paz and then show only 2 minutes? And end with Ratmansky's masterpiece? What a letdown. And if Lipes knew more about ballet, maybe he'd have realized a bit more what it means to end with another choreographer's work.Anyway, I enjoy everything ballet and really like film, too. This is not a great film but if you like NYCB (and new work) this is a must see. If not, may be a pass.