Hamilton - Is it bad I liked it?

FluffyTehFennekin said:
RENT was better, and even that was dated.
Click to expand...

That's kind of the thing. The show is "alright", and it is unique enough compared to other musicals out there right now, but it's getting its knock-offs already and I don't think it's going to age that well (similarly to RENT) although both are/will be looked on as staples in musical theatre.

But honestly, I just think Natasha, Pierre and the Great Comet of 1812 did what Hamilton was attempting to do way better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shield Breaker and Mexican_Wizard_711
LuthienTinuviel said:
I don't think it's going to age that well (similarly to RENT) although both are/will be looked on as staples in musical theatre.
Click to expand...
A large part of how well it will age is how often it will be produced after the sit-down and touring productions have closed up shop. (I mean, they have closed up shop, but, as of now, not for good, at least officially.) Will it be attractive enough for amateur productions and regional companies to license? That hinges on a whole host of other questions: Can it be divorced from its original staging? Is there room for reinterpretation?

Only then will anyone know for sure if Hamilton will enter the literature or if it was purely of its time and place.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Picklechu, AlexJonesGotMePregnant, Mexican_Wizard_711 and 2 others
LuthienTinuviel said:
it is unique enough compared to other musicals out there right now,
Click to expand...

Hamilton is not unique, though. Its identical to Miranda's previous show, In the Heights*, but with an American history gloss to make it palatable to white people.

*for those not in the know, In the Heights was a show meant to make rich Puerto Ricans feel like they had some kind of ethic street cred instead of being mostly white, rich and living in segregated gentrified neighborhoods far from those other dirty spics
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: madethistocomment, Shield Breaker, Dang Woodchucks! and 7 others
I’m not an enormous fan of it based on listening to the songs. Maybe watching the filmed performance coming next month to Disney+ will change that. I don’t think the true sign of greatness for a musical is that the songs have to stand on their own divorced from the play since they are servicing a story, not trying to be chart toppers. That being said, I think that the show attracts waaaaay more hate than it deserves and that is largely because the hardcore fan base is fucking annoying and won’t shut the fuck up about it. I know I should have considered the source, but it felt like The Huffington Post had a dedicated Hamilton correspondent for the first year of its run. That being said, I’m not too surprised by how quickly it shot up and why it’s so widely admired. When Stephen Sondheim asked Miranda what he was working on, the old bastard burst out in glee when he was told it was a hip hop musical about one of the founding fathers. “They’d never expect that out of you!” And he was right. No one would have thought of that to be a follow up to Into the Heights. What also helped us the ever tiring corporatization of Broadway, each new season full of Popular Movie: The Musical! Here is something that can be considered an original property (yes, I know it’s based off of Chernow’s book, but I imagine Miranda secured the rights in the odd event that someone else wanted to do a stage show based on Hamilton’s life) and is ambitious beyond elaborate set pieces. That is very rare for Broadway in general, and practically theoretical for Broadway musicals, particularly since Disney set down its anchor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xiphias and stuffandthings
albertbrown26 said:
the real life creator of Hamilton is a shill for Puerto Ricans wanting to come to the U.S. illegally on his Twitter account, and he basically ripped off Biggie songs by self-inserting himself, while thinking Alexander Hamilton was black.
Click to expand...
Do you mean Cubans? Because Puerto Rico is a US territory.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: albertbrown26
cactus said:
Do you mean Cubans? Because Puerto Rico is a US territory.
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. This was around the time where the media lied about the current administration putting kids in cages, even though the previous administration. The creator of Hamilton then tried to lobby for a way to get Puerto Ricans that we’re here illegally before the territory was recognized to get them over the border without rule of law.
 
albertbrown26 said:
I don’t think so. This was around the time where the media lied about the current administration putting kids in cages, even though the previous administration. The creator of Hamilton then tried to lobby for a way to get Puerto Ricans that we’re here illegally before the territory was recognized to get them over the border without rule of law.
Click to expand...

You might be getting things backwards a bit, Puerto Rico residents were granted US citizenship in 1917.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cactus
Since we're making musicals about fictional black men who were important to America's history, can we get a Desmond Pfeifer musical next?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Someone in a Tree
So is the musical cool to hate now since everyone remembered the man was a dang dirty white slaveowner?
 
albertbrown26 said:
I don’t think so. This was around the time where the media lied about the current administration putting kids in cages, even though the previous administration. The creator of Hamilton then tried to lobby for a way to get Puerto Ricans that we’re here illegally before the territory was recognized to get them over the border without rule of law.
Click to expand...
Puerto Ricans were granted citizenship over a century ago, dude, every Puerto Rican that is currently alive is a citizen of the US automatically.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Picklechu and cactus
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back