Hamilton

[fredtoast]

Not a big fan of Broadway musicals so I can't really compare it to others, but it was very entertaining. It is not meant to be a strict history lesson, so I am not sure if it is 100% accurate, but the majors themes are correct from what I know.

One thing I noticed was that Lin-Manuel Miranda was not as good looking or as good of a singer as the people around him. But since he was brilliant enough to write it I guess he gets to make himself the star.

[BmorePat87]

(07-29-2020, 02:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Not a big fan of Broadway musicals so I can't really compare it to others, but it was very entertaining.  It is not meant to be a strict history lesson, so I am not sure if it is 100% accurate, but the majors themes are correct from what I know.

One thing I noticed was that Lin-Manuel Miranda was not as good looking or as good of a singer as the people around him.  But since he was brilliant enough to write it I guess he gets to make himself the star.

Great music, bad history, but it makes it easy to digest for people who aren't traditional fans of broadway or history. LMM definitely isn't the most talented singer or actor on the stage, and some have said he should have given his role to someone else, but he really connected with Hamilton so I guess that's why he starred in his own musical.

Daveed Diggs steals the show for me, especially as Jefferson in Act II. 

From a history standpoint, I think it's ok that he left things out, but one of the places where his defense, and the defense of others, falls short is where he adds to make Hamilton a more likable figure, particularly by overstating his views on slavery.  In a play with no characters based on people of color, the use of almost all actors of color (besides the king) causes issues when you're intentionally portraying people who participated in the institution of slavery as strong opponents of it. 

But overall, I liked it. 

[jfkbengals]

(07-29-2020, 05:10 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Great music, bad history, but it makes it easy to digest for people who aren't traditional fans of broadway or history. LMM definitely isn't the most talented singer or actor on the stage, and some have said he should have given his role to someone else, but he really connected with Hamilton so I guess that's why he starred in his own musical.

Daveed Diggs steals the show for me, especially as Jefferson in Act II. 

From a history standpoint, I think it's ok that he left things out, but one of the places where his defense, and the defense of others, falls short is where he adds to make Hamilton a more likable figure, particularly by overstating his views on slavery.  In a play with no characters based on people of color, the use of almost all actors of color (besides the king) causes issues when you're intentionally portraying people who participated in the institution of slavery as strong opponents of it. 

But overall, I liked it. 

Agree with the bold whole heartedly.


And it was a fantastic show start to finish.  The King cracked me up, too.

As for LMM, I believe he starred in his prior show as well.  I don't think it is an unusual thing for the author to star in the show (for example, people regularly do "one man shows" that they wrote).  But Miranda gave up the Hamilton role after one year.  From what I read, he did so because he felt it was causing him to ignore his family.  I guess he was still composing new projects all day, then taking the stage at night with no time for the family in between.  I can't blame him for doing so.  It's not like he was throwing away his shot!

[fredtoast]

LMM can hold his own on a broadway stage, so I am not trashing him. But the one time I really noticed it was a scene where it was just him and Burr sitting on stage signing. The guy who played Burr was a total hunk with an incredible voice. The difference was noticable.