Posted: 7/23/26 at 2:46am
I don't trust my own recollections, so I looked up my thoughts on the Berkeley Rep version of the musical in May 2024:
Galileo is a frustrating show - worth seeing for the performances, set and lighting design, and a second act that has a genuinely interesting confrontation between the title character and his longtime ally, who is now the pope, along with more variety than the first. It's easy enough to grasp, almost too easy, with a score that is too repetitive (especially in the first act) and lyrics that don't move the story forward at all - except a couple of times in the second act.
I didn't dislike the show, and my wife enjoyed it more than I did, but there was something a little too predictable about it - with one notable exception. The cast is first-rate, with Raul Esparza playing the scientist as an arrogant but gifted rock star. That's fun for a while, especially because the book - as written by Danny Strong - also makes clear that he is as devout as the leaders of the Catholic Church who are suspicious of his ideas and rebellious nature. I had never seen Esparza live before, much less from the second row, and he was in good voice during the fifth performance of the weekend Sunday night.
Madalynn Mathews plays Galileo's daughter, Virginia, who is unmarriageable because her father is not financially independent and is also considered a scandalous figure. This leaves her in a nunnery by the second act. She makes the most of a tricky role that's constrained by her character's limitations. The most intriguing performer on stage is Jeremy Kushnier, a Broadway veteran who plays Bishop Maffeo Barberini. He is so inspired by Galileo that he writes a poem (well, fine, it's a song that he performs while shyly looking away from Esparza's character) about him and is his biggest supporter within the church hierarchy, which is very afraid that Galileo's insistence that the earth revolves around the sun will challenge the prevailing dogma in a way that will turn Catholics into Protestants. Strong deserves credit for making this concern seem less ridiculous than it sounds. The dynamic between Esparza's Galileo and Kushnier's Barberini is always interesting, and Kushnier - given the largest variety of songs along with high energy, a charming sense of humor and a lovely falsetto - practically steals the show. The opening song of the second act is a hilarious showstopper that also illustrates how becoming the pope is changing the former bishop.
The new pope has other problems - he's an embattled military leader against Protestant armies in Germany - and he gives a careful blessing to another attempt by Galileo to promote his theory. But Galileo pushes his luck, and his old friend - influenced by his enemies in the church, including cardinals played by Javier Munoz (of Hamilton fame) and Bradley Dean, as well as military leaders - feels betrayed. This leads to the best scene in the show, a showdown between the Pope and Galileo in which both men feel wronged but only one has power.
The score by Michael Weiner and Zoe Sarnak isn't bad, exactly. But as others have noted, the songs do tend to blur together, and the lyrics fall into an unfortunate habit of repeating words over and over. In fairness, things improve in the second act. But the show, directed by Michael Mayer, peters out with some predictable uplift.
I liked Galileo more than many of the professional critics, but it's easy to enjoy a new musical with strong, Broadway-caliber performances and some innovative effects. I assume this is just the first stop and another out-of-town tryout is coming. But despite the talent involved, I'm not sure the show can be fixed for Broadway just by banning the lyric writer from using the words "faith" and "louder." But I agree with Kitsune that Galileo, flaws and all, is worth checking out.
-----
I don't know what changes have been made since then, aside from Joy Woods in the role as Galileo's daughter. It's a thankless role unless it's been revamped. The reviews then were decidedly mixed, and the Variety review was a mocking pan. It captures many of the things that I didn't like about the show but felt too harsh. There's some good stuff in the show, along with imaginative lighting work, and I admired the way Strong treated his characters as serious people with real beliefs, instead of as cartoonish 1980s rockers winking at the audience the entire time. The latter approach, which I gather Strong fell into with his adaptation of Chess (which I didn't see), would have been a disaster.
Updated On: 7/23/26 at 02:46 AM
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
