Hamilton in Chicago - Page 8

[sorano916]

Posted: 10/31/16 at 1:58pm

I went on Saturday so these are a few of my thoughts...

 

Miguel... love Miguel. I caught his 2nd performance here in NYC and he's just grown so much in the role. He's a bit more humorous in the role than say Lin or Javi. Also, he's tiny compared to everyone else, especially Jonathan, which kinda makes him more of an impact when he's trying to show that he can do more, that he has more to prove. Also, thank goodness they changed his wig as having it all down during Act 2 wasn't working in NYC. It's still in a ponytail but it looks better.

 

Josh... His Burr is very eager and actually wants people to like him. I actually felt like he and Hamilton could have actually been friends and slowly you see the wedge drive between them. His "Wait for It" was thoughtful but precise. His "Room"... guh... the explosion at the end is much different than was Leslie did and it worked went with Josh's voice. In the duel, you can tell his frustration and his anger, but also his remorse afterwards.

 

BTW, Miguel's and Josh's "Dear Theodosia" is probably the most gorgeous version of that song because they both can sing really well and their voice blend together smoothly, kinda making the point that no matter the differences between them, they have a same goal: a better world for their children.

 

Karen. As many others have said, she's more emotional than Renee. I was in Side Orch, Row F, and she honestly had tears streaming down her face during "Satisfied". There was just a sense of desperation during that song that I never felt when I saw Renee. I really liked her as Angelica.

 

Ari. Her acting is so sweet and innocent... and a little naive, but her voice sometimes doesn't match that. It sometimes comes out a little pop-ish or too R&B. However, her "Burn"... man, it's not just disappointment which I mostly got whenever I saw Pippa, but there was anger and fire in there. To note, she doesn't full-out scream when Philip dies, just a couple "noo, noo..." She and Miguel have a lovely chemistry.

 

Jonathan. I've only seen Chris as Washington so I'm a little biased. Jonathan is good, but I felt that he was holding back. 

 

Alexander. Definitely more like Brian than the other kings. He definitely brought the laughs as well as the spitting. Heh. If you thought Groff was bad, oof. Avoid the first two rows.

 

Chris. I'm actually the few who liked his Jefferson compared to his Lafayette. His French accent needs some work as it kinda went away when he had to rap really fast. I also don't know if it was his mic or just how he spoke but it seemed a little low compared to others on the stage. He really went for it during the rap battles.

 

Wallace. I do like Wallace. I've seen him in many other shows (Hair, Godspell, Idiot, Rocky, Les Mis) but he really didn't do it for me for this in either role. To me, I didn't have a distinction between the two which didn't help. Oak's been the only person I've seen as Mulligan/Madison and he makes that distinction between the two so different than it's kinda hard to see someone not make as much distinction. Wallace plays off well with Chris.

 

Samantha and Jose. They're fine. They honestly just reminded me of Jasmine and Anthony in any extent. They sing and act well but nothing really stood out to me.

 

Ensemble... Very sharp and it's actually quite funny because you can kinda tell who's their OBC counterpart. Not necessarily because you know the track but just how the ensemble looks & carries themselves. It's hard to explain but they're great.

Updated On: 10/31/16 at 01:58 PM

[luvcaroline]

Posted: 10/31/16 at 2:04pm

Thanks for the kind words, velevele. I'd love to hear your thoughts about the show after you've seen it. 

[KJisgroovy]

Posted: 10/31/16 at 3:37pm

Jorge... Can you talk about the lottery seat locations? 

Thanks!

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 10/31/16 at 3:48pm

^my lottery seat was in the mezzanine box on the right. It was a limited view. It really tough seeing stuff on the right, but other than that I thought the seat was fine and I could see everything in the center perfectly fine.

 

does anyone know how well the show is doing gross wise? I'd expect it to make some box office record in Chicago,

[sorano916]

Posted: 10/31/16 at 5:40pm

Call_me_jorge said: "does anyone know how well the show is doing gross wise? I'd expect it to make some box office record in Chicago,"

 

The last thing I read about box office record in Chicago was went Newsies broke it last year... $2,012,723 in a week. But based on the article, it seems like grosses aren't really reported in Chicago...

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/theater/chi-newsies-claims-biggest-box-office-chicago-column.html

 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 1:27am

Big thanks to everybody who responded to my question about Ari and Karen's performances (and with such detail)! Another random question that came to mind (and sorry if it's been covered!):

In "Cabinet Battle #1" in the Broadway/original production, Washington says, "You could've been anywhere in the world tonight, but you're here with us in New York City!" Obviously, that's true to the history/text itself, but it takes on a meta meaning when you're in the Richard Rodgers Theatre. Is that line still exactly intact in Chicago? Just curious

[luvcaroline]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 1:29am

Yes, exactly the same. 

[nightnic001]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 1:30am

Yep still in, and no it does not get as big of response 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 1:33am

Gotcha. Figured it was a dumb question on my part, but had to ask! Thank you

[velevele]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 6:14pm

Warning, this post is only for “Hamilton” geeks, and it’s really long. If that doesn’t interest you, now’s the time to stop reading! Also if you don’t want spoilers for Chicago, don’t read this. Also it’s so long, I’m breaking it into parts. Cross-posted to my Facebook page, so if you're Facebook friends with me and read it there, there's nothing new here. Also, should be obvious, but everything that follows is my opinion, not The Gospel Truth That Applies To Everyone.   Part 1:

I’ve now been lucky enough to see “Hamilton” three times, twice in NYC and once in Chicago. Because of the amazing experience I had seeing it with the OBC in NYC, I was a little nervous about Chicago, but I needn’t have been. It’s become stereotyped to say “the show is the star” - I think, more accurately, everything about the show is the star, not just because of what Miranda did in creating it, but because of the great care taken, for the most part, in casting the various parts, and in the loving attention to detail involved in bringing the show to Chicago. The Chicago production held its own. So, by category, Chicago vs. NYC:

Venue. The PrivateBank Theatre (PBT) in Chicago is just awful, unfortunately. Many of the sightlines are poor - a large number of seats are sold as obstructed view - and even some of the seats not sold as obstructed view have some obstruction. The stage is much higher than in NYC’s Richard Rodgers Theatre (RR), which means that if you’re sitting in the orchestra and are closer than about 10 rows from the front, you won’t be able to see the stage floor (and will miss the lighting effects that take place there). The mezzanine seemed further back as well. In general, the stage seemed a little narrower and deeper than at RR, and I didn’t have the feeling of being close to the actors in the way I did at RR. (We were in left Orch Row G in PBT - my two RR tickets were in Orch Row D and Orch Row J, both of which were great.) I did a lot of agonizing before selecting our tickets for Chicago, because there’s no perfect solution at PBT - if you’re far enough back to see the floor, you’ll be too far back to see facial expressions. I went for facial expressions, but that meant loss of the lighting. I’d suggest being sure what your priorities are before selecting tickets at PBT. On the plus side, PBT has decent legroom, and a way larger lobby than RR. The merchandise stand wasn’t particularly mobbed, at least not early on.

Staging changes. This production, as I mentioned, has been carefully and lovingly transferred virtually intact. The stage/set is the same, and the sound system at PBT is (almost) as good as at RR. There have been a few minor changes in staging - for example, during “My Shot” at RR, Mulligan puts his leg on the bench to show off his pants during the “I think your pants look hot” line, but at PBT, he does a little shimmy dance instead. But by and large, it’s the same production as in NYC.

Audiences. All three of the audiences reacted about the same way, with applause/laughter in the same places, with one very notable exception, which I’ll say more about shortly.

Hamilton. We saw Miguel Cervantes, who was excellent. (In NYC, I’d seen Rua and Miranda.) In a way, I feel this is the one role for which it’s unfair to do comparisons. LMM’s performance will always be the definitive one, for obvious reasons - I don’t mean that everyone will find it to be the “best” one, depending on personal taste, but it will always be the “Shakespeare performing Shakespeare” one. I’ve read a lot of criticism about both LMM’s voice and his acting. I think the criticisms of his voice are justified - he’s not a strong singer - but I disagree about his acting. I thought he was incandescent the night I saw him, and his performance was by far my favorite of the three. Of the other two, I was least pleased with Rua, who wandered around the beat more than I would have liked (LMM is quite precise with the beat), and who occasionally had a half-smile on his face during quite serious parts of the show. Cervantes is a strong vocalist who was also precisely on the beat. He made some different choices than LMM - for example, he basically spoke all of the “I imagine death so much...” soliloquies, rather than singing them as LMM does, and that was quite effective. He’s well cast in the part.

Burr. Let’s get right to the controversial opinion.   I saw Odom twice in NYC, and Joshua Henry in Chicago. Odom, of course, is great, with the well-deserved Tony. But to my complete surprise, I thought Henry was better- a LOT better. Odom plays Burr in what I think of as kind of  one-note way - smooth, suave, never particularly unsure of himself, and it’s not that clear, really, how and why he and Hamilton come to the end they do. Henry portrays much more of a character arc - friendliness and warmth, caution, self-confidence, confusion, self-doubt, anger, and finally remorse. His “Room Where It Happens” strongly displayed the shift from longing to determination, and Henry knocked it out of the park. At the end, there was a huge, long ovation for this song, at least three times longer (if not even longer than that) than the ovations for Odom the two times I saw him. It would probably still be going on, if the conductor hadn’t finally struck up the orchestra and moved on to the next song. The one choice Henry made that I didn’t like as well as Odom’s was at the end of “The Election of 1800". Both times I saw Odom, he stuck his hand out as he approached Jefferson with the line “Congrats on a race well-run”, and then left his hand sticking out through all of the ensuing dialogue, till the end. (Jefferson, of course, never shook his hand.) Henry stuck his hand out at that line as well, but when Jefferson didn’t immediately shake it, he dropped it back down. I thought Odom’s choice was the more poignant.

Angelica. Let’s get to controversial opinion #2. I saw Goldsberry twice in NYC, also with the well-deserved Tony, and loved her performance. In Chicago, we saw Karen Olivo, and... I preferred her performance to Goldsberry’s as well. Goldsberry did a great job of showing the anguish and unrequited love during “Satisfied”, but Olivo brought that up a couple of notches more. Near the end, Olivo almost screams the last few lines, as she tries to cover anguish with congratulations, and it was just heartbreaking. I think we’ve all been there, where we had to watch someone we cared about walk away from us, one way or the other, and pretend it wasn’t causing us the pain that it was. Olivo did an incredible job of portraying this. I was also frustrated, both on the CD and onstage, of Goldsberry’s delivery, in “The Reynolds Pamphlet” of the line, “God, I hope you’re satisfied.” This is her climax line in the song, yet she delivers it in the same tone as the three lines right before it, barely even breathing - it’s not particularly intense, whereas I feel that line should be practically spit out with anger. Olivo gave it more of the anger I feel that the line deserves, and added some hand gestures as well.

End of Part 1!

[Jennabee]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 6:19pm

WOW velevele what an amazing review!  Thank you!

I am someone who tried VERY hard to see the OBC and while we are very much looking forward to seeing it in Chicago, I've thought of it as a bit of a consolation prize.  With the exception of Lin, looks like Chicago may be even better in some ways.  Really encouraging!!

Looking forward to your part 2!

[luvcaroline]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 6:52pm

What a great review so far velevele. I can't wait to hear more. 

I'm glad that you were as blown away by Josh's performance as I was. I still get chills thinking about it. 

[velevele]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 7:11pm

Following up my Part 1 Chicago vs. NYC comparison with Part 2, and repeating the warnings: Warning, this post is only for “Hamilton” geeks, and it’s really long. If that doesn’t interest you, now’s the time to stop reading! Also if you don’t want spoilers for Chicago, don’t read this. Also it’s so long, I’m breaking it into parts. And again - obviously, these are only my opinions, and YMMV. Part 2 here:

Washington. In NYC, I saw Austin Smith and Christopher Jackson, in Chicago, Jonathan Kirkland. I have to admit that Smith’s performance left little impact on me - he was competent, but for me, not emotionally moving. Then I saw Jackson, and for the first time during “One Last Time”, I burst into tears. It was like a clinic on how differently performers could handle the exact same material. I didn’t think Kirkland could possibly live up to Jackson, and he didn’t, but he wasn’t too far off either. He plays it a little less powerfully in terms of his song delivery, but he uses his physical size (quite tall) to great effect. For example, at the end of “Meet Me Inside”, when Hamilton and Washington have their big fight, and Hamilton finally snaps at the line “Call me son one more time--“, there is just a beat or two of silence, and then Kirkland slowly straightens to his full height and simply looks DOWN at Cervantes (who is quite short). Most of us, as kids, were probably on the receiving end of looks like that from our parents!  Because of the height difference between the two actors, that moment was overall considerably more effective for me than the same moment between Jackson and Miranda. Kirkland does a fine job, and I expect his performance will evolve for the better with time, but for now, edge to Jackson.

Lafayette/Jefferson. I saw Daveed Diggs twice in NYC, and Chris De’Sean Lee in Chicago. There’s no one else quite like Diggs, I think, but Lee did well. He’s very young (22, I think), which for me, worked a lot better for Lafayette (who was indeed very young during the Revolution) than it did for the much older Jefferson. His performance of Jefferson was considerably broader than Diggs’ - more nudge nudge wink wink, more hamming it up. The audience ate this up, but I felt Diggs’ portrayal was more chronologically apt. Lee isn’t a disappointment at all, but edge to Diggs here as well.

Mulligan/Madison. I saw Okieriete Onaodowan twice in NYC, and Wallace Smith in Chicago. Oak is a tremendous audience-favorite Mulligan (and I loved him as Mulligan also), but I was never too enamored of his Madison, whom I felt he played as a kind of a non-entity, a rather bland foil to the charismatic Jefferson. I’ve read a couple of biographies of Madison, and he’s so much more than that, so Oak’s Madison had left me fairly underwhelmed. Smith, on the other hand, plays Madison much more strongly, and much more of an equal to Jefferson, a decision I preferred. He also made a fine Mulligan, but Madison was where he shone for me. Slight edge to Oak for Mulligan, big edge to Smith for Madison.

Laurens/Philip Hamilton. Anthony Ramos twice in NYC, Jose Ramos in Chicago. I loved AR as Laurens, but didn’t like his Philip much at all - I felt he was playing the 9-year-old Philip with a certain amount of tongue-in-cheek quality that didn’t really work for me, and I especially didn’t care for the way he bellowed his lines in “Take a Break”. JR, on the other hand, was a brilliant Philip - he played it very sincerely, I thought, and somehow actually made himself look like a child. His Laurens was more low-key and less visible than AR’s, but he did the Laurens interlude (the one not on the CD) stunningly, which calls for a more low-key presentation. Overall edge to JR for me.

Eliza. Philippa Soo twice in NYC, Ari Afsar in Chicago. I thought Afsar bore a striking physical and vocal resemblance to Soo, so much so that I had to remind myself at times that I was watching a different performer. She doesn’t do the wrenching scream at Philip’s death that Soo does, which I think is a mistake. Otherwise, for me Eliza is a fairly bland character, so I didn’t see much else to differentiate Soo and Afsar.

I’ll spare everyone the more minor characters!

So overall: for me, nothing will ever top the OBC performance I saw with Miranda, but the Chicago cast can be very proud of what they’ve accomplished. In the end, it’s a matter of personal preference, of course, but IMO, the Chicago version is just as good as the NYC version, and in some places it’s better. Kudos to all involved.

[velevele]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 7:13pm

Thank you, Jennabee and Luvcaroline!  Jennabee, you are NOT getting a consolation prize in Chicago at all. Yes, Miranda won't be there, but I hope like mad that you won't be disappointed. Let us know! And Luvcaroline, thanks again for your brilliant review, which went a long way to reassuring me before I went. You were spot-on about Henry!

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 7:15pm

So far I'm in agreement with you velevele! I saw the show on Sunday so I didn't see Miguel(I will February), but I thought joseph was extremely talented and his performance made me cry a few times. As did josh and Karen. I'm still hoping Joshua records a single of room where it happens. I need to listen to him again!!

 

[luvcaroline]

Posted: 11/2/16 at 9:13pm

Velevele, I'd also love to hear your opinion of Alexander's King George. 

[mahnuma]

Posted: 11/3/16 at 2:12am

I saw it on Sunday and have been itching to see it again as soon as possible. I was soooo wired and pretty weepy so it just felt like such a whirlwind. It was still a perfect experience by all means, but I'd love to see it once more soon to kind of cement it in haha.

[velevele]

Posted: 11/3/16 at 7:09am

Luvcaroline, I didn't see Alexander as King George - the understudy, Jin Ha, went on. I was a little disappointed at first, since people have been raving about Alexander, but on the plus side, Jin Ha is a friend of a friend, so that was fun.  Ha played it very understated in his first two numbers - I think it was the first time he's gone on as KGIII and I was wondering if he was playing it a little cautious, but he loosened up considerably in his third number, and he was hilarious in "The Reynolds Pamphlet". (In NYC, I'd seen both Groff and O'Malley, whom I both loved, and Ha was considerably more subtle in his performance. But I don't think most people want "subtle"!)
 

In a way, I think KGIII is the least important role in terms of who's cast - the part is written so that pretty much "anybody" could do it, I think - it seems to sort of play itself. (Even I, who have never acted even one line onstage in my life, think I could play KGIII!)    Not to underestimate the work the KGIII actors have put into that part - I know it's not as easy as I'm making it sound - but it's pretty much a one-note character. Ha got nice rounds of applause every time, especially the last time, but he didn't get quite the ovations that either O'Malley or, especially, Groff did.  I think I'm gonna have to go back to Chicago just to see Gemignani! 

Updated On: 11/3/16 at 07:09 AM

[MyLife]

Posted: 11/3/16 at 10:30am

I often wonder how much the portrayal of Madison is affected by his Jefferson pairing. I admire Oak's Madison greatly, but I remember noticing him and enjoying him more when Daveed was out. Someone here mentioned that that Smith's Madison seemed like he was more of an equal and a guide to Jefferson, rather than a lackey, while Oak seemed like more of a sidekick. It makes sense when one describes Chris Lee's Jefferson as hammier and younger - he needs guidance. Daveed's Jefferson stands so much on its own that Madison coming off on a sidekick makes more sense to me. I enjoy both portrayal's but they are different. This is why I love seeing shows multiple times :).

Chemistry in a duo is key.

[pupscotch]

Posted: 11/3/16 at 10:47am

velevele, what did you think of Samantha as Peggy/Maria? 

[velevele]

Posted: 11/3/16 at 1:54pm

pupscotch, I was a big fan of Jasmine Cephas Jones's interpretation (I saw her twice in NYC) and, especially, her gorgeous voice, so I was a little nervous about what I'd think of Samantha Marie Ware, but she was fantastic. She was a tad more forceful as Peggy (came across as a bit more of a spoiled brat), which I really liked. For Maria Reynolds, she was exquisite. I thought her interpretation of Maria was noticeably different than Jones's. Jones begins by playing Maria as a distressed victim, as does Ware, but in Ware's interpretation, underneath the damsel in distress, you can see a hint of slyness and even anger, which wasn't visible to me in how Jones played it.  I LOVED this. It made the subsequent entrapment of Hamilton follow naturally, and really drove home that when he wanted a story to be a certain way, that's how he saw it - he wanted to see a damsel in distress who fell for him, and not a blackmailer, so that's what he saw. But from the start, Ware shows that other side of Maria - buried, but still visible. I thought it was exquisitely done.

[hamiltonboys]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 12:54am

Two quick questions:

-I got three front row seats in the balcony. Is it true that we will need to lean forward to see the front of the stage? How is the view in general?

-Is there a souvenir program specifically for the Chicago production? 

[pc1145N]

Posted: 11/11/16 at 9:36am

I sat in the front row of the balcony and did not have to lean except for about 3 times. The view was much better than I had expected. You'll be very happy.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 11/12/16 at 10:34pm

Something I am just remembering about the set(haven't seen the NY production so it could be the same case) is the platform they set all the tables on when they were tracking them in and off. Well at first I thought the platform on a track then over the course of the show I saw there wasn't a track and a guy was pushing a pole to move it(I'm not familiar with the name of this process), but I thought it was interesting David Korins would have a track for the candles, but not for this platform. Anyone know why?

Updated On: 11/13/16 at 10:34 PM

[ggersten]

Posted: 11/13/16 at 9:46am

pc1145N said: "I sat in the front row of the balcony and did not have to lean except for about 3 times. The view was much better than I had expected. You'll be very happy."

When I saw the show from the fifth row in the orchestra, the person in charge of lighting sat next to me taking notes.  He usually sat in the balcony.  He said the front of the balcony was the perfect place to the see the show.  Not that he didn't like the orchestra seats - he said it was a different show from the orchestra. But, if you want to take in the whole effect of the show, he recommended the balcony for view and value.