Is Michael Greif today’s Hal Prince?

Is Michael Greif today’s Hal Prince? I can’t help but notice he has a track record of great, innovative, sometimes iconic shows - of which he apparently had a heavy hand in shaping a few (especially next to normal and Dear Evan Hansen). And he has churned out some of the most iconic performances of our time.

He seems to have an incredible eye for talent and can bring the best out in people.


Iconic contemporary sounding shows (including 2 Pulitzer Prize winners).

* RENT (with stellar performances from practically all leads)

* next to normal (with a stellar performance from Alice Ripley who in a recent video credited Michael Greif, and Marin Mazzie)

* Dear Evan Hansen (with a stellar performance from Ben Platt)

Scott Frankel/Michael Korie collaborations

* Grey Gardens (with a stellar performance from Christine Ebersole)

* Far From Heaven (with a stellar performance from Kelli O’Hara)

* War Paint (with stellar performances from Christine Ebersole and Patti LuPone)

Plus some solid work from Idina in If/Then.

Of course it helps that he has access to some of the world’s best musical performers and creatives but I can’t help but notice there is something special in most things he works on - kind of like the Hal Prince shows.

Updated On: 8/26/21 at 08:16 AM

I'd say there really is no Hal Prince today. That may be a mountain top no one else will ever achieve. No one else will ever have 21 Tony Awards!

But I agree Michael Grief (and Casey Nicholaw mentioned below) are among the brightest lights currently putting wonderful shows and performances on our stages. Long may they reign!

Updated On: 8/26/21 at 09:15 AM

Greif does intimate character studies, and is not a "flashy" director like Prince. Along with Joe Mantello, he is more comparable to Mike Nichols.

Rachel Chavkin comes to mind as possibly the next "Hal Prince type" because of her commitment to interesting new work. Her contributions are what made Hadestown and Comet work; those shows would not have been the artistic successes that they were without her work in shaping the productions. That feels very Hal to me. I would throw George C. Wolfe in there, too (though Wolfe also has some Elia Kazan qualities for how well he directs/shapes plays). Bartlett Sher has some Prince qualities, but he is more known for reinventing revivals, and Prince rarely did that.

Casey Nicholaw and Jerry Mitchell are more Tommy Tune than Hal Prince: someone who can create slick productions that mask some of the flaws in the actual material.



(And for whoever said nobody will have 21 Tonys again –– Roger Berlind exceeded that before his death, and Scott Rudin was about to pass Prince. Prince won 8 competative Tonys for Directing, which is nothing to slouch at, but the Tony categories were different then so some years he won multiple Tonys for producing the same show -- Best Musical and Best Producer. And nowadays there are dozens of co-producers who can win Tonys for no creative involvement.)

Updated On: 8/26/21 at 10:05 AM

Sorry, but no.

3 big contributions to the canon (plus some "solid work" do not a Hal Prince make. The sheer quantity of culturally significant shows that Hal Prince produced and/or directed FAR outstrips any director working today, and probably most producers too.

As far as Michael Greif is concerned, he doesn't come close by almost any metric. Surely Tommy Kail, Joe Mantello, and Rachel Chavkin are right up there with Greif. And I wouldn't compare any of them to Hal Prince either. And none of them are producers.

Chavkin may not have the extensive history as those other directors, but I agree she is helping to change the game as far as developing shows with her innovative direction woven into the conception of the show. Between Comet, Hadestown, and Moby Dick (and to a lesser extent, Small Mouth Sounds) she's starting to demonstrate a significant pattern that does partially mirror the way Hal Prince made contributions to his projects. But she -- or any director working today -- has a long ways to go to emerge as a modern Hal Prince.

Michael Greif is hands down the best director working now as far as developing new musicals.

Hal Prince was a visionary and was truly in a league of his own.
I will also agree with the above statement that the only person (at least that I can think of right now) working today to come close to him when staging a show, is Rachel Chavkin. She’s one of the only directors that it doesn’t matter what the project is, if I see her name, I know for sure I’m going to see something nobody else could do.

Updated On: 8/26/21 at 11:16 AM

HogansHero said: "The question betrays a lack of significant understanding of what Prince did, on both a micro and macro level."

That sums it up. There can and will never be another Hal Prince. He was unique, and it’s impossible to have that kind of career anymore.

HOWEVER, even though I don’t really like the material she chooses to direct, in terms of mis en scene and surprising visual touches that are epic without being bombastic, Chavkin has some Hal in her work.

I think Bart Sher is my favorite director working in NY, and his work brings that “sense of occasion” to the theatre, but again, he’s not Hal Prince.

HogansHero said: "The question betrays a lack of significant understanding of what Prince did, on both a micro and macro level."

You need not take it so literally. It's only for discussion purposes - in particular, given Hal's work with Sondheim and Kander and Ebb on a portfolio of shows that I think are the best ever made (far stronger than any of the shows I mentioned in the OP), there is no literal comparison for me.

Updated On: 8/26/21 at 01:30 PM

God no. He came out of the gate running with a brilliant production of Machinal at the Public...and then did only better-than-middling work on every musical he did afterwards. Some great musicals, but not great because of him. It wasn't until his wonderful staging of "Dear Evan Hansen" that I think he lived up to the promise of Machinal.

If one was lucky enough to see David Cromer's "Next to Normal" at Writer's Theatre in Chicago, it spelled out in comparison how uninspired Grief's direction of that show was.

If there was a Broadway Museum you could devout a whole wing to Harold Prince’s awards. He was a one of a kind.

I would love a crystal ball, just to see how Marianne Elliott’s career will eventually pan out.

Updated On: 8/26/21 at 09:38 PM

Michael Greif is not today's Hal Prince... he's today's Michael Greif.

No contemporary director should be compared to Prince just yet.

SouthernCakes said: "Be curious to know why Greif’s staging of DEH did It for you! To me it felt like a show designed for an off Broadway house and not a big Broadway musical - which it is exactly that. The sets move on from wing to wing and the band is in a loft which makes sense for its off Broadway house but doesn’t make much sense given its current home. And the staging just felt lacking to me. So be curious to hear your views.

Besides his brilliant use of social media projections (which could have been too much but was completely on point) the show just moved. And in Act Two, where I would argue all three writers just basically gave up (they were way more interested in the Act One plot machinations, the dialogue and especially the songs) he kept the show on a it's forward momentum. If not for him, Act Two would have melted into complete melodrama in its last thirty minutes, but somehow he was able to make the second half almost as vital as the first (and somehow control it's predictable plot denouement) and turn that show into the hit it is. Not that we always saw his hand, sometimes he just sat back and let the power of the actor and/or song simply do the work. The contrast between the busy and the quiet moments--that's how you direct a show!

Updated On: 8/27/21 at 01:32 PM