Is broadway world paid to promote Hamilton? — Page 4

Jordan Catalano said: "If you want to see some real racist stuff from Dave, search for the threads when they announced the remake of ANNIE. If I remember correctly, he really wasn't too pleased about that.

"

Fighting against separation is racist?

Okay, i really enjoyed In The Heights. I found the ending and many other parts (Nina's story and her family's and abuela's stories for example) very moving. Salsa and musical theatre are my two favourite genres of music. But are you really saying that the Piragua guy's filler-sounding songs are masterpieces, or a rap about not having milk? Some of it was indeed wonderful, but 25 masterpieces in a row? Do you literally feel this way, or are you exaggerating for effect? (I'm just curious - you are of course entitled to your opinion, whatever it may be, but i am really curious now what your literal opinion is.)

Juggalo12 said: "I know a famous music theater historian who told me he hated Hamilton. It is the most profoundly overrated show of all time. The music is simply NOTHING. "

Yeah, but you're a juggalo so who really cares what you think about what music is considered "quality."

I've listened to the entire double CD many times, and there isn't a single memorable song.

I've listened to the CD many times and feel exactly the opposite. When I saw the show the first week of previews on Broadway, I already had melodies stuck in my head. I can recall several of them at the drop of a hat. I also loved In the Heights as well and I'm planning to see the London production this summer.

It's like two different people wrote these shows.

While I disagree with that statement regarding your two examples (one of the things I loved about Hamilton was how it retained so much of Miranda's signature style evident in both In the Heights and Bring It On), it could just as easily describe any number of Broadway composers.

It is the most profoundly overrated show of all time. The music is simply NOTHING.

I believe that is the most profoundly exaggerated statement regarding a Broadway musical of all time. It means NOTHING.

Yes I do believe that all 25 songs are masterful, including the charming Piragua song, not the shortened reprise of it. There are 25 main songs of significant length. Each one is entirely different from the others. The "rap about milk" is merely one little line in the seven minute opening number which introduces all the characters. Yes, I believe every main song is a masterpiece for what they are, both the lyrics and the music. To combine so many different musical styles into one show and have the songs come out sounding uncontrived and unique is a remarkable feat to me. My opinion is that ITH is one of the very greatest shows of the last 30 years. I'm not alone in this. I'm a professional music director and pianist, and know all of the shows. Even if only half the songs were amazing, the show would still be way ahead of the usual fare.

However, I remain unmoved by the music of Hamilton. Perhaps I need to see the show, but I am not impressed. It seems like the music is watered down to appeal to the masses, and some of the song lyrics are purposely designed to excite the tourists into a frenzied realization that they are in "the greatest city in the world" and are witnessing a "revolution" of music theater, rather than just the revolution in the story. This show was designed from day one to be a massive hit. I find this a sacrifice of true art. You can disagree. I personally do not care for the Hamilton music at all, after listening to it many times. Not that anyone cares what I think. It sounds simplistic and without energy. The "dialogue" and "rap" are all exceedingly brilliant, but the music is not. I like the opening and the ending, but nothing much in between.

Juggalo12 said: "It sounds simplistic and without energy."

Are you 100% positive that you're listening to "Hamilton (Original Broadway Cast Recording)?"

I disagree with the assessment of Hamilton's music as simplistic, but it seems unfair to say it was designed to be a massive hit. While that isn't necessarily a bad thing, this was a show that was developed over a long period of time and had it's first production at a non-profit theatre. Plus, the subject matter isn't exactly something with mass appeal. While someone is certainly free to dislike the music, it's not as if this was thrown together quickly to capitalize on some kind of fad or craze- craft and care certainly went into the composition, whether or not it is your taste is a separate judgement.

I didn't realize that LMM had cracked the code on how to make a hit! He should patent that! You are certainly permitted to not like the show, but "blaming" it's success is ridiculous.

I know the work of the Insane Clown Posse. I suppose the 2 really don't compare.

As for In the Heights, my recording says there's 23 tracks so I'm not sure how there are 25 masterpieces in the score. It's a good score but he began writing it almost 20 years ago, so the increase in quality between the two (which is immense in my opinion) could simply be because of age and experience. I certainly disagree that they sound like they were written in the same sitting (hyperbolically speaking).

Updated On: 3/3/16 at 02:40 AM

Dave19 said: "FindingNamo said: " The sisters Schuyler, Angelica, Eliza and Peggy introduce themselves multiple times, which is very dull and unnecessary and makes the audience feel like a fool,

Speak for yourself, fool.

"

How many times do you need to hear something before you understand it?

"

I have to ask, do you feel that way about every song that has a repeating chorus? Personally, I find the repeating of this line underscores the relationship between the sisters - Angelica and Eliza are especially close and do things together, and Peggy is the younger sister who tags along. And that closeness sets up a lot of what Angelica says about the two of them in Satisfied. And setting Peggy up as a sister on the periphery makes it easy to understand that she's not really mentioned beyond this.

What I keep coming back to in your posts, though, is that you seem to somehow feel that you are the arbiter of taste. That you and only you decide what everyone should enjoy. You don't enjoy a show? OK, that's your thing. I might agree or disagree. I would never tell you that you aren't allowed to hold that opinion though.

Assuming everyone who enjoys or respects LMM and Hamilton are lemmings is ridiculous. I went into the show expecting it not to live up to what I had heard about it. I hadn't listened to the cast album. And yet I thought it was fantastic on multiple levels - overall as a show, in the amount of facts that were included, in the influences that LMM infused into the score (and he'd be the first to tell you all of the influences that knowingly went into the music).

That's my opinion though - you don't have to agree. I do expect you to respect that it's my opinion and I can enjoy or not enjoy a show, regardless of whether you enjoyed it.