OUR Hamilton Reviews — Page 2

CT2NYC said: "Broadway61004 said: "Georgeanddot2 said: "Saving this one to watch with my family for the 4th of July tomorrow.

Just a heads up, this is currently Oscar eligible. Unless the Oscars make a special ruling rendering this ineligible, I think this could be a Best Picture contender. We could see some of the performances recognized as well."

It may technically still be eligible right now, but I'd say there's less than a 1% chance it ends up that way. Otherwise every single Met production shown in cinemas over the past 10 years would have been eligible.

And even if it does end up eligible by some miracle, I'd say there's less than a 1% chance it would get nominated. Oscar voters are already completely rebelling against streaming services, so something on a streaming service that isn't even a film in the traditional sense? No way.

I could, however, see the Academy giving Lin an honorary Oscar or something along those lines."

1. In 1975, James Whitmore received a Best Actor nomination for his filmed stage performance in GIVE ‘EM HELL, HARRY, so there is precedent.

2. Due to the pandemic, streaming films will be eligible this year without a theatrical release.

3. In 2019, Roma, a Netflix film, won 3 Oscars: Best International Feature, Best Cinematography, and Best Director.

4. In previous years, only films shown in a theaterfor a run of seven consecutive days would be eligible, which is why none of the Metropolitan Opera performances or Fathom Events qualified.

No miracle necessary,there’s everyreason to believeHamiltonwill compete at the Oscars, as well as at the Golden Globes, where I think a Best Picture Musical or Comedy win is already a good bet, even withWest SideStoryyet to come."

Followup to your Point #4, in my lifetime opera has always had a niche audience who adores opera.  They are in the drastic minority.  It is inconceivable to me that operas would receive any nominations, even if eligible, unless it was a really bad year for some categories.  Hamilton clearly does not have a niche audience; if anything, it has gotten people who never attend the theatre to express interest and actually attend when they can get tickets and afford those tickets.  Whether Hamilton is eligible or not, I do believe that there are categories for which it should not be eligible, e.g., sets and costumes, music, song, because they were exactly the same as in the show.

Broadway61004 said: "CT2NYC said: "Broadway61004 said: "Georgeanddot2 said: "Saving this one to watch with my family for the 4th of July tomorrow.

Just a heads up, this is currently Oscar eligible. Unless the Oscars make a special ruling rendering this ineligible, I think this could be a Best Picture contender. We could see some of the performances recognized as well."

It may technically still be eligible right now, but I'd say there's less than a 1% chance it ends up that way. Otherwise every single Met production shown in cinemas over the past 10 years would have been eligible.

And even if it does end up eligible by some miracle, I'd say there's less than a 1% chance it would get nominated. Oscar voters are already completely rebelling against streaming services, so something on a streaming service that isn't even a film in the traditional sense? No way.

I could, however, see the Academy giving Lin an honorary Oscar or something along those lines."

1. In 1975, James Whitmore received a Best Actor nomination for his filmed stage performance in GIVE ‘EM HELL, HARRY, so there is precedent.

2. Due to the pandemic, streaming films will be eligible this year without a theatrical release.

3. In 2019, Roma, a Netflix film, won 3 Oscars: Best International Feature, Best Cinematography, and Best Director.

No miracle necessary,there’s everyreason to believeHamiltonwill compete at the Oscars, as well as at the Golden Globes, where I think a Best Picture Musical or Comedy win is already a good bet, even withWest Side Storyyet to come."

1. Yes, I never said there wasn't any precedent, but that was one award 45 years ago. To think that has any bearing on now is not accurate.



2. They have said that films streaming are eligible, but they have not defined what a film is. This is not a film. This is a video recording of a staged event. Do you really expect every stand-up special that premieres on Netflix is going to be eligible for Best Picture?

3. Roma is exactly what I'm referring to. One of the most acclaimed films of the year lost Best Picture to Green Book because, by several voters' own admission, they wouldn't vote for something that they felt wasn't a true film.

So no, Hamilton will not be eligible or win until they actually make a film adaptation of it down the road."

Roma WAS a true film...it just wasn't shown in many movie houses.

Personally, 
I think it makes more sense as a possible Emmy contender because, in the end, it really is not a movie...it is a taped version of a great show.  The Emmy's already have many categories in which taped shows appear, and are not considered anything other than the norm.  

I see it tonight, and am excited about the initial reactions here; I doubt it will change my mind re Emmy vs. Oscar.  I also agree that it should be eligible when and if an 'opened-up' film is made, with shots of the Battle of Yorktown, and with Hamilton walking around Manhattan, and the duel is filmed out of doors, etc., etc., etc. That is the movie I really want to see, whereas this is the (apparently extremely well done)taped version of a great stage show that I really want to see also.  Tonight).  I fear, probably unnecessarily so, that if this did manage to get Oscar nominations, (a)it still would not win them...well maybe Daveed Diggs, but could hinder the real movie from getting made.

CarlosAlberto said: "Jarethan said:

Personally,
I think it makes more sense as a possible Emmy contender because, in the end, it really is not a movie...it is a taped version of a great show.

It was not taped. It was filmed with the intent of releasing it in movie theaters,you know the venue with the big screen where films are shown?The only reason it wasn't was because of the current pandemic. What part of that are you people not getting?!?!?

This isn't brain surgery..."

Okay, CarlosAlberto. You keep thinking that. I look forward to your response when they rule it ineligible, probably about 3 months or so from now (actually that's a lie as I won't even remember this thread by then; but my point still stands)

CarlosAlberto said: "Broadway61004 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "Jarethan said:

Personally,
I think it makes more sense as a possible Emmy contender because, in the end, it really is not a movie...it is a taped version of a great show.

It was not taped. It was filmed with the intent of releasing it in movie theaters,you know the venue with the big screen where films are shown?The only reason it wasn't was because of the current pandemic. What part of that are you people not getting?!?!?

This isn't brain surgery..."

Okay, CarlosAlberto. You keep thinking that. I look forward to your response when they rule it ineligible, probably about 3 months or so from now (actually that's a lie as I won't even remember this thread by then; but my point still stands)"

You need a hug, don't you?"

Yes, I clearly think that this will be ineligible simply because I need a hug. You are spot on. Thank you! 

CarlosAlberto said: "Jarethan said:

Personally,
I think it makes more sense as a possible Emmy contender because, in the end, it really is not a movie...it is a taped version of a great show.

It was not taped. It was filmed with the intent of releasing it in movie theaters,you know the venue with the big screen where films are shown?The only reason it wasn't was because of the current pandemic. What part of that are you people not getting?!?!?

This isn't brain surgery..."

 

BFD.  Are you always that much of an a**-hole?  I do not care what you call it.  Movies cry to be opened up; when movies that are made of stage plays do not open up, they are frequently criticized for it, referencing things like static and confining, saying vs. showing, etc. 

As I acknowledged, I do not see it until tonight, although I did sneek in the first number.  It was VERY ENTERTAINING, as I am sure I will find the entire performance, but it was not a movie.  A movie is not a movie just because it is filmed with real film or filmed digitally.  

So, I stand corrected, I think it makes more sense as a possible Emmy contender because, in the end, it really is not a movie...it is a FILMED version of a great show.  And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  If determined eligible for Oscars, unless a huge number of year-end films end up postponed, and there is limited competition, I fear it will lose.  Because there will be voters who loved it, but are still going to conclude that it was not a movie.

Re your a**-hole comment re 'big screen where films are shown', those big theatres also show Fathom Events quite regularly, many of which are NOT movies; they show NT Live productions, which no-one has ever considered eligible for the Oscars, because they are NOT MOVIES, they show the met operas and Bolshoi ballets as well, certain rock concerts, etc.  

I remember reading at the time they announced that it would be in movies that a key reason was to make it available to so many people who could not see it live.  I doubt anyone would dispute the likelihood that they were trying to make a lot more money as well.  That doesn't make it a movie, it makes it something with such broad interest that it could be successful if released in a movie theatre.

You don't have to reply.  I have had more than enough obnoxiousness for at least a few days.  Just didn't expect it to come from one person.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have Disney+ on my Roku device. I noticed that Disney+ wanted me to activate my account (which I've been using for three weeks already). I asked for a code, they emailed it to me and there is NO WAY to enter it on the screen where they are asking for it...

I am hoping Disney+ doesn't shut down on me.

Does anybody know about this Disney+ code thing on a Roku device?

I was also having a captioning issue, but CT2NYC solved that for me.

Updated On: 7/3/20 at 03:46 PM

MichelleCraig said: "I have Disney+ on my Roku device. I am not seeing any way to access captions for HAMILTON.

So, I went to the settings option inDisney+ and there was no captioning information...but I did notice that Disney+ wanted me to activate my account (which I've been using for three weeks already). I asked for a code, they emailed it to me and there is NO WAY to enter it on the screen where they are asking for it...

Now I am watching HAMILTON with no captions (I do not have a hearing issue, I would just like to have captions as this is my first experience with the show)...and since my passcode expired after 15 minutes, I am hoping Disney+ doesn't shut down on me.

This has put me in a fine mood to try and enjoy this. Does anybody know about captioning or this Disney+ code thing??"

I have a Roku TV, and I activate the closed captioning on Disney Plus by hitting the asterisk button on my remote while the movie is running.

Updated On: 7/3/20 at 03:57 PM

I just finished watching, and I'll admit to having had high expectations, which isn't always the best idea, but in this case, those expectations were absolutely met and even surpassed. Usually, when I watch pro-shots of musicals, there's some point where I get the sense that the camera angle being shown is leaving something out that I wanted to see, but I never felt that way once during this one (Jonathan Groff's excessive spluttering is part of his charm). The audio mixing seemed impeccable to me as well. Honestly, I think it'd be pretty difficult to dislike this recording of Hamilton, and I'm curious to see what my rather contrarian friends who claim they don't like Hamilton will say after watching this.

Also, WOW! Those performances were incredible! I never got to see this cast on Broadway, but I thought Phillipa Soo in particular gave a phenomenal performance. Some others that stood out to me were Daveed Diggs, Renee Elise Goldsberry, and Leslie Odom, Jr., but there wasn't a single cast member I had any issues with, and the ensemble members were all killing it!

As for the added censorship, I was already expecting it, and it's a small price to pay for this amazing gift we've been given. I barely noticed it in "Yorktown," but the record scratch in "Washington On Your Side" was a little jarring. Once again, though, if that's what it took to make this masterpiece so easily accessible for us, I have no complaints at all.

This has been a difficult year for all of us, and I'm immeasurably grateful that we could have this beauty to brighten up our lives for a little while. I'm sure I'll be watching this over and over again for the foreseeable future.

schubox said: "poisonivy2 said: "Becayse it cannot be said enough:

Philipa Soo + Renee Elise Goldsberry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lexi Lawson/Mandy Gonzalez (the Eliza/Angelica I saw). Omg."

100%. I've seen and heard a lot of different Angelica's and no one even comes close to Renee"

I would have loved to see what Anika Noni Rose would have done with the role, since she was Angelica during the workshop.

poisonivy2 said: "Well I saw it and compared it to the cast I saw in 2018:

https://humbledandoverwhelmed.blogspot.com/2020/07/hamilton-on-disney-plus-happy.html"

I enjoyed your read, in particular two themes:

-- I was criticized wildly on this board when I said that my one issue with Hamilton was that I felt it was over-choreographed (over-directed).  If is a great musical, but I felt it could even be greater if the dancers were not in full motion most of the time.  It was for me distracting.

-- I have seen many musicals many times; rarely have I felt so strongly that the original cast so far exceeded the subsequent casts I saw (3 additional times) that my view seemed almost pretentious ('I saw the original cast, did you?).  I don't expect anyone ever to approach Daveed Diggs' performance, just the way I don't expect anyone ever to approach Nathan Lane as Max B. or Angela Lansbury as Mame or, to cite another non-leading role, Frances Ruffelle in Les Mis.  But he is only one.  The three subsequent times I saw it, no-one came close to Phillippa Soo, Renee Elise Goldsberry, LMM (this is probably me...he IS Hamilton to me), and Christopher Jackson.  I have seen two other people who I felt were as good as Leslie Odom Jr., but I was never as bowled over by his performance as the other ones.  It will be interesting to see if my opinion changes with the benefit of close-ups when I see the show tonight.

The original cast of Hamilton struck lightening in a way that very few shows that I have seen ever have, and just can't be duplicated.  Of course, that doesn't make Hamilton any less great a musical; just makes subsequent performances competing with a very high initial bar.

For whatever it's worth, I love Renee's performance, but for me Karen Olivo was absolutely the best Angelica I've seen--and the best I'm ever likely to see. 

Whether or not Hamilton is eligible for the Oscars, I think it would be a wiser move to submit it for the Emmys. They would rack up a LOT of Emmys in more appropriate categories, rather than fight to be taken seriously as a "film" and possibly not get any nominations. At the Oscars, they could hope for (unlikely) acting nominations, but at the Emmys, they would get those nominations, along with directing, music directing, cinematography, etc. because they would be up against other live broadcast events. So while they could submit for Oscars, the Emmy route would probably be more prosperous.

CarlosAlberto said: 
"So if it isn't eligible to be considered because you say it isn't a film then why was it submitted to the Motion Picture Association of America for a rating?"

There is no requirement (that I saw) in the eligibility rules for movies to have a rating. The MPAA doesn't govern the Academy. It's a separate trade association. However, most movie theaters will not screen films that are unrated; Fathom or other special screening events notwithstanding.

"It is a filmed recording of the original broadway stage production done so with the intent of releasing it to motion picture theaters. And that is why it was submitted to the Motion Picture Association of America for a rating."

It was filmed with the intent for an eventual commercial release. The show's producers would have had no way of knowing that the winning distributor would give it a theatrical run, outside of special event screenings. Home/online/broadcast distribution was probably their most realistic expectation. Perhaps a few event screenings in the lead up. But they very unlikely foresaw a theatrical run typical of Hollywood movies. All they intended was to sell to the highest bidder and make a profit.

"So while it may not be a filmed adaption of the source material it remains a filmed recording of the stage production intended for theatrical releasewhich in essence makes it - wait for it....a FILM."

This is definitely true. Outside of some technical requirements of the actual recording (including runtime), a movie only needs a 7-day screening in LA in the same theater (at least 3 screenings per day). And it can be unrated. The MPAA has no relevance to Academy Award eligibility. It can be a film of James Corden singing in his bathtub, and as long as it meets the screening and technical requirements, it'd be eligible.

"A film I might add that is indeed eligible for consideration by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences."

Actually, there's a marketing requirement that Hamilton might not have met. However, it's vague enough for them to argue that they've met it. And there is some vague wording for exempting the theatrical release requirement due to COVID-19. They use the term "initially released" for the exemption. Movies may still have to have a theatrical run. It's not very clear. And may be the main reason it was submitted for a rating.

I have no doubt the "film" probably meets the eligibility requirements. (But as I mentioned, the requirements include a list of technical requirements related the actual physical recording, and it only applies to the original "print." So if they did a conversion to meet the requirements, it's not eligible). And while in a normal year I have no doubt the Academy wouldn't even consider it, the reduction in eligible films may open a door for a nomination or two, but I doubt it. But this all supposes that Disney submits it for consideration.