Posted: 10/21/15 at 4:54pm
I think there's some confusion over the fact that there are two different things: word-of-mouth and hype. They might SEEM like the same thing, particularly when word-of-mouth is ecstatic, but what is there to be done if the paying customers have ecstatic experiences and want to talk about them?
Posted: 10/21/15 at 5:11pm
I remember seeing the Show Business: The Road to Broadway documentary when it came out, and being astounded by Riedel's pettiness and toddler-like whining. He all but admits in that doc that his main goal is to destroy every single Broadway production that he can. Not write Broadway criticism (which is what a critic, you know, does). But use his column to destroy as many productions as possible. It's utterly disgusting.
Posted: 10/21/15 at 5:23pm
Yep, I've been basically out of the loop on Broadway stuff for several years. I heard great word of mouth on this show and then saw it and it more than lived up to it for me. I'm now listening to the cast album many times over and going back to the show- so they word of mouth worked on me at least.
And I have watched as each of my friends, Broadway fan or not, has been exposed to the show for the first time and, especially the younger or more political ones, have become obsessed.
Posted: 10/21/15 at 6:04pm
Riedel, I don't think, has ever presented himself as a critic. He's made it very clear he is a biased gossip columnist.
Posted: 10/21/15 at 6:45pm
Riedel is a shtick (among other words that start with the same letters...). If he could figure out a way to get attention by being sweet, he would be sweet. He just wants a job, and the lousy one he has (fueled 100% by his shtick) is the one that is paying the rent. And no he is not and has never been a critic. I think he has in fact called himself a critic, but I suspect he did that just to get attention too.
It is not, however, correct that he wants to destroy every show. Some shows he promotes but the agenda is always the same.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 7:43am
"Quite Honestly I agree with Reidel. The show is vastly Over Over Rated and some of my clients which I call the Money crowd are leaving at INTERMISSION"
Stevie,
Thank you for providing us with a little glimpse of reality ---- sorely needed here, and most welcome.
As for your clients who walk out, I empathize with them. I feel bad that they wasted their money and time, and that what I'm sure was a highly-anticipated evening for them ended in disappointment.
But I also admire them, for standing up for themselves and making a statement with their feet, rather than allowing themselves to be bullied into acquiescence --- or worse. And the empty seats in act two may have another beneficial effect as well. The audience members will see that some of their number had the courage to say the emperor has no clothes, and those who share the walk-outs' dissatisfaction may themselves be emboldened to stand up and state as much in defiance of the party line and the contumely with which they are certain to be met.
Updated On: 10/22/15 at 07:43 AM
Posted: 10/22/15 at 7:57am
It's a Broadway musical, not a war. There's nothing brave about being an audience member; particularly leaving any show at intermission.
I didn't particularly like Hamilton, but I trust I'll never hear your salivating, hateful praises because I'm not a dick when I talk about it.
Updated On: 10/22/15 at 07:57 AM
Posted: 10/22/15 at 9:00am
After Eight said: "Thank you for providing us with a little glimpse of reality"
Pot, meet kettle
"As for your clients who walk out, I empathize with them. I feel bad that they wasted their money and time, and that what I'm sure was a highly-anticipated evening for them ended in disappointment."
Guess what? That is something we should all be able to agree on: no one should wish disappointment on anyone.
"But I also admire them, for standing up for themselves and making a statement with their feet, rather than allowing themselves to bullied into acquiescence --- or worse."
And that (and what follows it) by contrast is something that no rational person could agree with.
"
Posted: 10/22/15 at 9:03am
I know a guy who sent 463 clients to Hamilton and they all loved it so much they immediately went to the box office after the show and bought tickets for the next day.
It's true because I typed it here!
Posted: 10/22/15 at 9:05am
Liar. I know for a fact two of those 463 did not buy tickets the next day. They waited for a week.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 9:11am
I was taking creative license!
Posted: 10/22/15 at 9:35am
Good or bad, there is clearly an enormous amount of hype around this show. MR is good at his job, which is why thousands of words have been expended here about him. He has an entertaining column. He doesn't like it, lots people wouldn't. This is allowed.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 10:35am
"He doesn't like it, lots people wouldn't. This is allowed."
Ironically, I think he did like it when he first saw it. But he is like our politicians and always follows the green. And I don't mean Shrek. Or Elphaba.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 10:36am
Posted: 10/22/15 at 11:06am
stevie3 said: "Quite Honestly I agree with Reidel. The show is vastly Over Over Rated and some of my clients which I call the Money crowd are leaving at INTERMISSION. Which genius on this board said " It will change the face of American Musicals Forever. REALLY ??? This show will be the best material that Forbidden Broadway has ever gotten. A Black George Washington, 3 sisters who are all different nationalities, and a Troll as Hamilton. How can you beat that ? But please keep the Hype going its really working for me.
Because is so much more believable to have an all white cast when they break out into song and dance. Because we all know George was a fab dancer
"
B
Posted: 10/22/15 at 11:57am
In 1776, they broke out into song. They did not do likewise into dance as the show had no choreography.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 11:59am
Have you ever seen a production of 1776 anywhere? There are two numbers- Cool, Cool Considerate Men, and He Plays the Violin, that feature dancing.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 12:01pm
Posted: 10/22/15 at 12:23pm
For your information, I saw the original production and the revival that played the Gershwin I believe. The "dancing" in that is not what one would call breaking into dance. It was more incidental. If you take it as real break out dancing, that is your opinion. I treat it differently.
Updated On: 10/22/15 at 12:23 PM
Posted: 10/22/15 at 12:37pm
I mean, there's literally a waltz section in He Plays the Violin- I guess you can argue semantics, but it's wrong to say there's no choreography in 1776. If there were nothing, then it wouldn't have made much sense to hire Onna White and Kathleen Marshall as choreographers for the original and revival productions.
Regardless, the point is that it's no less realistic to have a black George Washington than it is to have Richard Henry Lee gallivanting around the stage singing puns about his own name. Neither is realistic- but then when is anything in musical theater?
Posted: 10/22/15 at 12:47pm
No problem re the casting in Hamilton. I squirm a little with some on the board who basically say people are flocking to it because it is non white. Imagine if the words were reversed. There would be an uproar and rightfully so. We would see a show based on the subject matter, playwright and/or composers and other aspects. To see a show specifically based on the race of the cast - one way or the other, is not our thing. We would enjoy a show based on many factors and not one. We saw In The Heights and thoroughly enjoyed it. Will listen to the cast album of Hamilton and than be able to comment on the score. Could not comment beside that as we could not judge without seeing it.
For many reasons, we will not be seeing it . The cost is the main factor as we basically have had our disposable income cut in half as we are both retired (wife forcibly retired before she wanted to be). We would not pay the prices being charged even if we were both working. It is what it is. We see much less but we enjoy it more.
Updated On: 10/22/15 at 12:47 PM
Posted: 10/22/15 at 1:49pm
Roxy, I doubt the opposite of the casting of Hamilton would cause an uproar simply because we've had so many productions on Broadway with entirely white casts (Roundabout's upcoming production of Noises Off comes to mind immediately). But that is exactly why Hamilton's casting is so refreshing and making people who aren't generally interested in theater take notice.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 2:05pm
Mr Roxy said: "No problem re the casting in Hamilton. I squirm a little with some on the board who basically say people are flocking to it because it is non white. Imagine if the words were reversed. There would be an uproar and rightfully so."
What are the odds people would avoid going to a show because it was white, though?! 
Mr Roxy said: "By the way, seeing On Your Feet next week via Today Tix . Nowhere near the hype of Hamilton and we will probably enjoy it more. "
I always enjoy shows I see more than the shows I don't see, too.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 3:15pm
For the first 5-10 minutes, i felt like he said he did and were thinking of leaving. but then, maybe because of the dancing we started to really enjoy it.
Posted: 10/22/15 at 3:51pm
"Imagine if the words were reversed. "
If you actually understood what the show is doing -- something that is admittedly hard when you have not seen it -- you would never say that. I will try to explain.
People are not going to see Hamilton because of its multi-ethnic casting, but because the show is telling its story specifically with that casting. It is asking us to rethink American history through the prism of the American mosaic of the 21st Century, rather than as a bunch of white dudes prancing around in powdered wigs. And in doing so, it opens our eyes to our own world, and the meaning of our history.
The analogy would be if someone wrote a penetrating show about American slaves and cast whites as those slaves. I can't imagine any uproar that would ensue, other than a positive one.
"By the way, seeing On Your Feet next week via Today Tix . Nowhere near the hype of Hamilton and we will probably enjoy it more."
Well, although as you say, you will probably never know, if you prefer vapid jukebox musicals to intelligent theatre, then yes I suppose you will have a better time there. There are people who would rather sit home and watch mind-deadening sit-coms on TV than attend ANY theatre too. The choice is yours.
