BlankZoe wrote: »
It might be a rights situation
Usually broadway shows will have a HEY YOU CAN'T FILM THIS SHIT period for several years after they debut
Renzo wrote: »
LMM was clear about this. Disney doesn't want anything higher than PG-13 on Disney+. PG-13 can have 1 "fuck". Hamilton has 3. They removed 2 of them: Hercules Mulligan getting the fuck back up again and Southern Mother-fucking Democratic Republicans. They're just muted out. The rest of the show is apparently untouched.
The most obvious historical aberration is the portrayal of Washington and Jefferson as black men, a somewhat audacious choice given that both men are strongly associated with owning, and in the case of the latter, raping and impregnating slaves. Changing the races allows these men to appear far more sympathetic than they would otherwise be. Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda says he did this intentionally, to make the cast “look like America today,” and that having black actors play the roles “allow[s] you to leave whatever cultural baggage you have about the founding fathers at the door.” (“Cultural baggage” is an odd way of describing “feeling discomfort at warm portrayals of slaveowners.”) Thus Hamilton’s superficial diversity lets its almost entirely white audience feel good about watching it: no guilt for seeing dead white men in a positive light required. Now, The New York Times can delight in the novel incongruousness of “a Thomas Jefferson who swaggers like the Time’s Morris Day, sings like Cab Calloway and drawls like a Dirty South trap-rapper.” Indeed, it does take some getting used to, because the actual Thomas Jefferson raped slaves.
“Casting black and Latino actors as the founders effectively writes nonwhite people into the story, in ways that audiences have powerfully responded to,” said the New York Times. But fixing history makes it seem less objectionable than it actually was. We might call it a kind of, well, “blackwashing,” making something that was heinous seem somehow palatable by retroactively injecting diversity into it.
Besides, you don’t actually need to “write nonwhite people into the story.” As historians have pointed out, there were plenty of nonwhite people around at the time, people who already had fully-developed stories and identities. But none of these people appears in the play.
WeX Majors wrote: »
I was under the assumption that this was a thing that was taped pre their broadway debut wasn't it?
MulysaSempronius wrote: »
Tried watching this week my 6-year-old daughter. Thought she might enjoy it s little, as she had been to a few family Broadway shows in the beforetimes.
She got bored and said is was just a lot of singing. We have up at intermission.
DJ Eebs wrote: »
most of the king george scenes I was begging someone to come up to him with a napkin or something
shalmelo wrote: »
I probably won't watch this until Sunday, but it's been fun today watching a huge swath of twitter get their first good look at Daveed Diggs in action.
#pipe wrote: »
So ok I adore Hamilton (I've only listened to the soundtrack and seen a few clips but I have every intention of watching the Disney+ version asap)
But over the past few days on Facebook I've seen some extremely hot takes about how Hamilton isn't good actually and LMM is not great either and like
Are these just extremely cool contrarians or am I missing something?
Like, ok, it's not historically accurate. It agrandizes Hamilton who wasn't as anti slavery or as progressive by modern standards as the show suggests, and like, LMM has talked himself about how Hamilton was kind of a calculating, selfish asshole... But my response to that is that it's a musical. Of course it's exaggerated? Of course the hero is made to look more relatable and sympathetic? Because it's a musical?
Is LMM problematic? The only thing I could find was he made a big deal about bringing the show to Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria? He brought entertainment and donated a ton of money I don't really see much of a problem.
Am I overthinking?
Anyway Wait For It is my very best karaoke song.