215 posts
|
Post by frosty on Jul 7, 2020 9:59:21 GMT
I think it's becoming quite common for US shows to come to the UK to be filmed because of the huge cost/experience difference. Disney chose to film their 'Aladdin' in London (even though they swapped out the cast for various international actors and used the Broadway script) and Nickelodeon also completely rebuilt the 'Spongebob' musical set in Plymouth, of all places, even though it's never played in the UK - if they can do that and still be cheaper than filming the existing US set, the cost differences must be staggering. Wow, I didn't know that about Spongebob, I wonder why there are such massive cost differences? I was surprised to see that some of the big productions on BroadwayHD were filmed in the UK, but now I know why. We have been so lucky to have NT Live, and then NT at Home, a 'National' theatre should be able to reach the whole country, not just people able to get to London. But I am still very much looking forward to actually sitting in a theatre auditorium and experiencing the excitement of a live show again....Hopefully soon... |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Jul 7, 2020 10:01:32 GMT
I think it's becoming quite common for US shows to come to the UK to be filmed because of the huge cost/experience difference. Disney chose to film their 'Aladdin' in London (even though they swapped out the cast for various international actors and used the Broadway script) and Nickelodeon also completely rebuilt the 'Spongebob' musical set in Plymouth, of all places, even though it's never played in the UK - if they can do that and still be cheaper than filming the existing US set, the cost differences must be staggering. Wow, I didn't know that about Spongebob, I wonder why there are such massive cost differences? I was surprised to see that some of the big productions on BroadwayHD were filmed in the UK, but now I know why. We have been so lucky to have NT Live, and then NT at Home, a 'National' theatre should be able to reach the whole country, not just people able to get to London. But I am still very much looking forward to actually sitting in a theatre auditorium and experiencing the excitement of a live show again....Hopefully soon... I think it has to do with US stage unions aswell if I remember rightly though I could be wrong. I think the T&C’s and ‘what you have to have’ are financially less favourable to the production in the US. |
|
4,164 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 7, 2020 13:37:29 GMT
]That is one of the first rules of editing and they did it constantly to the point I was actually shocked they were allowed to leave it that way. There should always be a bridging shot in the middle, it is disorientating for the viewer. There were a lot of moments throughout that I remembered from the show that I thought I would NEVER have cut that like that! But then maybe they just didn't have the shots to cut it properly. Have you considered the possibility that what you are calling 'bad editing' is in fact a stylistic choice, deliberately done because it 'broke the rules'? That 'breaking the rules' is part of the ethos of the production? I certainly haven't seen anyone say they were disoriented - in fact the vast majority of people have praised the filming and editing choices. Of course, the vast majority of people watching this wouldn't normally watch a filmed production, so they wouldn't even know what the 'rules' are - they've not internalised any filming conventions for this type of production, and don't even know they exist. Normally filmed productions seem staid and 'stagey' - this did not. It brilliantly conveyed the energy and emotion of the live show. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 18:14:13 GMT
]That is one of the first rules of editing and they did it constantly to the point I was actually shocked they were allowed to leave it that way. There should always be a bridging shot in the middle, it is disorientating for the viewer. There were a lot of moments throughout that I remembered from the show that I thought I would NEVER have cut that like that! But then maybe they just didn't have the shots to cut it properly. Have you considered the possibility that what you are calling 'bad editing' is in fact a stylistic choice, deliberately done because it 'broke the rules'? That 'breaking the rules' is part of the ethos of the production? I certainly haven't seen anyone say they were disoriented - in fact the vast majority of people have praised the filming and editing choices. Of course, the vast majority of people watching this wouldn't normally watch a filmed production, so they wouldn't even know what the 'rules' are - they've not internalised any filming conventions for this type of production, and don't even know they exist. Normally filmed productions seem staid and 'stagey' - this did not. It brilliantly conveyed the energy and emotion of the live show. I will hold my hand up and say I found aspects disorientating. That is not to say I don't think there is room for innovation in editing, but I found the high and wide shots that lost all detail of the production disorientating given the number of close ups as well, and thought that in some places the close up chosen was the wrong shot. Some of them were fantastic, others didn't work for me. Not everyone has to like the editing, or hate it - this thread is getting far too defensive on both sides. |
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jul 7, 2020 18:57:35 GMT
]That is one of the first rules of editing and they did it constantly to the point I was actually shocked they were allowed to leave it that way. There should always be a bridging shot in the middle, it is disorientating for the viewer. There were a lot of moments throughout that I remembered from the show that I thought I would NEVER have cut that like that! But then maybe they just didn't have the shots to cut it properly. Have you considered the possibility that what you are calling 'bad editing' is in fact a stylistic choice, deliberately done because it 'broke the rules'? That 'breaking the rules' is part of the ethos of the production? I certainly haven't seen anyone say they were disoriented - in fact the vast majority of people have praised the filming and editing choices. Of course, the vast majority of people watching this wouldn't normally watch a filmed production, so they wouldn't even know what the 'rules' are - they've not internalised any filming conventions for this type of production, and don't even know they exist. Normally filmed productions seem staid and 'stagey' - this did not. It brilliantly conveyed the energy and emotion of the live show. Given the amount of money that was spent on filming Hamilton - several orders of magnitude more than the usual budget for filming a stage show for presentation in cinemas or on PBS or via streaming, and in a different universe from what would be spent on something like the kind of in-house archive film we saw of Chichester's Flowers For Mrs. Harris, or the archival films you can view at NYPL's performing arts library - I would be very, very shocked if there was a single shot or a single cut that hadn't been carefully, meticulously weighed against a range of alternatives. Nothing in this filmed version of the show will be there by accident, and the look and feel they wanted to achieve will have been planned and mapped and possibly even storyboarded ahead of the performances they filmed. That's not to say anybody has to like the result, but with the budget they had, whatever we see is going to be the result of active choices rather than sloppy camerawork or editing. |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Jul 7, 2020 19:30:51 GMT
can anyone tell me how the narratives and character in 1776 and Hamilton overlap - that's me not being well aquainted with 1776. Just tried to find the film but it's not available at the moment.
|
|
20 posts
|
Post by lucyhoneychurch on Jul 7, 2020 20:08:53 GMT
1776 is one of my friend's favorites, so we had our annual re-watch on July 4. In the US, it's available to rent on Prime Video, but as we discovered it's not readily available for streaming. TCM also airs it annually on July 4.
The plot of 1776 is taking place concurrently with the the very beginning of Hamilton. 1776 is set May-July, 1776 in Philadelphia. Throughout the musical, the Continental Congress receives dispatches from General George Washington out in the field. The battle of Lexington and Concord in April 1775 began the Revolutionary War. Historically, the Samuel Seabury pamphlets were published in 1774 and Alexander Hamilton met Eliza Schuyler in 1779, so you can get a sense of how the timelines line up. Thomas Jefferson is in both musicals and is portrayed very differently. John Adams is the main character of 1776. He is briefly mentioned in Act 2 of Hamilton with one line "Sit Down, John, you MF," which is a reference to one of the songs in 1776.
If you are able to get a hold of the film, it's notable because it includes many of the original Broadway cast members, including William Daniels. It's a film and musical that would be very unlikely to be made today. It was originally produced during the Nixon era, so some of the more darker musical numbers are a commentary on the contemporary politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jul 7, 2020 20:37:06 GMT
]That is one of the first rules of editing and they did it constantly to the point I was actually shocked they were allowed to leave it that way. There should always be a bridging shot in the middle, it is disorientating for the viewer. There were a lot of moments throughout that I remembered from the show that I thought I would NEVER have cut that like that! But then maybe they just didn't have the shots to cut it properly. Have you considered the possibility that what you are calling 'bad editing' is in fact a stylistic choice, deliberately done because it 'broke the rules'? That 'breaking the rules' is part of the ethos of the production? I certainly haven't seen anyone say they were disoriented - in fact the vast majority of people have praised the filming and editing choices. Of course, the vast majority of people watching this wouldn't normally watch a filmed production, so they wouldn't even know what the 'rules' are - they've not internalised any filming conventions for this type of production, and don't even know they exist. Normally filmed productions seem staid and 'stagey' - this did not. It brilliantly conveyed the energy and emotion of the live show. I am loathed to reply to you after the reception my last post got, but hey here goes... You can edit something however you want, but that doesn't mean people are going to or have to like it. As I said before someone else brought up the editing, I actually enjoyed the film very much and am glad we have it as a memorial of the live show, so people are taking my thoughts on the editing WAY too seriously. I in no way think it is some kind of massive disaster on an unimaginable scale and I would certainly not not watch it again because of the editing. The more times I watched it the less certain things would stick out to me and I would just get used to them, I just don't like the style in which PARTS of it were edited and I think it is cut too fast for live theatre. There are many live concerts and shows I think are not that well edited, but I still watch them because I enjoy the show and that is the most important thing. I am sure that somewhere within the 100's of rough cuts that exist of this thing that has been gestating for years is something pretty close to how I would've cut it, but the editor is not the final word on the project. The director, probably Lin and others from the actual production and however many execs across however many companies that financed it who have all come in and stuck their fingers in the pie. I would imagine Disney would've also had another go at it in the final pass once they came onboard. As I said before, everyones opinion is valid and if you liked the editing that's great, enjoy! I highly doubt anyone involved in it gives a poop what I think about it. If they are proud of it and feel their 'vision' of the show is there on the screen, then I am happy for them. It definitely made me want to rush out and see the show again. I even finally bought the CD after watching it and it will certainly be one of the first things I revisit when this hellish Covid nightmare is all over. |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Jul 7, 2020 22:16:35 GMT
thank you Lucyhoneychurch ( and full marks for that name, and I hope Charlotte's not been dragging you around) for that detailed reply. I definitely want to see 1776 even more now.
|
|
4,164 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 7, 2020 23:35:26 GMT
intoanewlife of course no one has to like anything anyone makes. It just seems a little insulting to me to assume that because you don’t like elements of something that means it was f***ed up - a product of incompetence - rather than a series of deliberate creative choices. Particularly when it’s an element that featured consistently throughout the piece. Consistency is usually an indication of intent being applied, not a mistake being overlooked. It’s very unlikely that this very well-resourced production didn’t the capture the exact shots they needed to edit the film however they wanted. The film’s director who was a core member of the original multiple award-winning creative team, after all.
|
|
422 posts
|
Post by carmella1 on Jul 8, 2020 0:42:57 GMT
Molasses to Rum sung by the great, even if only in this one instance, John Cullom sends shivers down your spine. It was supposed to be revived next year. Now I am not so sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jul 8, 2020 1:16:09 GMT
intoanewlife of course no one has to like anything anyone makes. It just seems a little insulting to me to assume that because you don’t like elements of something that means it was f***ed up - a product of incompetence - rather than a series of deliberate creative choices. Particularly when it’s an element that featured consistently throughout the piece. Consistency is usually an indication of intent being applied, not a mistake being overlooked. It’s very unlikely that this very well-resourced production didn’t the capture the exact shots they needed to edit the film however they wanted. The film’s director who was a core member of the original multiple award-winning creative team, after all. I'd be happy to have a conversation with about this privately if you'd like, but I think everyone in the thread is probably pretty sick of this subject and my opinions by now. I will say however that I certainly do not think the film is f***ed up or a product of incompetence and I am sorry if what I wrote gave that impression. |
|
4,164 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 8, 2020 7:54:05 GMT
I haven’t seen anyone complaining about this discussion - robust opinions expressed, yes, but it has been perfectly civil.
It’s rather an interesting subject and nice to have something to talk about that’s unrelated to the dreaded virus!!
🙂
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2020 10:36:03 GMT
Molasses to Rum sung by the great, even if only in this one instance, John Cullom sends shivers down your spine. It was supposed to be revived next year. Now I am not so sure. It was being revived with an all female cast too. Molasses To Rum will sound very different with a female voice. |
|
1,137 posts
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 8, 2020 15:49:15 GMT
I recommend watching on a good laptop and with some good earphones if you have them. Watching it again with AirPods Pro was a totally different experience than on the tv. Every detail could be heard!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2020 21:57:21 GMT
For those that are interested, here is an article on how Hamilton was edited for the screen, as told by the shows director Thomas Kail, and editor, Jonah Moran.
I especially liked how they showed the stage 'effects' during Satisfied and Hurricane.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jul 13, 2020 23:20:38 GMT
Tonight was my first encounter of the whole show.
Stagecraft is excellent
The writing is clever
The performances are - on the whole- great
Lighting is amazing
I did find a couple of jarring things. Mostly the end of musical numbers was punctuated in a rather clumsy way rather too frequently for my taste. I can work out when to clap without a big chord and a lighting hold.
Also diction was an issue at times. The words need to be heard clearly. Not always the case.
Still glad to have watched it
|
|
422 posts
|
Post by carmella1 on Jul 15, 2020 5:28:57 GMT
Molasses to Rum sung by the great, even if only in this one instance, John Cullom sends shivers down your spine. It was supposed to be revived next year. Now I am not so sure. It was being revived with an all female cast too. Molasses To Rum will sound very different with a female voice. Oh, I did not know that. Leave it alone, it should be all male. |
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on Jul 25, 2020 11:19:02 GMT
For anyone who needs this today, here's Act One of Hamilton... but with the Muppets. It's not the crossover we deserve, but it's the crossover we need. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2020 19:01:45 GMT
For anyone who needs this today, here's Act One of Hamilton... but with the Muppets. It's not the crossover we deserve, but it's the crossover we need.
Not bad, but think I prefer Kermit Christ Superstar. |
|
4,046 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Jul 25, 2020 20:21:02 GMT
I'm not generally much of a Muppets fan but that Gethsemene is terrific! I was shrieking with laughter at all the dead frog pictures!
|
|
1,763 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Jul 25, 2020 20:41:11 GMT
I'm not generally much of a Muppets fan but that Gethsemene is terrific! I was shrieking with laughter at all the dead frog pictures! I sent it to my friend as the casting announcement for the Regent’s Park concert. Wasn’t sure if I should include a trigger warning for the 3 minute mark! |
|
3,374 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Aug 16, 2020 10:54:54 GMT
Might be of interest. "Alexander Hamilton" (the book the musical is based on) is on offer for 99p on Kindle this month. Or it's available to borrow for free.
I read it last year and it's worth reading. Fleshes out the events shown in the show a lot. It is heavy going in parts but nowhere near as dry as a lot of historical biographies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2020 13:36:58 GMT
Might be of interest. "Alexander Hamilton" (the book the musical is based on) is on offer for 99p on Kindle this month. Or it's available to borrow for free. I read it last year and it's worth reading. Fleshes out the events shown in the show a lot. It is heavy going in parts but nowhere near as dry as a lot of historical biographies. Ooh thanks, that might be my holiday reading! I attended the final charity livestream the Original Broadway Cast did last night and it was really interesting to hear Thomas Kail and Lin-Manuel Miranda talking about the staging and shot selection for some clips from the show; then Andy Blankebuler and Stephanie Klemons doing the same for choreography. All even more poignant when they started talking about Howell Binkley and the genius of his lighting design. There was also a lovely musical tribute to him from some of the OBC, plus some fun chats between members of the cast. Well worth the charity donation! |
|
|
|
Post by hannechalk on Aug 28, 2020 20:25:02 GMT
I just watched the movie on Disney+, and loved it.
I was really emotional at the end.
I thought it was wonderfully done. Due to my mental state I cannot just sit and watch something on tv anymore, I always have to be doing something with my hands. I listen more usually than I actually watch. Tonight I was doing a puzzle, but at numerous times, and especially towards the end, I just sat and watched it.
So that's saying something.
|
|
