What do you get when you combine a bloated studio that has not had an original idea since 1928, and a musical that is already dated after 5 years? Disney and Hamilton of course. Yes. The folks that gave us Song of the South and their own twisted versions of fairy tales and bedtime stories for 75 years is crowing about their Hamilton movie production. ZZzzzzzzzzz....What? Another ripped off idea (Lion King) wasn't available?
I have never seen the play, but I have read books on Hamilton. When the play came out in 2015, my first thought was, why center it around Alexander Hamilton of all people? I get the idea of making a hip musical, with catchy tunes taking place around the American revolution, but why Hamilton? I know the play is based on an excellent book by Ron Chernow. And...ok...he was a lot younger than Jefferson...Adams...Franklin. He was was killed in a duel with Aaron Burr...so some drama. But he was a bit of a nut job. He pushed for a president for life idea...wouldn't that have been a hoot. The play tries to make him in to a poor immigrant that makes good...what?! There were no immigrants in 1760...just native Americans and colonists. Which one were you AH?
Stick With Mickey Mouse
By all accounts Hamilton is entertaining, but like that deadbeat LBJ once said, "don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining." I get a diverse cast, catchy tunes and a somewhat original backdrop. Just don't try to make some sort of inaccurate point on history a major part of the production and expect me to just overlook it. The two are pretty much made for each other. A reactionary company...producing a movie with a reactionary view of history. In fact, Disney should just stick with the only original thing they ever created: Mickey Mouse.