LATEST NEWS

Amazing Grace

Princeton Returns Profile Photo
Princeton Returns
#1Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 6:50am

Just watching some of the promo videos and this seems like an interesting project for a musical. Apologies if this has already been discussed on here but has anyone seen or heard anything of it, workshops etc? I assume its aiming for Broadway

WhizzerMarvin Profile Photo
WhizzerMarvin
#2Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 8:48am

If they do bring it in they should change the title. Every time I see it I immediately think of Leap of Faith; sounds like they could play in rep, no?

The subject matter also instantly evokes Scandalous, which is never a good thing.

If the producers don't want to suffer the same fate as their predecessors they need to find a way to break from the pack and prove their show has something different and special to offer than the others of its ilk.


Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

Melissa25 Profile Photo
Melissa25
#2Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 9:02am

I agree with the recommended title change. At first I thought OP was talking about Liberty: A Monumental New Musical.

Come think of it, that one should change it's title too.

Princeton Returns Profile Photo
Princeton Returns
#3Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 9:45am

That's interesting you both say that as to me the title seems perfect. Is the song not that well known in the states? Plus it was also the title for the movie a few years back

WhizzerMarvin Profile Photo
WhizzerMarvin
#4Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 10:01am

The song is very well-known.

For me it just gives it a cheesy, perhaps too "churchy," vibe. I think it's a turnoff to that you're paying Broadway prices for what sounds like a musical put on by a local church youth group. I didn't see the film- was it one of those "faith-based" films like "God's Not Dead," and "Heaven is For Real?"

Leap of Faith was also the title of the movie, but since the film is largely forgotten it didn't carry an recognition for the audience/ticket buyers.


Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

Princeton Returns Profile Photo
Princeton Returns
#5Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 10:07am

From memory the film and this show (from what I've read) follow the same story

WhizzerMarvin Profile Photo
WhizzerMarvin
#6Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 10:22am

Do you live in the UK, Princeton?

Do you guys get all these "faith-based" movies that we get here in the states? They're not just any movie that deals with religion, but rather faith-funded or endorsed films that are often very low-budget and decidedly pro-faith (Christianity). Churches rally their members to go in large groups and, in respect to their budgets, several have been very big hits this year.

I can't imagine them getting much of an international distribution though.


Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

Princeton Returns Profile Photo
Princeton Returns
#7Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 10:30am

Yes I do and no we don't, not something I've heard of and which is probably why I don't see a problem with the title . The movie Amazing Grace was historical movie to do with slavery

ErinDillyFan Profile Photo
ErinDillyFan
#8Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 10:55am

I have tickets for the Saturday 11th matinee. I will let you know afterward...

loliveve Profile Photo
loliveve
#9Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 11:14am

I don't know why "Amazing Grace" the movie used the song title, because the film is not about John Newton (who wrote the song). Rather, the film is primarily about William Wilberforce and his long fight (about 20 years) against the slave trade, leading to Parliament pass a bill abolishing the slave trade. John Newton is in the film some, but is depicted only in his later years, as old and blind... as one who influences Wilberforce. The only reference to the song= Wilberforce using his singing voice to captivate an audience, and singing "Amazing Grace."

In contrast, the musical is supposed to be about John Newton, who was a sailor and worked on slave ships. He transported something like 15,000 slaves, if I remember the number correctly, and at one point was enslaved himself in West Africa following a dispute. He became a Christian and renounced the slave trade (though he did not become an abolitionist right away), and he married his childhood sweetheart. The musical is John Newton's story... and supposedly about the relationships he had and stuff. (Can you tell I like history and that my mom was a teacher?)

Anyhow, because the musical is about Newton, I hope they don't change the title.

JPeterman Profile Photo
JPeterman
#10Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 12:27pm

I am extremely hopeful this makes it to Broadway. I think the title is great, I can't think of anything that would be better, actually. As loliveve said, this musical is a historical biopic about the man who wrote Amazing Grace, so Amazing Grace seems like a pretty appropriate title.

John Newton is played by one of my favorite up and coming Broadway stars, Josh Young. He has an AMAZING voice. I have seen him in Stratford, Canada in Jesus Christ Superstar, Kiss Me Kate, and Grapes of Wrath, on national tour as Marius in Les Mis and as Che in Evita, and as Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar on Broadway.

I most recently saw him in Evita and his voice has matured and gotten better and better with time. Go see this if you are in Chicago, I wish I could!

WhizzerMarvin Profile Photo
WhizzerMarvin
#11Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 12:39pm

I don't think it's an issue of the title not being appropriate. It's a bio-musical about the author.

My quibble with it is that apart from sounding cheesy and a little Hallmark movie of the week, there is a religious aspect that might scare some away fearing that the show will push "Christian values" in its message. This certainly was part of the reason shows like Scandalous and Leap of Faith failed to attract an audience in New York.


Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

haterobics Profile Photo
haterobics
#12Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 12:43pm

Wasn't the bigger issue that those shows were both pretty awful? You can talk about faith in a good show and no one will mind...

WhizzerMarvin Profile Photo
WhizzerMarvin
#13Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 12:58pm

Well, yes, both shows were awful, although I personally loved Leap of Faith because it was often campy and hilarious.

I think people will go see shows that talk about religion and faith, but they don't want to see shows where they feel like religion or faith is being thrust upon them. When I hear that a movie or play has obtained faith-based funding it makes me nervous because I feel like I'm going to get evangelical propaganda. Anyone who knew Kathie Lee's religious background (putting aside her dubious credentials to pen a musical) could rightfully be a little hesitant about the tone of her show.

It turns out neither Scandalous nor Leap of Faith were overly preachy, but that's irrelevant. It was one (of many) factors that made ticket buyers leery of attending.

Amazing Grace might not have any religious agenda, but I've already prejudged it/become suspicious based on the title.


Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

loliveve Profile Photo
loliveve
#14Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 2:31pm

It's unfortunate that you prejudge it based on it's title. As the saying goes, "Don't judge a book by it's cover..." maybe the same should be for musicals, only "Don't judge a musical by it's title"?

I've probably watched a couple of the same videos as the OP. I think I there was one on choreography with Christopher Gattelli and one with Josh Young singing a medley of songs, and he sounded wonderful!

ShakinBaconGirl Profile Photo
ShakinBaconGirl
#15Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 2:33pm

The title is just awful.

WhizzerMarvin Profile Photo
WhizzerMarvin
#16Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 2:44pm

I mean, I think it's only natural to make (mini) judgements about any show based on a title.

When I first heard "Urinetown" I thought, "Gee, that's weird, but I'm intrigued." "Ankles Aweigh" sounds silly and campy, yet fun. "South Pacific" sounds exotic. "How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying," is a mouthful, but it's also funny.

I haven't judged Amazing Grace to be a crappy show; I haven't heard a word of the book or a note of the score. But titles are important. Just ask Lysistrata Jones!


Marie: Don't be in such a hurry about that pretty little chippy in Frisco. Tony: Eh, she's a no chip!

loliveve Profile Photo
loliveve
#17Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 2:49pm

Whizzer- your comment about Lysistrata Jones made me laugh Amazing Grace

A bit off topic, but I like the tag for Amazing Grace: "The song the world knows. The story it doesn't."

Princeton Returns Profile Photo
Princeton Returns
#18Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 2:57pm

Agreed. To me it let's you know what it's about pretty clearly

RippedMan Profile Photo
RippedMan
#19Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 4:53pm

Seems like a big splashy musical without any prior source material. Kind of interesting. Although I think the title is terrible. Sounds cheesy.

Wilmingtom
#20Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/5/14 at 8:51pm

I'm with Wizzer in terms of the off-putting title for all the reasons stated. I know people involved and wish them all the best with it but that title is not going to work in their favor.

GilmoreGirlO2 Profile Photo
GilmoreGirlO2
#21Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/6/14 at 10:54am

I will be seeing this on Thursday (first preview). Very interested to see how it is!

Hadn’t before considered the problems with the title (although I do agree with some of the comments above), but I certainly think the logo needs to be changed (and quick!). Every time I see it, I think it looks like some sort of “Game of Thrones”, warrior-esque musical (not to mention it looks cheaply designed, too). Maybe that’s their way of trying to counteract the “churchy” title?

Also, for the record, I think Whizzer is smart enough that, although the title immediately evokes an idea of a possibly preachy musical for him, he wouldn’t let that keep him from going (or from insisting that the show is preachy if it’s not). I think he is just bringing up the point that if that was one of HIS first reactions to the title, it could cause others (especially those non-regular theatre-goers who don’t always know much about the shows and the titles are often all they are going off of when choosing a show to see) to shy away from wanting to see this. It may seem silly to us, but it IS the name of their brand and those things can have a big effect on its marketability.

Marlothom Profile Photo
Marlothom
#22Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/10/14 at 9:46pm

What did you think GilmoreGirl02? I don't know what else they could call this show but Amazing Grace.


"Observe how bravely I conceal this dreadful dreadful shame I feel."

Marlothom Profile Photo
Marlothom
#22Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/10/14 at 9:46pm

DOUBLE POST


"Observe how bravely I conceal this dreadful dreadful shame I feel."
Updated On: 10/10/14 at 09:46 PM

GilmoreGirlO2 Profile Photo
GilmoreGirlO2
#24Amazing Grace
Posted: 10/11/14 at 11:44am

I saw this at the first preview last night and, I must admit, I’m not entirely sure what to make of it.

I’ve never been to a first preview before and was quite impressed with how smoothly the show ran. Everything looked tight, no technical difficulties I noticed (except issues with a gun going off, but that could easily happen at the 200th performance as it could at the first), and no fumbling in any way. For those that are interested, the show ran 2:45, started on time, and no extended intermission. They were in great shape in this respect – hats off to the cast and crew on a solid first preview.

I’m not sure where to start. The score is extremely melodic and some of it is very beautiful, but I wouldn’t say that there are any songs that really stand out. Nearly all of the songs are very pretty, but they never reach that next level for me – they stay on one dynamic the whole time. My girlfriend pointed out that none of the songs felt completely born out of the moment so much as songs were placed where they should be placed (which I agree with). As in, “We need an I Want song here, we need a rousing bar number here, we should have a duet right here,” but, while they were all placed appropriately, they didn’t seem to come out of that idea of characters needing to sing to be able to express what they are feeling in a different way than speaking. Many of the songs seemed incomplete – as if they just suddenly stopped. I imagine they will continue working on these, expanding songs, giving them buttons, etc.

The book is not horrific, but it is very clichéd and paints very broad lines and characters. There were scenes where I felt like I have seen the exact dialogue before multiple times, just swapped with different names/situations. Between this and the songs, it felt like the written show is almost a little paint-by-numbers. They took a basic structure of a musical and inserted the right names.

That being said, the written show isn’t bad – just typical and a little stale. What they have going for them is a true story that really is quite interesting. I was entertained the whole time, cared about the characters (although not exactly invested in them), and the show satisfied me enough for the evening.

However, I think the biggest issue here is the direction. While the script isn’t great, I do think it’s serviceable enough that excellent direction of the show could elevate the material (not necessarily to the point of the show working on all fronts, but I do think the right direction could hide the mediocrity of the script to an extent). The direction here felt very by-the-book as well and a little static. I felt like I could see the actors following directions in their head – take two steps this way, stop, look out, turn head sharply to the left, walk three steps right, etc. (I should note that, for their part, the actors were doing what they could to make everything natural, but it still came off a bit mechanic.) In this sense, the direction felt very amateur. There was one scene in particular, toward the beginning, where there is a bit of chaos going on onstage and in the middle of it, suddenly the cast would freeze into these little vignettes (and it highlighted a couple of the characters’ movements) and then, occasionally, go into “slow motion.” This was one choice that was laughably bad (and looked awkward) that I certainly hope they cut and figure out a different way to play the scene.

The set was fine – crows nests of a ship framing the proscenium with sails and masts on the stage. Scenes that didn’t take place on the ship took place in front of these – sometimes with a flat coming down to hide these, sometimes not. I couldn’t help wondering what it is with pre-Broadway tryouts in Chicago revolving so much around ships – “Pirate Queen,” “The Last Ship,” and now this.

I hope they continue to work on deepening characters and making them more three dimensional – especially the “bad guy” who wants to marry Erin Mackey’s character, Mary. At first he comes off like a stereotypical, horrific villain, then suddenly becomes a comic relief, and then toward the end I think we see a bit more of a realistic in between of those two. For a story that centers on such a serious topic, it felt odd and out of place to have this villain be such a caricature and then even the comic relief.

In terms of both underscoring and the songs themselves, the orchestra sounded so small (I believe there are 9 musicians in the pit from what I counted in my program) – there were these moments of great bravado or tension where I felt like I was missing a full orchestral sound to match what was happening on the stage. I actually felt like they could have benefitted from some extra ensemble members as well – in similar moments where there was supposed to be chaos with everyone running around, it didn’t look like they had enough ensemble members to fill those moments.

Overall, the show felt very amateur and I’m finding it a stretch to imagine this making it Broadway (or, if it does, doing well on Broadway). That being said, they may find a niche audience – at Thursday’s performance, I got the sense that the audience was made up of people who aren’t regular theatre-goers. Lots of “Ooooos” at sassy digs lines, applause and exclamations of “That’s amazing!” for an effect where people are underwater (an effect I have seen done quite a few times – blue scrim in front, actors hooked to wires “floating” through the water), and it was clear that the recognition of the title song was a lure for many to come to the theatre (at intermission I heard one woman saying she couldn’t wait until they sang “Amazing Grace” and I could feel the anticipation in it in the room). Based off of a lot of these reactions that I don’t see at most shows, it definitely seemed like an audience that doesn’t necessarily see much theatre and was coming out, specifically, for this show and story.

Also, because it was discussed here earlier, I wanted to mention that I felt the show steered far from being preachy (I actually wondered if those in the audience who came for a spiritual awakening story were disappointed at the lack of focus on it). There is certainly plenty of talk about faith, losing faith, bible passages, etc., but when John Newton does have his “awakening,” it’s not really focused on his coming to God so much as growing a moral conscious.

Speaking of his moment of awakening, I hope they redo the staging on it – after all he had been through, it didn’t seem to be distinguishable why this one moment was the time that made him change his life when it seemed like it could have happened a few times before that. The storytelling was a little muddied there.

***SLIGHT SPOILER***

I did feel a little disappointed at how “Amazing Grace” is incorporated into the show. At the end, one of the actors comes out and relays to the audience what happened to the characters and how, five years after what we just saw, John Newton wrote “Amazing Grace” about all of these experiences. The cast them comes out and sings the song. For a show that is billed as all about the creation of the song, it felt a little disappointing to not get to actually see that moment where he sits down to write it. I understand that all of these experiences are what inspired it, but I was hoping for that moment of distinct inspiration, seeing him come up with the melody, sit down and put it on paper, etc.

***END OF SLIGHT SPOILER***

That being said, the performance of “Amazing Grace” really is spectacular and had me leaving the theatre with chills. (If you don’t want to hear how it’s performed, skip the rest of this paragraph.) Josh Young sings the first verse a capella, then each verse slowly builds with more instruments and more actors, erupting into the entire ensemble giving a final, rousing verse at the end. It’s truly a wonderful moment and had some of the audience on their feet at the end of the song, before curtain call even started. It ends on such a powerful moment, I couldn’t help but think people might forget the entire rest of the show and the only thing that will stick with them will be that last moment, which would certainly garner good word of mouth.

Some random things I hope they work out over their run: The transitions are all awkward and forced (I’m sure this is something they will work out). I would also love for them to focus more on John and his servant, Thomas’, relationship a lot more in the first act, because it really plays quite a large part in the second. I think Mary’s storyline is really quite interesting and would love to see more of the risky moments of what she was doing – everyone involved in that storyline has very high stakes and I would like to actually see those high stakes in the scenes and performances. And, there is a gun fight scene where there were about 10 – 15 gunshots that went off…I implore them to make use of their sound designer and use sound effects for this scene…everyone in the audience was wincing/jumping the whole time and I, honestly, couldn’t even see most of the scene because my eyes were constantly blinking at the impact of the gunshots. Also, perhaps they just didn’t have the dress finished or they haven’t yet figured out how to make the costume change happen, but there is a ball scene where Mary’s dress is commented on – yet, it’s the same dress that she was wearing in the previous scene.

I apologize that these thoughts are a little all over the place – I am not really sure what to make of the whole thing. I was certainly entertained the whole time and there were some great moments. But, it didn’t (at least, at this point) feel anywhere near a Broadway-quality show. That being said, I appreciate the story they are telling and there is clearly a lot of heart and a very interesting story here. I might revisit the show later into the run and am intrigued as how it develops.