1776 Reviews

Dee from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

ABSOLUTELY PHENOMENAL

It's been hours and I'm still talking about it. This play brought history to life. Every single role was poignant and meaningful-I have never given John Adams the credit he is due! The actor who portrayed him was PHENOMENAL. Ben Franklin and John Dickinson were brilliant. Abigail Adams was powerful. The soldier's scene was phenomenal. I don't want to leave anyone out because everyone's role had meaning. This as a beautiful and honest telling of our country's birth.

Franny Ryan from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

WONDERFUL VOICES

Truly amazing singing, acting and choreography. My daughter wanted to listen to the movie soundtrack from the 70s on the drive home because it was so bad in comparison to what we just saw and heard.

Don from Sherman Oaks, California

A MEMORABLE NIGHT AT THE AHMANSON

This 1776 was a powerfully dynamic production. The new arrangements are first rate. And the diverse casting sets the original script on its end affording the audience a unique glimpse into the humanity of our Founding Fathers. Favorite numbers included Momma Look Sharp, Molasses to Rum, and Cool Considerate Men. The Egg features a video of America's 247 year struggles in two and a half minutes that had me in tears at its end. The cast is stellar with several showstopping numbers throughout. A few minor quibbles about the scenic design (ask me about the "shower curtain" later) but certainly nothing that should keep you out of the theatre. There will be those who will complain of the "wokeness" of the piece especially the battle between the left and right which unfortunately continues across our country to this very day. But all in all the Ahmanson isn't kidding when they say their "...production of 1776 is REVOLUTIONARY!!🇺🇲

Carol from Los Angeles, California

RIVETING AND REFRESHING

What a riveting performance by this unique and diverse cast. We listened to the original 1969 cast recording on the way to the show, and this was such a refreshing remake to hear it sung by a unique and diverse cast. Like the original, this has some very funny moments. Unlike the original, some of the disagreements in the Congress hit home a little harder because of the diversity of the cast. The Egg and Molasses to Rum are mind-blowing, and Momma Look Sharp is absolutely heartbreaking. I can't even list all the phenomenal singers, there were so many shining moments.

Kiki Rose from Washington, District of Columbia

BRILLIANT

Bravo! I have been a huge fan of 1776 since I first saw the movie in the 1970’s. I saw the magnificent production at Ford’s Theater twice several years ago. I couldn’t wait to see this one. I just returned from seeing it a second time at the Kennedy Center and I didn’t think it could get any better and it DID. The singing, the acting, and the humor were brilliant. I loved seeing the story of the Declaration of Independence told through a very diverse cast of women - it forced you to see it through a different lens. The script is a work of art and the cast took it to the limit. The woman who played Ben Franklin was AMAZING - her comedic timing was right on point. Both times I saw it there were standing ovations. One piece of advice: this play is not for young children. The dialogue will go over their heads.

from Des Moines, Iowa

WORTH THE TIME

This was my first time to see 1776 and I was not sure how it would stand up next to Hamilton. I enjoyed the recasting .....this is one of the best things abt the show. I found the second act more compelling than the first and Molasses to Rum was powerful. Well worth your time...thought provoking and extremely well presented.

J M Saniuk from Hendersonville, North Carolina

STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BUT STILL MY COUNTRY

Don’t let the political correctness scare you away. This show has heart, emotion, and some phenomenal vocal performances. America is still a grand dream, even if it is still under construction.

Oh well from San Diego, California

DISAPPOINTING, ULTIMATELY FELT LIKE A MOCKERY

What's said nowhere in the main descriptions is that this is an all female cast. They did well, and their best, but I just could NOT suspend disbelief. When the soldier soloed for a Vietnamesque recounting of her time at the front, it came off as simply offensive. If we're going to take gendered privileges' seriously, surely the most important is the privilege to not fight and die, something exclusive to women. So a woman recounting the horrors of battle came off as... sort of gross . She was great, though. Excellent performances. Ultimately, it struck me as a small-minded production, a statement against men, one that usurped their triumphs and hardships, their very experience of life, the stuff women cannot understand. Maybe the intent was something more kind and nuanced. It's just how it felt. The cast was very good. Theater should takes risks. I don't hold it against them. I just don't think they pulled it off.

Janet Foster from Seattle, Washington

TECHNICAL NEEDS WORK

I love this musical and was excited to see this adaptation. The only problem was that the orchestra overwhelmed the singers and you couldn’t understand the words of the songs. In addition I had a hard time understanding the actors because they were women whose voices are in a higher range than men’s voices. The sound people needed to adjust levels so that the people could be heard and understood.

R.O. from Chicago, Illinois

HUGE LEFT-WING POLITICAL STATEMENT.

The point of this production was to apologize to the Native and African Americans for injustices of the past. There's a time and a place and when you're paying this much for tickets to see a show that you really loved as a kid, it pisses you off. Singing was really good though.

Gloria Bobcat from Chicago, Illinois

AWFUL - DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME OR HARD-EARNED MONEY

I only gave 1775 2 stars because the performers were talented. But combine a boring script with a horrible adaptation that leaves you falling asleep for two hours, and you are in for an excruciating painful evening. The backdrop keeps track of the calendar as the show moves closer to July 4, and every time it changed, everybody around me groaned because it was moving so slowly. Everybody was in a hurry to get to July 4th and get out of dodge. Also, the show neglects the beautiful occasion that American independence, flawed or not, represented for the future of humanity. Some purple-haired junior high social studies teacher from the D list definitely influenced the adaptation.

Margaret O'Banion from Des Moines, Iowa

1776

Very disappointing having seen the original at least 3 times. Did not enjoy having a revamp of the show having an all female cast. It didn’t work at all for me. Enjoyed the original script and characterizations far more. Having an all female cast took away from the production. It took much of the historical accuracy out of the show. As the saying goes, LIf it ain’ broke don’t fix it.” The write up in the program sound like the focus of the show as meant to be a political statement rather than actress’s being true to the original script. I don’t need to know the gender or sexual background’s. Just hire good, talented actors/actress. The audience doesn’t need to be told the casting rationale. Since I found it not nearly as entertaining as the original and I was disappointed in the show I left at intermission.

Julie Kenney from Los Angeles, California

SHOW WAS OVER-AMPED AND OVER-ACTED

While I appreciated the gorgeous singing voices the over-acting was really cringey. Some of the numbers (He Plays the Violin especially) were so over-the-top and not in a good way. These women can belt and that’s great but there were many scenes where some restraint, and taking it down a notch, would have added so much more poignancy and complexity. Overall I found it too long, too loud, and too much.

Honey from Los Angeles, California

1776

The woke philosophy did nothing to improve this theatrical production. The “nouveau” casting was actually disconcerting and tedious. A piece of musical revisionist history that should not have been revived. The singers are talented, but can’t remember one song. Not worth the time or money.

Eric A from Charlotte, North Carolina

SO SAD

I have loved this play / movie since I was 13 years old when it first came out.. I have seen the play many times and the movie more times then I can count. I love history and musicals a perfect combination for me.. But 1776 is more then just that I took my 2 kids and their significant others and they new almost nothing about the Declaration of independence or the American Revolution. So sad but a great opportunity for them to have fun and learn! What a disappointment let me be crystal clear the actors were amazing! Their talent and skill of acting and singing were 4 stars (although the person who played John Adams was not strong enough) Although they stayed with the original script for the most part it lost so much in its impact and accuracy ! I felt let down I always get goose bumps in regards to the birth of this nation and 1776 does it so very well. Except this version there are other places to make these modern changes therefore I can not recommend it in this version!!

GirlInDC from Washington, District of Columbia

HORRIBLE ADAPTATION, GREAT SINGING

First, the cast was terrific especially the woman playing John Adams. Great voices! And that’s the only positive I have. The show ran 2 h 45 min with added scenes that I felt were unnecessarily woke. One scene actually drained the energy from the audience. Though, the Native American woman singing in it has a powerful voice. The whole thing had moments that were funny, a bit smutty, and extremely left-leaning. As noted by another reviewer, the ladies’ vocals are the only reason I gave it two stars.

Ray Ott from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

SIMPLY - BORING!

Not entertaining! From the start the show failed capture the audience. The significance of the event failed to leave an impression. The only redeeming entertainment was the excellent voices in the cast. Recommend spending money on a different show.

Marc from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

MISSED BY A LONG SHOT

The one good thing about this "interpretation" of this show was the cast's singing voices. However, that's where the compliments stop as this show truly failed to capture my imagination or anything for that matter. I've seen this show several times, and have left completely enthralled by it. This was not that time. Multiple characters tripped on their lines through out. It was difficult to suspend disbelief, or relate to characters. The video montage in the middle of the show, that flashed moments of history that hadn't actually happened yet, didn't help things. Having a BFA in Music Theater, I've performed in and have watched many unique versions/interpretations of otherwise fairly tame shows. I'm just not sure that this directorial choice hit any of the marks one might hope they would for thinking outside the box. Save your money.

Chris from Chicago, Illinois

UNWATCHABLE

The show was badly produced and performed from the first line. Lackluster singing, wild overacting, limp choreography. It was impossible to suspend disbelief and flow with the self-congratulatory progressive casting. None of the characters were believable, to the point it would have been easier to believe it as a farce, a send up of shows that try way to hard to be worker than thou, abandoning all talent, art, and entertainment. I might have believed it as a high school production (but not a good one at that). Not for one minute should this public display of self-absorbed disrespect for the audience be on a broadway stage I have never walked out of a production before but I made an exception for this to maintain my self-respect The only thing professional is Ticketmaster taking your money. Save it.

Michelle from Des Moines, Iowa

AWFUL

Missed the mark! It was a very amateur production. Songs out of key and not good. Not a good reenactment, didn’t entertain or convey a message. Left at intermission- what a waste of money.

Bruce from Des Moines, Iowa

BOREDOM OVERCAME US

I did not expect a boring dramatization of historical events concerning the Continental Congress to unfold on the stage at the Civic Center this evening. Did we expect a number of smart and sassy musical numbers, as in Hamilton, instead? Probably, but this production will be far removed from that. I can’t comment on the Second Act, since my wife and I chose to leave this show at intermission, something that we rarely ever do. We were not alone, as numerous others did the same. In fact, I have not witnessed so many people leave at intermission as I did tonight. Maybe this production plays better in other locales, but maybe not.

E from San Diego, California

GOOD ACTING - BAD EVERYTHING ELSE.

We have season tickets and took friends to see this one. Absolutely dreadful -- we left at intermission. Weirdly low amount of music, cheesy jokes, boring script. I read a review online that calls the show 'terminally woke' which is an accurate description. I have no issue with bringing politics in, but you still have to put on a show that is worth watching. Overall, I'd rather listen to the king's monologues from Hamilton and get more story and entertainment than from what we saw. Set design was lackluster, especially in context with some shows like Hadestown, Frozen, and Lion King that showed how much set design can contribute. On the plus side, the performance from Martha Jefferson was fabulous -- her voice is incredible and I wish the whole show revolved around that one character. In general, the actors did very well. Did laugh a few times. Seats and the theater itself are excellent.

JF from San Diego, California

INTERMINABLE

This is the first time in my life that I left a show at intermission. It just dragged, with a lot of talk, 75% of which was incomprehensible, and not much music. I have no problem with the concept of non-traditional casting, but some of the choices just didn’t make sense. Thomas Jefferson, who was over 6’ tall, was played by a very slight actor, and the actor who played his wife towered over him. It just made all of their scenes together not ring true. Some of the actors had excellent singing voices, but the accents they employed when speaking their lines, presumably to make them sound like colonial Americans, not only made it very difficult to understand them, but in most cases, just sounded amateurish. A few of the actors, most specifically those portraying Richard Henry Lee and Benjamin Franklin, seemed to think they were playing in a farcical version of the play; there was plenty of chewing of the scenery by these 2, in particular. Over-acting was rampant throughout. I felt as though I was at a high school production. No offense to high schoolers intended. My husband was nodding off during the first act; I held his hand, squeezing it occasionally to keep him awake. I can’t guarantee that I’d have been able to remain conscious myself for another hour plus in order to keep him from falling asleep. The first act was 75 minutes long. I thought it would never end.

Nancy B from San Diego, California

WORST SHOW I’VE SEEN IN SAN DIEGO

Perhaps the show is clever and entertaining, but we could hardly make out the dialogue. I don’t know what the problem was, because I’ve never had that occur at the Civic for any show before. We had many empty seats around us, and by the time the intermission began, numerous rows around us cleared out. We tried sticking it out for the 2nd half, but ultimately going home sounded far better than staying and straining to make sense of it all. Awful. It’s too bad, because some of the singing voices on stage were brilliant. Abigail and Martha were stand outs. Unfortunately, we didn’t know what they were singing about most of the time.

Josh Bych from San Diego, CA

NOT WORTH IT

Costumes were awful. Music was boring. Very low budget. Totally unbelievable overall at this price.

Nancy Williams from San Jose, California

DISAPPOINTED

There was so much wrong hard to know where to begin. The singing was hard to understand. Boring, confusing! “Hamilton Move Over” give me a break! NO COMPARISON! We left at intermission with several others!

Arnon from San Jose, California

I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND A WORD

It was the combination of muffled audio with actresses' forced intonation coupled with English being my second language. My wife kept asking me what did they say, what foes it mean? We could still follow the main story line only because it was very simple and stretched over a very long play. Later I talked with my friends, who were born in San Jose and Iive here more than half a century, and to my surprise they also did not understand much of the conversations. So it's not only me. Other reviews already mentioned the unusual women only cast for a show that is mostly men roles. That did not work well for me either. It feels to me that the cast was selected primarily for the purpose of making a political social statement, rather than creating a good play. It's the director's and producer's statement, not the actresses who did what they were told to. I did not like this show, sorry.

S Butler from Charlotte, North Carolina

JUST AWFUL

I am an avid theater goer and this is the first time I’ve ever walked out of a show. It was that bad. I love 1776 and couldn’t wait to see this. But there was no rhyme or reason to destroy this wonderful show with bad sets bad acting and lackluster singing. I think the actors knew it too with a low energy cast that seemed like they couldn’t wait to get it over with. Save your money.

Wyatt Pringle from Nashville, Tennessee

WHY & YUCK

1776 was my favorite musical when I was a kid. It's the music we sang (very poorly) as a family on vacations. And it's the show I've seen so many times that I can still sing every line 59 years later There is even a story of my parents inviting an understudy we met at a Chicago performance home for dinner who showed up darn drunk. I hate that this revival is what I took my teenage son to see for his first time. Not sure what was worse, the idea to cast it as an all female show, the performances, the non set design, that John "obnoxious and disliked" Adams came across as likeable or the hypocrisy in this sort of updated casting to still have all the slave characters be African American actresses. The producers must've seen the success of Hamilton and came to the wrong conclusion on how to cash in on this historic show. (pun intended). Simply bringing 1776 in its original form would have provided an I testing debate about which is the better historic record if this country's founding. I actually saw a small community theater in Dickson do this show with some Black and si e woman playing the roles of our very white and very male Founding Fathers. The "orchestra" consisted of a single piano player. That performance was way more interesting than this. At least they had a reason for the casting. They had to use who they could get. I went home and took a long shower. That almost made me feel better

Dex Roberts from Nashville, Tennessee

HARD TO BE "SWIKE" WHEN YOU PUT ALL TO SLEEP

Not sure why so many complaints about this all female cast version of the story of our Founding Fathers is being characterized as being "woke." Most people I saw in the audience were asleep. Using woman to play men's roles isn't a woke thing in this case. It's just a bad idea. Ive read two major newspaper reviews and as many on this thread as I could stomach. None give any good reasons of what an all wan cast was supposed to do for the show. I love this show. I hated this rendition.

Adrienne from Washington, District of Columbia

1776 AT KENNEDY CENTER

all female cast portraying men wasn't what I expected. That wasn't the reason for the review. The cast was great. however it was not Kennedy Center standard, more like a local theatre. I was slowwwww and lots of high pitched screaming. Next time I will wait until someone recommends a show. Totally disappointed.

KC from Kansas City, Missouri

TOTAL BOMB

As season ticket holders we were disappointed at this amateur performance. The casting of the new version was confusing at best. Could not follow as it was very disjointed. The all female cast made for a farce with disrespectful sexualized innuendo. The sound was so poor that in the beginning of the second act we could not hear the actor at all. Quiet with poor enunciation. Then loud screaming (song?).... I wear hearing aids and had turned them all the way up to try to discern what the actor was saying, and then was painfully grabbing them out of my ears. Had to go to Audiologist then referred to ENT next morning for damage to one of my eardrums! We left immediately. We have premier Season Ticket parking, and the lot had emptied by at least 1/3 by intermission. I can't imagine what the cast was thinking watching audience leave in a steady stream. A waste of talent, time and money. This is unusual for this venue. But now twice this year the "new versions"were disappointing.

Kam from Seattle, Washington

EVERYONE IN 1969 MUST HAVE BEEN ON ACID

I agree with all the people who gave this one star and left at intermission. But I can’t agree that this was a bad production of a good show. There was hardly any music, and what there was was eminently forgettable. The opening number, which you would think would set the tone for the show and so should get the writers’ best shot, alternates endlessly between the lyrics “Sit down John” and “Somebody open a window”—not a trace of dramatic tension, nothing to do with the subject matter. Other song choices were equally purposeless. Not a single good tune or well-turned lyric within hailing distance. As for the current casting, the diction of 9/10 of the performers was so poor that without a digital doom scroll to the left of the stage no one would’ve been been able to understand much of what they were saying. In common with a number of other reviewers, I have seen high school productions that were considerably more enjoyable.

Natsumi from Seattle, Washington

BORING

Hard to sit through and very lackluster. Actors and venue were amazing, but the story and script was awful.

Page:12345All