Cameron Mackintosh Says Oliviers are Failing to Premier Showcase Commercial Theatre

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 9:45am

Full Article

[ebontoyan]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 10:14am

I agree with him!

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 10:55am

When famous people or industry people openly complain about how certain people didn't get nominated (or even use words like "disgrace"), I wish they had the guts to say which nominee should have been taken out in favor of whoever it is that was robbed of a nomination.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 10:57am

Just because it's a commercial success, doesn't mean it's award worthy.  

[DeNada]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 11:16am

It's true that most of the Olivier winners come from the subsidised sector - particularly in the plays sector, but even in the musicals (City of Angels and Sunny Afternoon are both subsidised in origin, although the Donmar barely counts IMO and Sunny Afternoon has a commercial transfer).

BUT

The Oliviers aren't about awarding diverse casting, or how much money you've spent on a show.  They are, in theory, about artistic quality in commercial theatre.  As powerful as Eva Noblezada's voice is, has she reinvented the role after Lea Salonga and the legions of petite belters that followed?  Did Jon Jon Briones really do anything that Jonathan Pryce hadn't done? Was there really more of merit in the UK tour production of Miss Saigon with a lick of fresh paint than the Donmar's staging of City of Angels?  At least they bothered to do a new staging...

CM could, perhaps, content himself with his enormous number of Whatsonstage awards, voted for by the public; Miss Saigon is a big commercial success with an easily coercible fanbase.  Don't get me wrong - I really quite like Miss Saigon.  But it didn't deserve to win anything.

Plus... in this day and age, does anyone really care if you win an Olivier?  It doesn't sell tickets like a Tony does.

[decast]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 11:33am

Just going off topic a little from that, I have to say, what ended up on tv, despite being nearly 2 hours long was just so dull. Or dry, however you want to put it. Putting Angela Lansbury in the 'also tonight..' winners bit was unbelievable.  It really lacked energy, despite some good performances (not Beverly Knight screeching at me for 3 minutes tho). When you put it alongside the Tonys broadcast there's a stark difference. I imagine for anyone who wasn't a real theatre type, tuning in for curiosity, they wouldn't have lasted long watching it, despite there being a number of recognizable faces (McAvoy, Dench, Spacey, Strong, Ejiofor etc). I have to say, I thought the Miss Saigon performance was one of the strongest of the night. 

[Princeton Returns]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 1:13pm

Maybe if he and the creative team had done something more original and creative with it instead of a mix of the original with the uk tour it might have stood more of a chance. This sounds like cameron having a bit of a sulk.

Unfortunately on the whole there is more risks being taken,and more creativity being done in the subsidised sector than the commercial west end. I also didn't hear him complaining about the Wos awards only awarding big  commercial productions and not the smaller ones

Anyway, the book of Mormon won and that is highly commercial.

[lotiloti]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 1:23pm

CM has no grounds for complaint, with regard to 'Saigon'. The current production, whilst wonderful to listen to. Visually IMO, is a total disaster. CM has (as usual) completely over produced . The direction by Conner (nothing stands still, for a second) detracts from the shows greatest asset, the score. Meanwhile, the Donmar's,  'City of Angel' stood head & shoulders, over any other musical revival this year. I was overjoyed, that it received the best revival nod. Once again it proves, biggest isn't always best.

[devonian.t]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 1:40pm

Given the amount of wine he consumes, you'd think he'd know the dangers of sour grapes by now!

[imeldasturn]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 1:47pm

Economical success is the reward for commercial shows, let the good ones pick the awards.

[DeNada]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 3:28pm

False dichotomy there, though.  Miss Saigon is not a bad show.  It's just that it, and its performers, are not as good (in this production) as other shows on at the moment.

The musical winners aren't exactly uncommercial, either - both Beautiful and Sunny Afternoon are jukebox shows (amusing that Ray Davies should win Outstanding Achievement in Music for... songs he wrote 50 years ago for his pop group...) and City of Angels was not only star-studded but had a starry creative team; lest Cameron forget, Howard Harrison was not only a production administrator in his office many years ago but also lit Mary Poppins and Witches of Eastwick for him!

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 4:13pm

"Maybe if he and the creative team had done something more original and creative with it instead of a mix of the original with the uk tour it might have stood more of a chance. This sounds like cameron having a bit of a sulk."

But he did!  Didn't you know, his choices of affordable, younger directors and designers for the new Phantom, Miz and Saigon was all about him wanting to let the voice of a younger generation place their stamp on those shows!! 

It's too bad he seems to have less and less interest in shepherding in new shows.

[Annetteiago]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 6:07pm

I hardly think they should be supporting any theater but good theater. I think Beautiful,  Sunday Afternoon is commercial theater however.  I do not think that Cameron should stop being a  baby because the show did not get as much nominations as he would like.

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/14/15 at 7:11pm

I don't see anything wrong with supporting commercial theater, just as long as it's good commercial theater.