#1
Posted: 1/25/18 at 4:23pm
2018 Tony Committee Meeting, Round 2: Decisions on ONCE ON THIS ISLAND, THE BAND'S VISIT, METEOR SHOWER, and More
#2
Posted: 1/25/18 at 4:51pm
Nothing to be surprised by in this round.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#3
Posted: 1/25/18 at 5:19pm
Not sure if it's a surprise, but all of the various Spongebob songwriters are jointly eligible for Best Original Score.
#4
Posted: 1/25/18 at 5:37pm
Bands Visit is showing amazing potential! And i think best actor will be quite a competition this is year!
#5
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:07pm
dearalanaaaa said: "Bands Visit is showing amazing potential! And i think best actor will be quite a competition this is year!"
Potential? Not sure I follow, this is just who can be nominated for which categories... shows with zero potential still go through the Tonys sorting hat like this...
#6
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:08pm
Surprises that no one is noticing: Springsteen and The Parisian Woman were not made eligible.
What's the deal with the latter? Are they just giving up on everything at the Hudson?
What's the deal with the latter? Are they just giving up on everything at the Hudson?
#7
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:19pm
AntV said: "Surprises that no one is noticing: Springsteen and The Parisian Woman were not made eligible.
What's the deal with the latter? Are they just giving up on everything at the Hudson?"
Well, the article said: "The productions discussed were M. Butterfly; Junk; The Band's Visit; Latin History for Morons; Meteor Shower; Once on This Island; SpongBob SquarePants the Musical; The Children and Farinelli and The King."
So, the fact that they didn't discuss shows at this meeting that they hadn't intended to discuss doesn't seem like a big deal.
#8
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:26pm
They discuss them in order of their opening. Those two opened in between the others so they intentionally skipped them and won't be revisiting them.
POSSIBLY, Springsteen is planning to invite the nominators during the extension so they held off discussing it, but it seems unlikely the show will want to invite all the voters anyway. There's no excuse for Parisian Woman though.
Updated On: 1/25/18 at 06:26 PM
#9
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:29pm
AntV said: "They discuss them in order of their opening. Those two opened in between the others so they intentionally skipped them and won't be revisiting them."
Maybe there was nothing to discuss.
#10
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:30pm
Exactly. Do they need to discuss everything? In at least some of the case above they needed to discuss given the default below the title ‘rules’ would lead to very diffierent nominating outcomes for some of these actors. For other shows it could just be business as usual.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
Updated On: 1/25/18 at 06:30 PM
#11
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:42pm
M. Butterfly and The Children have no ruling clarifications either, but are still listed as discussed. Just like every other time they do this, the list they release of shows as "discussed" are the shows made eligible.
#12
Posted: 1/25/18 at 6:45pm
I would also imagine IF they were deemed ineligible, they'd have mentioned it. Time will tell.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#13
Posted: 1/26/18 at 12:26am
Does this mean that all three actors in The Children will be considered featured, given that none are above the title? They all have fairly equal stage time by the end of the play, so you could make an argument for all three of them being leads, or none of them. I know that shows with ensemble casts (i.e no single lead) often just put all their actors in the featured category (e.g The Humans), but with only three actors, and only two of them being women, it seems like they ought to all be considered leads.
#14
Posted: 1/26/18 at 12:52am
If they are below the title and no ruling was announced, they’re featured.
"Broadway...I'll lick you yet!"
#15
Posted: 1/28/18 at 1:14am
So happy Hailey will be eligible to be nominated for Best Performance by an Actress for a Leading Role.
Back in the early 90s, LaChanze was nominated for Featured Role (not leading) for the same character.
#16
Posted: 1/28/18 at 1:39am
So just saw the bands visit. Im having a hard time classifying this as a musical. I would put it as a play with music. The very few songs that there are do not advance plot or character. Emphasis is on spoken word. Well emphasis is on mind numbing silence but thats a topic for the review thread. Im just wondering how they decide the classification of musical.
#17
Posted: 1/28/18 at 7:45am
all_that_jazz said: "So just saw the bands visit. Im having a hard time classifying this as a musical. I would put it as a play with music. The very few songs that there are do not advance plot or character. Emphasis is on spoken word. Well emphasis is on mind numbing silence but thats a topic for the review thread. Im just wondering how they decide the classification of musical."
I see what you mean, but I don’t agree that it should be considered a play with music. The songs are mostly non-diegetic, and they do advance the plot, it’s just that the plot is very minimal, so the advancement isn’t as obvious. The songs also develop character, which is another key factor in distinguishing a musical from a play with music. Furthermore, when the line is blurry, it’s usually best to defer to what the artists consider the work to be (within reason). Yazbeck and Moses intended to write a musical, so we should consider it a musical.
I agree with your sentiment though, I would just phrase it differently: rather than claiming it IS a play with music, I might argue that it’s a musical that SHOULD have been a play with music. But even that, I’m in doubt about. After all there are a few really wonderful non-diegetic songs that do wonders for the emotion of the piece as musical theatre.
Updated On: 1/28/18 at 07:45 AM
#18
Posted: 1/28/18 at 9:56am
I couldn't disagree more that the score of The Band's Visit is NOT integral to the story, character and setting. "Waiting" and "Welcome to Nowhere" "It Is What It Is" are absolutely perfect expositional/introductory-type songs that very effectively establish where these characters are, what they are feeling and what their recent life has been like (which is absolutely pivotal for helping shed light on the importance of the Band coming to the town for some of these characters - especially Lenk's character). "Omar Sharif" while not strongly advancing the plot is absolutely digging into Lenk's character's previous experiences, which helps explain why she might have been struck with Tony's character and why her attitudes towards arabs/arabic culture are perhaps different to others in her town. I mean I could go on, but similarly "Something Different", "Something Different (Reprise)" and "Answer Me" are pivotal. The music is not simply incidental or filler but integral to the character development and progression of the 'story' (much more effective than most other musicals I have seen, which is why I think some of the characters are so strong and deep than typical for a musical).
It's just such a beautiful, well-constructed piece I think.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
Updated On: 1/28/18 at 09:56 AM
#19
Posted: 1/28/18 at 10:16am
Not all songs need to advance the plot. Look at many of the Sondheim musicals. The songs in The Band’s Visit organically come from the characters feelings and often feel like an extension of the dialogue at the moment. To me, it feels much more like a musical than a show like “Once,” which I enjoyed and felt it deserved to be classified a musical. But TBV couldn’t be more of a musical, in my opinion.
Updated On: 1/28/18 at 10:16 AM
#20
Posted: 1/28/18 at 10:21am
I realise I made a mistake at the beginning of my post - but yes agree TBV is a musical and the music is so important for the characters and ‘story’. The music isn’t there for incidental filler. Without the music in TBV, we’d lose a significant amount of character development and exposition. Without the music, there would be no substance/explanation/understanding of how and why Lenk has come to like Tony’s character.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
Updated On: 1/28/18 at 10:21 AM
#21
Posted: 1/28/18 at 2:36pm
JBroadway said: "all_that_jazz said: "So just saw the bands visit. Im having a hard time classifying this as a musical. I would put it as a play with music. The very few songs that there are do not advance plot or character. Emphasis is on spoken word. Well emphasis is on mind numbing silence but thats a topic for the review thread. Im just wondering how they decide the classification of musical."
I see what you mean, but I don’t agree that it should be considered a play with music. The songs are mostly non-diegetic, and they do advance the plot, it’s just that the plot is very minimal, so the advancement isn’t as obvious. The songsalso develop character, which is another key factor in distinguishing a musical from a play with music. Furthermore, when the line is blurry, it’s usually best to defer to what the artists consider the work to be (within reason). Yazbeck and Moses intended to write a musical, so we should consider it a musical.
I agree with yoursentiment though, I would just phrase it differently: rather than claiming it IS a play with music, I might argue that it’s a musical that SHOULD have been a play with music. But even that, I’m in doubt about. After all there are a few really wonderful non-diegetic songs that do wonders for the emotion of the piece as musical theatre."
Nowhere in my post did i claim its a play with music. I said im having a hard time classifying as a musical. And wondered how the tony committee decides in these instances. Like peter and the starcatcher. What are the parameters for that classification. I mean if i was gonna state i wouldnt even give it play status. To me no one is changed or impacted by any event in the show. They all end the same way they began. Its like seinfeld. A story about nothing just not as cleaver about it. But again i didnt state it was anything. But i would state it was the most painful evening on broadway in 30 years.
#22
Posted: 1/28/18 at 2:43pm
So, in order to be considered a musical, a show must have characters who have changed by the end? Really?
And you DID say in your post you would “put it as a play with music.” Now you’re retracting that statement you clearly made in your initial post?
And you DID say in your post you would “put it as a play with music.” Now you’re retracting that statement you clearly made in your initial post?
#23
Posted: 1/28/18 at 3:06pm
Ya i would put it...as in my opinion....how i see it. Nowhere do i say the tonys are wrong and it is a play as jbroadway said. He said i should write it as my opinion not fact. How is my opinion making it fact. Perhaps we should comprehend when we read. And no characters changing doesnt make it a musical. Its basic storytelling. Theres conflict then resolution. Adversity and a solution theres a point. Something.
#24
Posted: 1/28/18 at 3:50pm
You didn't understand the show. We get it.
#25
Posted: 1/28/18 at 3:59pm
No im saying I dont think its a musical. And i dont think it should be nominated as such. And what criteria does the tony committee base this classification on. I mean there are shows i dont like but they are still musicals. My love or dislike of a show is not the question. Clearly the simple question asked was too much for some here.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $70
Tickets From $106
Tickets From $159