Are The Producers Of BILLY ELLIOT Comping Every Tony Voter To See The Show Three Times?- Page 2

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:07pm

I don't get the big deal. Why does it matter which one they saw? They're ALL incredible dancers, singers and actors who completely do justice to the role.

Actually, none of them are incredible singers. They're incredible dancers, passable actors, and below average singers.

[jennamajig]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:16pm

It does seem unfair to reward three young actors based on the performance of only one of them (depending on which Billy the voter sees). I've only seen David and found his performance moving (he is a terrific dancer!), but not the best acting job of the season. The role is written to tug at the heart strings no matter what boy is saying the words.

And I love the show. It should win for its absolutely amazing choreography. But a special award would probably have been better, perhaps paired with all three Billys performing Electricity at the Tonys (which, who knows, part of it will probably be performed anyway).
Updated On: 4/27/09 at 05:16 PM

[TBD2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:18pm

A couple of thoughts (counting courtesy of Spamelot's King Arthur):

1. "I think it's ridiculous that they're predicted to win." Rather...

This 'prediction' is not from the voters -- we have to wait and see.

2. "I don't ever remember any problems in London or Sydney with that decision." SVG123

This is an ENTERTAINMENT enterprise, not a government entitlement program -- people just need to quit bitchin' because they're afraid the boys will get the award. It's entertainment!

3. "Do the voters really all sign something saying they've seen all the nominees in all the catagories?" Whizzer...

Looked at another way: Each boy is relying on the others to impress 'his' judges MORE THAN the shows 'his' judges are comparing them to. To win EVERY boy has to win the judges who saw his performance -- or they loose 33% of the vote right off the bat! How's that for pressure?

Everyone has a favorite show they want to win every award (including me), but this fruitless politicking is just annoying -- the committee has made its decisions and unless they used steroids during the deliberation we need to move on -- to paraphrase Arthurian mythology: "If the boys are chosen, then let the boys be king!" (umm, er.. kings!)

Ed

[jennamajig]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:22pm

Looked at another way: Each boy is relying on the others to impress 'his' judges MORE THAN the shows 'his' judges are comparing them to. To win EVERY boy has to win the judges who saw his performance -- or they loose 33% of the vote right off the bat! How's that for pressure?

Hmm, that is a good point. Didn't think of it that way. That does seem to add onto the pressure when you put it that way :).

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:22pm

Actually, none of them are incredible singers. They're incredible dancers, passable actors, and below average singers.

Agreed. Lauren Conrad is a better actor than Kiril Kulish.

[WishingOnlyWounds2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:23pm

What happens if the voters see/saw Tommy?

[defyingravity07]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:25pm

Ooohhhh..... another twist in the game.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:26pm

What happens if the voters see/saw Tommy?

That is an excellent question, Wishing.

[jennamajig]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:26pm

^^Perhaps they will make sure he is (barring any freak illnesses/injuries) scheduled to go on when Tony voters aren't present? I assume that since they are comped, it is known when a Tony voter is coming.

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:30pm

This is so ridiculous. Honestly.

Just give the boys a Special Tony. (Boy, I'm getting deja vu from that whole TheCharleston/Billy Elliot conspiracy theory fiasco) Let them perform. It'll still be great publicity. The thing is, yes, they're very talented dancers. But really? THEY ARE THE BEST LEADING ACTORS OF THE ENTIRE SEASON?

Brian D'Arcy James is belting his ass off and portraying a nuanced, subtle character under pounds and pounds of makeup eight shows a week. Gavin Creel and J. Robert Spencer are passionately leading talented ensembles. Should three boys who perform two shows a week and are amazing dancers for their age but can't sing or act really win this prestigious award?

[defyingravity11]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:36pm

Many Tony voters make their selections without seeing a great number of Broadway shows each season. The Tonys often reward the role, not the actor. Why should this season be any different.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:36pm

^^Perhaps they will make sure he is (barring any freak illnesses/injuries) scheduled to go on when Tony voters aren't present? I assume that since they are comped, it is known when a Tony voter is coming.

There are over 700 Tony voters. It's likely some will be at just about every performance in the month of May.

[boyfromoz2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 5:52pm

What is so hard about the process? The voters attend one show and see one Billy. If they believe the performer they saw had the "Best Performance by a Leading Actor in a Musical" of every eligible show they've seen that season (take note its Best Performance, not Best Actor) they vote for said performer.

That means that to win, all three Billys need to impress. If one of them is lackluster, they lose one third of possible votes and therefore don't win.
Updated On: 4/27/09 at 05:52 PM

[WishingOnlyWounds2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 6:02pm

If they lose... one of the boys is probably is probably going to get sh*t on by the others.

[boyfromoz2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 6:16pm

Weird fact: if they are nominated and do not win, it will be the first time the role has not won an award it was nominated for.

[Scripps2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 6:38pm

I've always assumed the reason all Billys have been nominated is to not give any of them a sense of inadequacy when they are still emotionally and physically maturing, and coping with the difficulties of doing so in the public eye.

I did think it was strange at first to have nominated all three original West End Billys for the Olivier, but to not nominate them or to nominate only one (or even worse two) would have been totally unfair.

The important thing to consider here is that the boys' well being as they grow up is far more important than the competitive nature of an awards ceremony primarily for adults.

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 6:40pm

Yeah. Because show business is and has always been SO kind and nurturing to child actors.

Derisive snort.

Updated On: 4/27/09 at 06:40 PM

[Scripps2]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 6:49pm

Wow - I'm in the presence of some who can speak for all of showbusiness.

Thank you for your derision.

Please have some water off a duck's back in return.

[homeimp]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 7:15pm

I do not understand the thoughts of some people on this thread. As a few have stated, the joint nominations caused no difficulty in other cities. What the Billys have accomplished is so much greater an achievement than that of any other actor in a musical this year, that awarding the Tony elsewhere to my mind would be a travesty. I doubt any of the other potential nominees would even want to be in the competition without the Billys. It just wouldn't be right. I'd almost be willing to give them the Tony for their work in the first act alone - one big number and moment after another, hardly leaving the stage. The Billys are not acting Hamlet, they are not singing the Boy From Oz. They are playing a young boy of 11 or 12 years. Their acting and their singing voices are perfectly suited to the role. Liam Moyer sang very prettily in London, but I don't think he brought quite the anger and the passion to the role that the NYC Billys bring. So I say well done to David, Kiril & Trent. Take this award. You deserve it.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 7:29pm

What the Billys have accomplished is so much greater an achievement than that of any other actor in a musical this year, that awarding the Tony elsewhere to my mind would be a travesty.

What exactly would be a travesty about people believing someone else gave a better performance? Plus, isn't that statement awfully subjective?

I doubt any of the other potential nominees would even want to be in the competition without the Billys. It just wouldn't be right. I'd almost be willing to give them the Tony for their work in the first act alone - one big number and moment after another, hardly leaving the stage.

I'm sure Bobby Spencer, Brian D'Arcy James, Matt Cavenaugh, Craig Bierko, James Barbour, et. all, would be thrilled to be nominated for the Tony, even if it is against the Billys. What exactly wouldn't be "right" about it? Because they're kids going against adults?

By your logic, we should just forget all about the category of Best Actor in a Musical this year. Let's not even have nominees. Just give them the Tony and be done with it.

If the boys should be given a Tony for their work, it should be a special Tony, awarded to the three of them.

[defyingravity07]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 7:36pm

Brian D'Arcy James goes under 1.5 hours of prosthetics EIGHT times a week & perform for 2.5 hours in it. Each Billy only does 2 performances a week.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 7:41pm

I have a solution.

Let's just give the award to Susan Boyle and be done with it. Surely no one would object?

[Tom's Cat]

Posted: 4/27/09 at 8:15pm

"Brian D'Arcy James goes under 1.5 hours of prosthetics EIGHT times a week & perform for 2.5 hours in it."

That statement's about as ridiculous as the arguments being made against the boys. BDJ goes through a big makeup and costume change every day so he can get behind the prosthetics and play a one-dimensional cartoon character. Chris Seibert too. The characters are fun and cute and the guys do what they can with them - but it ain't that great and it ain't that much. (And don't tell me I'm wrong. I've seen it too.) It doesn't come close to what these boys and the other potential nominees are doing every day.