Bertie Carvel vs. Billy Porter

Surprised that this isn't a board yet.

Ok, guys. Since apparently Bertie is eligible for a Tony for Best Leading Actor in a Musical, along with Billy Porter, this is going be very unpredictable who will win because hands down, one of these 2 will get the Tony. Heck, even I can't choose. So, for now, let's guess who will win.

I know I just said that i can't choose, but for now, I'm just going to say Bertie.

Billy SHOULD win because of the quality and volume of work that he is doing - he must be onstage as the center of attention for close to an hour during KINKY BOOTS. It's hardly fair comparing the two roles. Is there any precedent for a "leading" role with only 2 songs and 20 minutes of stage time as is the case for Bertie Carvel?

What are some previous wins for Leading Actor in a Musical where someone that should've been in featured has won, and someone who had more of a 'leading leading' role with more stage time hasn't won - i.e. the Harvey Fierstein year (2003) for Hairspray, beating Antonio Banderas... What about Norbert Leo Butz - I always thought he won the leading actor Tony for a featured role...

Team BILLY.

This is a very poor mistake for the producers and the commitee. If Bertie loses, it's their faults. If he got Supporting, then the competition for that is over. Now, it's anyone's game for these 2 and the actors will have to hope for the best.

Bertie is the definition of a "Supporting Actor" in this show. And Porter shares te last bow with Sands and is on stage almost as much, so he is the definition of a "Leading Actor". The fact they're in the same category is ridiculous.

I haven't seen Matilda, so I'm asking: Is Bertie the biggest MALE role, so that's why he's Leading? Could that be the thinking?

---

I just need to say that Bertie is probably the most handsome man on Broadway right now.

Just had to say it.

There's some serious category Freud here!

---

See, I don't get this "Miss Hannigan is a supporting role" talk. Her role dominates the show (if played right) as much as Annie. And she has more stage time than the Phantom in The Phantom of the Opera.

It's like saying Fagan or Nancy in Oliver! aren't leading roles either. The story revolves around Oliver from his POV (mostly), but there are other "principle" roles that qualify as leads. ("Leads" is a plural word. You can have more than one.)

Maria in West Side Story isn't on stage (or screen) for the first 25 minutes of the story. Does that make her a supporting role, too?

You can't measure everything with a stopwatch or a ruler.

---

Regarding categorizing the characters of Trunchbull or Hannigan as "Leading" vs. "Supporting", I think both are Leading roles.

If you consider their roles in terms of plot, both characters are the major Antagonist roles to Matilda's and Annie's Protagonists. Neither role "supports" another character's role in terms of plot.

It does not matter how much stage time is occupied, or how many songs they sing. I think of it as being similar to roles in the movie, "The Wizard of Oz". Although the Scarecrow, Lion and Tin Man are all onscreen for much longer than the Wicked Witch of the West, they are all supporting roles to Dorothy's leading character.

Had she been nominated for an Oscar, Margaret Hamilton probably would have been in the "Best Actress" category. As the major Antagonist to Judy Garland's Protagonist, the WWotW could be considered a Leading role.

As mentioned by others before, the Tony is not about the quantity of physical work alone (i.e. stage time or physicality). How well the role is created/executed counts.

Think about Dame Judi Dench's Oscar for Queen Elizabeth in Shakespeare in Love. She was barely even in that picture...

Updated On: 4/27/13 at 09:28 AM

Bertie is winning, case closed.

The Tonys have done some crazy things through the years. Remember the joint nomination for Ripley and Skinner in Side Show? Ridiculous!