Biggest Tony Shockers In History

I'm pretty sure Avenue Q won over Wicked. I'm also pretty sure that was just a typo on your part, so don't feel embarrassed.

---

Updated On: 9/20/08 at 10:35 AM

Ditto.

None of them are surprises if you think about it.

Q was awarded for its originality; Pierce was awarded because it was the only thing CURTAINS would win (much like Stew winning for Best Book); PJ GAME was the rejuvenation of a show that hadn't been seen in years, etc, etc.

Always gets me when a show wins Book, Score, and not musical.

While other shows have won Book and Score, but not Best Musical, Urinetown is the only show to have won Book, Score AND Direction, but not Best Musical. In other words, the best written and directed show of the year was somehow not the year's Best Musical. That was a very peculiar year.

---

Updated On: 9/20/08 at 10:50 AM

^To be fair, Starmites basically was nominated by sheer default and simply not to have two revues only vying for Best Musical. 1989 was just a shocker of a year.

I know what you mean, Urban... but I just have a chip on my shoulder about Starmites in general. I'm still bitter that my school chose to put it on, that my non-musical-loving friends who saw our school production are now convinced that all musicals are like Starmites, and that my sister loves to play the cast recording constantly. ^_^

---

"Two Gentlemen From Verona"?

AlgonquinProd2 - I dunno. "Follies", while beautiful in score, has one of the deadliest books around. Even a concert version I saw couldn't work with it. While I definately wasn't around then, thus cannot pass a judgement, I can at least understand that decision.

Updated On: 9/20/08 at 11:09 AM

Chicago losing to Chorus Line was not a shock. Chicago not winning anything was not a shock. Chicago richly deserved Score, Choreography, Actor and Actress (Donna should have been in Featured Actress. I love her, but her being in Leading defeated the whole purpose of the show and it having NO stars.), however it was pretty well expected that Chorus Line would win everything that evening.
The craptacular Two Gentlemen of Verona losing to Follies? That was a shock.
But it's very strange when a show wins Book and Score, or at least Score and doesn't win Best Musical. What the hell does Best Musical mean? It should mean the Best Musical. The best written, best performed, best executed piece. Light in the Piazza nearly swept the Tonys in 2005, but still that awful piece of **** Spamalot won Musical. Now after winning Score, Actress and all those design awards, wouldn't the Best Musical obviously be Piazza? Anyone get what I'm saying? Same thing with Follies. It won nearly everything, yet Two Gentleman won. Does Best Musical really mean Best Producer? I hope not because I don't think Papp did a better job producing Two Gentleman than Hal did on Follies. Sure The Prince Office lost money, but I think Follies was a harder show to produce than Papp's. I don't think the Spamalot idiots did a better job producing Spamalot than LCT did for Piazza. So what does it mean? We should just get rid of Best Musical. It means nothing, at least on artistic terms. Best Play is another matter. At least the Author gets it.

Herman's speech was even more shocking than him winning!

Spamalot winning over Light in the Piazza
Spring Awakening winning over Grey Gardens
Lion King winning over Ragtime

Definitely Ragtime should have won as it was a much richer show especially scorewise.

---