Marissa Jaret Winokur who at the time was an absolute nobody, besting a controversial, but still career defining turn for Bernadette Peters in Gypsy.
I think the only real upset was that people expected Peters to win for simply playing that role (personally, I thought she was woefully miscast). Marissa received across-the-board raves in the runaway hit of the season while reviews for Peters and Gypsy were wildly mixed.
Matilda's entire Tony campaign rubbed voters the wrong way and made voter feel as though they were expected to bow to the shows greatness.
Did it really? It sounds more like a speculative Riedel conspiracy theory. I do think Matilda deserved FAR more awards than it received, but Carvel in the category for Lead definitely made sense for the role. It was pretty clear that Porter would win for that category, anyway, so it doesn't seem like much of a "ploy". And I think Gabriel Ebert's win in the Featured category caught most by surprise. As for the girls playing Matilda, placing them in an acting category wouldn't necessarily put any of them in Lead (as we've seen countless times with child actors). If they were nominated in Lead and won, Pippin/Patina Miller fans would have been outraged and shrieking their heads off. Choosing the girl who played opening night for nomination over the other two who equally shared the role seemed disrespectful to the producers (and rightfully so to me), so they went the way of the special award given to the cast of La Boheme, which nobody seemed to take issue with then, so why now? The rule change after Billy Elliot was something of a kick in the teeth to child actors who carry a show and are contractually forced to share a role. That they should be treated as adult actors for awards, but not for their casting and performance schedules already puts them in an unfair position from the start. Thinking that these decisions by the producers were an expectation to "bow to the show's greatness" sounds more like very sour grapes rather than anything logical. And if that is how Tony voters REALLY make their decisions, then Matilda never really had a fair shot, anyway.
The KINKY win was definitely an upset and a political situation when the Britishproducers refused to share producing credits with established Broadway producers.
Didn't they share producing credit with The Dodgers?
but in terms of lead actor, I ebelvie the main argument was that Carvel should've been in supporting and that his role really was not a leading role.
People often get this confused. The award is for leading actor, not leading role. There was no reason why Carvel should not have been considered the lead male actor in Matilda. Whether he was considered lead or not is about billing and the producers right to petition for lead if the actor is not billed above the title.
Going way back to 1971: Two Gentlemen of Verona over Follies for Best Musical. Even the presenters and winners were stunned. And while I love some of Galt MacDermot, how the hell did that happen? How many revivals have there been of Two Gentlemen?
Two Gentlemen of Verona was the surprise hit of the season. A funny joyous romp that delighted audiences. Though Follies has been revived twice, none of the productions on Broadway recouped. I thought the Delacorte production of Two Gentlemen in 2005 deserved a Broadway transfer. I could easily see how it could have won Best Musical in its original season.
Clearly, time has proven that Follies "works" just fine.
Not...really. I think Suskin was referring to how well it worked in terms of the audience and ticket sales. Two Gentlemen was a hit in its first production. Follies flopped three times. For me, I never saw the original production of Follies, but the latest London revival was the closest it ever came to "working" for me, but I still find it problematic. Ambitious, to be sure, with some great tunes, but not a show I enjoy seeing.
Once on this Island
Why?
Drama Desk Award: My Fair Lady
Drama League Award: My Fair Lady
Outer Critics Circle Award: My Fair Lady
Different voters would be my guess.
As for Will Rogers Follies, I was bit surprised when it took home the top prize, but it wasn't until after the Tonys that I actually saw the show. Once I saw it, it totally made sense. At the time, Miss Saigon was considered the front-runner, mainly based on its ticket sales and being the new Boublil/Schoenberg mega-show riding in on a tidal wave of buzz from the West End after Les Miserables. But keep in mind, even despite the casting controversy, reviews were mixed. Secret Garden also had mixed reviews and didn't exactly catch on like wildfire with the exception of young girls, some musical theatre geeks and Patinkin fans. Once on This Island was the little-show-that-could that was greatly admired, but hardly noticed. Will Rogers Follies snuck in just under the wire as the last show of the season and it had a LOT gong for it:
1. Creative team of beloved Broadway legends
2. Bio of a beloved American personality (James Whitmore continued his popular solo show as Will Rogers across the country through 2000)
3. Witty book
4. Score littered with gems
5. Genius concept executed brilliantly
6. Iconic design and choreography
7. Rope tricks, trained dogs, bare boobs and a mostly naked Jerry Mitchell dancing on a giant Native American drum
Seriously, the show offered generations a spectacular view into a bygone era most never had the opportunity to witness. Toe-tapping tunes, unforgettable costumes, scenery and dancing, star-turn performances, laughs, poignancy, sex appeal for pretty much everyone...the show really had it all.
I loved all four shows and choosing a favorite among them would be virtually impossible for me, but I can easily see how WRF won Best Musical.
I think that we can all kind of agree that if not for the whole political campaign that Avenue Q ran, Wicked likely would have taken the prize that night as it was expected to.
No, we can't.
I still believe that Matilda lost at least a few votes for Score due to the bad sound design. I know for sure that at least a couple voters said they couldn’t understand the show due to how muddy it sounded in the theatre (a complaint that has plagued the show from the start) and I’m sure they weren’t alone in that regard.
Those would be some really stupid voters. Most voters receive at least a promo CD of the score (a voter used to give me his copies when he already owned it or didn't want it). And the original UK cast recording had been available for a couple of years. Losing Sound Design makes sense, but not Score.
Jersey Boys winning Best Musical wasn't a Tony upset at all, just a disappointment to Drowsy Chaperone fans. JB was a runaway hit receiving across-the board raves and was the strongest reviewed musical of the season. It would've been an upset if it HADN'T won.
Winning Best Score and Best Book doesn't usually guarantee a Best Musical win at that time. Just a few years before, Urinetown won Best Score and Best Book yet Thoroughly Modern Millie won Best Musical.
A few years before that, Parade won Best Score and Best Book yet Fosse won Best Musical.
And Falsettos in 1993.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Updated On: 5/7/19 at 01:11 PM
