Breaking: Tony Committee Decides Eligibility on Slew of Shows, Matilda Girls NOT Up for Best Actress But Recognized — Page 5

Sure they do. They matter more than anyone with only 7 years of posting. And certainly less than a full year.


That's the way it works around here. Seniority.

---

Um....I was joking. Truly.

---

I was simply stating people would've had a lot to say, not that we posters would be running after the Tony committee with torches and pitch forks Beauty and the Beast style! Wicked brought up the angry mob idea! It doesn't negate the fact wicked called me out and you went along with it! Drama mama, my apologies:) I see the humor now, this is precisely why I hate text messages, things get misinterpreted without vocal inflection. Truly, I'm over this and would like to see this topic back on track!

^I'm not denying that ... I'm letting you know that Rocks was ALSO saying that voters don't care, but you seemed to think he was saying they DO care. He was agreeing with you.

Could Patina and Laura jointly win the award! I'm rooting for both.

To help with everyone's confusion, here is the language from the Tonys rules:

"The written requests from a producer shall not in any way infringe upon the exclusive right of the Tony Awards Administration Committee to a) define a show as "new" or "revival" and b) place an eligible candidate in a category other than that indicated by the opening night program or requested by the producer."

So there is no way to jump to conclusions about what requests were made since the committee has such a board and aggressive discretion.

^ Sorry, but I don't think the boys should've been nominated either. It sucks for the girls, I guess, but this is how it should be. It's not fair to their competition to evaluate a ten year old doing two performances a week by the same standards as someone giving a very emotionally and physically difficult performance eight times a week.

They're still getting recognized, which IMO is silly but they WILL be honored by the Tonys so I'm not sure what there is to complain about here.

---

It's possible that the committee decided, in retrospect, that making the three Billy Elliots eligible was a mistake and that they did not want to repeat the mistake with the Matildas. It could also be that the membership of the committee is different and that these folks just see it differently.

>> "It's great that they're being honored, but I am mad about this."

As above posters have mentioned, nominating the Billys was probably viewed as a mistake. It seems that the Tony Committee might be looking to correct that mistake this year.

I do think it's unfair of the Committee to have made the decision to award the Matildas without giving Tony voters an opportunity to have a say. Perhaps Tony voters might feel that Lilla Crawford (or any of the other Young Actors currently working on Broadway) would be worthy of an honor as well?

If I had my 'druthers, I'd set a permanent restriction on Tony eligibility for all Young Actors (as they're defined by Actors Equity and New York law). It does not seem fair to have children compete with adults as professionals. The criteria used to evaluate their performances would very rarely place all the actors on an equal footing (a Young Actor would have to be exceptionally mature in their craft to compete with adults).

BUT... this year is an exceptional year for Young Actors on Broadway. There are two shows that both have large numbers of Young Actors as featured cast members. To allow the Tony Committee to unilaterally decide that the 4 Matildas are the only Young Actors worthy of being honored doesn't seem right, either. This isn't an honorary award like "lifetime achievement", etc., where it's appropriate for the decision to be made by the committee alone.

I think it would be better to establish an option for a "Young Actors" Tony every year. I'd like to see it as a write-in vote by Tony voters, with the award going to the Young Actor who receives a write-in vote from say, 30% of ALL Tony voters (i.e., if there are 100 Tony voters, the award would go to the Young Actor who received 30 write-in votes).

In the case of a tie, the Award would go to BOTH (what's the harm in encouraging young performers?). In years where there were no featured Young Actors, the option could simply be ignored by Tony voters. If NO Young Actor received 30% of the vote, could their performance really have been that good?

A separate category for Young Actors would allow for more flexibility in consideration (like multi-casting for a role) and eliminate the unfair competition between children and adults.

Updated On: 4/26/13 at 08:22 PM

I think Shamos is in the correct category. Although he's onstage for the majority of the play, he's rarely the center of focus within the plot. He doesn't have a "moment" to warrant a leading placement in my opinion. I could see Faye being a leading character before Jeff.

It looks like the producers of ORPHANS didn't make a request to place Sturridge in featured category and since he is billed above the title he is considered lead.

That puts Jeremy Shamos (The Assembled Parties) and Bobby Cannavale (Glengarry Glen Ross) in good positions to win.

Richard Roma is meaty, scene-stealing role that has already won Tonys for Joe Mantegna and Liev Schrieber. Cannavale is one of those actors that everyone seems to like (both personally and professionally) so he has a good chance of being the third actor to win a Tony for this part.

With Carvel now petitioned for lead, this means Mr. Wormwood has a shot at being recognized in the featured category, and I also predict 2 Matilda nominees (Miss Honey and Mrs. Wormwood) for the featured actress category