Broadway.com on Why There Was No Replacement Tony

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 5:42pm

It sounds like the Tony Administration Committee doesn't understand this award any better than the rest of us:


"Back in September 2005, the Tony Awards Administration responded to the cries of the industry as well as theater fans in general by announcing the creation of a brand-new Tony category: Best Performance by an Actor or Actress in a Recreated Role. But on May 16, 2006, when this year's Tony nominees were announced, it was revealed that no Broadway replacement would be receiving the award this year. Why not? After a bit of investigating, Broadway.com has learned there is really no clear-cut answer.
________________________________________________________________

"The award came out of when Reba McEntire entered Annie Get Your Gun," Administration Committee member James Freydberg explained. "She was extraordinary and there was no way to acknowledge that. So this award was a way to honor when someone comes in and gives one of the most amazing performances in years. What we found this year was that no one gave a performance of a quality we'd never seen before."

That is a suitable explanation, but some worry it may not represent the whole story. Current procedure dictates that every Broadway production can suggest up to two leading replacements (who are contracted a minimum of six months) and three Administration Committee members are dispatched to see each of the proposed performances. If the majority of those three deems the performance worthy, all 24 members of the Administration Committee are required to see the performance. Apparently only two replacement performers this past season, Fiddler on the Roof's Harvey Fierstein and Dirty Rotten Scoundrel's Jonathan Pryce, made the first cut. Many contacted by Broadway.com claim that the entire Administration Committee did not attend either show, seriously jeopardizing the performer's chance of obtaining 16 votes.

"The difficulty with this Tony is finding a procedure to [administer] it," another Administration Committee member, Emanuel Azenberg, said. "The category is really a three-year experiment. This is the first year and we'll work on it. I think the procedure will be made clearer in the next meeting."

Clarification of the category's fine print may indeed be needed, as it appears there is a misconception. "It's not just for a good replacement," Azenberg noted. "It's for someone who offers a whole new take." Yet numerous press agents contacted by Broadway.com said the productions they represent proposed anyone eligible, believing the Tony would go to whoever was simply the best replacement this year.

"The problem is the way the rule read—that anyone who came in as a replacement should be acknowledged," Freydberg concurred. "The category is worth taking a shot at because it is something good for an actor. It can bring someone of great talent to Broadway that might never come otherwise. But it needs to be looked at so everyone understands what we are really talking about. It was ridiculous the amount of people [that were] submitted this year."

Others on the committee didn't take issue with the amount of proposed candidates. "Each producer has a definition of what is special, so it's up for us to decide," Michael Price said. "I think it went well overall this year. There are a few creaky things which we are going to discuss. We just have to make a more concerted effort to get everyone to see [the candidates]. But it did what it was supposed to do—it sent us to the theater to see those performances."

Still there will always be those claiming foul because of the minimum vote requirement and the lack of full committee attendance. Did those things affect the chances of Fierstein and Pryce? Many involved are quick to say "no," but, it is impossible to ever really know.

The majority of Administration Committee members contacted, even those who were pleased by the process, believed select changes should be made before next year. A few suggested that, instead of an official category such as Best Performance by an Actor or Actress in a Recreated Role Tony Award, it's possible the industry would be better served by simply encouraging the Administration Committee to occasionally distribute special Tonys to deserving replacement actors.



http://www.broadway.com/Gen/Buzz_Story.aspx?ci=529659

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 5:48pm

Yeah, I think it's definently a grey issue. I can imagine it's hard for the entire committee to see all the new replacements. That means that they would all end up seeing the same shows everywhere. Well, most of the same shows if the producers of "Wicked" enter their new two leads every year. Right?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 5:54pm

Well, the whole committee doesn't have to see all of the replacements.

"Current procedure dictates that every Broadway production can suggest up to two leading replacements (who are contracted a minimum of six months) and three Administration Committee members are dispatched to see each of the proposed performances. If the majority of those three deems the performance worthy, all 24 members of the Administration Committee are required to see the performance. Apparently only two replacement performers this past season, Fiddler on the Roof's Harvey Fierstein and Dirty Rotten Scoundrel's Jonathan Pryce, made the first cut. Many contacted by Broadway.com claim that the entire Administration Committee did not attend either show, seriously jeopardizing the performer's chance of obtaining 16 votes."

So the whole committee only had TWO shows to go back and see and most apparently didn't bother to show up. I guess they didn't feel like sitting through Fiddler and DRS again.

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 5:56pm

A few suggested that, instead of an official category such as Best Performance by an Actor or Actress in a Recreated Role Tony Award, it's possible the industry would be better served by simply encouraging the Administration Committee to occasionally distribute special Tonys to deserving replacement actors.

This makes the most sense.

The only thing I find puzzling is the claim that the creation of the award was due to Reba's Annie (which was at least five years ago, wasn't it?) It took them five years to hash out the mechanics of giving this award -- and then they're faulty? Or is this just something they're saying to make Harvey feel better?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:00pm

That's what I'm saying. Maybe the those people don't want to see those shows again. And giving the award out to be people they find eligible is still a grey issue because how does that person's performance get nominated? Would the whole committee have to go see them too? Isn't that sorta what's already going on?

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:02pm

And the other odd thing is that -- according to their rules -- in order to be eligible, a performer had to begin his/her run after March 1, 2005. Harvey began his run in January 2005.

Again, it's clear that these people don't even understand their own rules.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:10pm

Rentboy:

1) Every show on Broadway can nominate two replacements for this award

2) A subcommittee of three members goes to every show that put forth replacement nominees. Apparently those three went to every show they were supposed to.

3) If two of the three deem a given performance worthy, THEN all 24 are supposed to go check the performance out.

4) Only two replacement performances were deemed worthy by those three this year -- Pryce and Fierstein. So the 24 committee members ONLY had TWO shows to go see and apparently many didn't bother, making it difficult for either actor to collect the necessary 16 out of 24 votes to receive the award.

Understand?

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:18pm

I would assume that by the time Fierstein and Pryce were deemed eligible Fiddler had already closed. It seems weird that after drafting those rules that all of the members who were required to see DRS for Pryce did not.

[TimeSuckage]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:27pm

This "award" is all about luring big names in as replacements. They pretty much admit that in the quoted article. Even if they meet all the criteria, even if they were brilliant beyond belief, they're not going to honor an Eden Espinosa or a Brad Oscar. Really shameless.

[Dirty Rotten Scoundrel]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:37pm

I think that it's ridiculous that one of the reasons that they didn't have the award was because they couldn't find enough worthy nominees...yet, come on, let's be frank, look at the nominees for Original Score, Musical, and even Leading Actor. Hypocritical much?

[Caroline-Q-or-TBoo]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 6:47pm

and yet they don't have seperate awards for music AND lyrics...

[wiggum2]

Posted: 5/29/06 at 9:08am

"and yet they don't have seperate awards for music AND lyrics... "

well they used to

[OtherDaryl]

Posted: 5/29/06 at 10:15am

I just don't get why they didn't give Reba a special award along the lines of the Burton EQUUS or Mary Tyler Moore WHO'S LIFE IS IT ANYWAY honors. . . Or make a special "Tony Honor" like they did with the cast of La Boheme.