Can We Finally Talk About Who Will Win The Tony For Best Musical? — Page 3

I think there is a difference between having an alternate and sharing a role. Anything with the Tonys comes down to billing, opening night performances, and petitions from the producers. Patti LuPone was billed as Evita with a matinee alternate. The four girls in Matilda are not alternates; they are all playing the role. Just like with Patti in Evita, the producers will have to petition the Matilda girls as leading actresses since they are below the title. Would it be more fair for the opening night Matilda to be solely eligible and not the others? It does get sticky, but the Billy Elliot decision was how the Tony committee decided to handle the situation the last time this happened (and also showed how the opening night performer alone would get the nomination if not petitioned otherwise, as was the case with David Bologna in the same show).

Also, the Tony committee saw all three Billys and deemed that each was of equal quality and together created one performance. The category is listed as Best Performance by a Leading Actor in a Musical, and they as a unit were the leading actor in the musical. Again, that's how they decided to do it that year.

Since there is already precedence for the Matildas to be "bundled" together for awards contention, I can't see that a similar petition wouldn't happen here.

Also, it's not the fault of the production for the Tony committee to rule the way they do. If they see one girl (or two or whatever) not having an equal performance as the other girls, I don't think they'd consider "the idea of 'bundling.'" Of course, that's their prerogative, but that's what they seem to stand by.

That said, if two (or more) adult actors equally shared a role, I think the Tony committee would recognize that with this "idea of 'bundling.'" Honestly, I thought that's what they'd do with the principal cast of La Bohème, but alas, they decided to "bundle" them all together in a special Tony.

The Constant Wife ran over the summer of 2005, which means Lynn Redgrave's eligibility would have been determined by September or October. Are you saying the committee had even then already decided that Julia Roberts wouldn't deserve a nomination for Three Days of Rain and therefore kept Redgrave as a lead since she was billed above the title? Or are you saying she was eligible as featured but the nominators broke the rules and made her a lead?

"I think it would be the default to nominate at least four if there were four eligible."

I would hope that if there are only four productions that they decide to nominate only three, or even two, rather than nominate all four and make it akin to "everybody gets a ribbon" day.

Isn't that what they did for Billy Elliot during Tony season? Or did the voters all see different Billy's and voted based on the one they saw?

Rob McClure had better be nominated for Chaplin: The Musical.

'They only needed to see one Billy to vote fairly.'

I saw all 3 Billys, and didn't find them equally Tony-worthy at all. One was a better dancer. Another was a better singer, etc.

But regardless of my tastes, how 'fair' is it for a performer to win an award when arguably two-thirds of the Tony voters probably didn't even see their performance? How 'fair' is it for an adult performer who does ALL EIGHT SHOWS a week to have to compete against a cute child actor who does 2-3 shows a week?

The '3 Billys' Tony ruling was idiotic. And it wasn't even consistent within the same show. Two actors shared the role of Billy's best friend, but only the actor who performed it on opening night was Tony-eligible. So how 'fair' was that?

The year after, the producers of 'Fela!' petitioned the Tonys so the two men who shared the title role would share a Tony nomination for Best Actor. But their request was rejected.

Why was 'bundling' OK for 'Billy,' but not for 'Fela'?

It's Best Actress in a role not best role by an actress. If a production wants to float four actresses in a role all four should be eligible separately or one should be put in contention and the voters will need to see that one actress. Irene Ryan made quite a stir in the Andrea Martin role got nominated and did not win. I have a problem wasting supporting awards on five minute cameo appearances.

Best Musical - I defer until the end
Best Score - Kinky Boots
Best Book - Matilda
Best Actor - Billy Porter
Best Actress - Sophia Genusa
Best Supporting Actor - Bertie Carval
Best Supporting Actress - Annaleigh Ashford
Best Orchestrations - Cinderella/ Matilda
Best Costumes - Cinderella/ Matilda
Best lighting - Matilda
Best Sets - Matilda
Best Choreography - Matilda
Best Direction - Matilda/Pippin
Best Revival - Pippin
Best Musical - Kinky Boots / Matilda

---

Nowhere does it say that Tony Awards are for performers performing eight shows a week.

I just want to point out that the roles of Billy Elliot and Matilda are no walks in the park. Any child performing Billy Elliot eight times a week would badly injure himself, blow out his voice which is on the verge of changing, and ruin any kind of future career. Any child playing Matilda eight times a week would exhaust herself before the fourth show and hurt her voice before it becomes developed. These are nine- and ten-year-old girls who are asked to carry a show, the youngest leading actresses in Broadway history. These roles are mammoth for the children playing them and they should not ever be asked to perform it eight times a week. It has nothing to do with them being cute.

If the Tonys say that only the opening night Matilda is eligible, voters are voting on a performance, not the amount of times the actor performs the role a week.

Updated On: 3/11/13 at 04:08 AM

This^ .

Well, sort of. I can't tell you who was "best" as I didn't see all three. But my point is: if one is actually better than the others then they don't all deserve the award.

If all three were equally wonderful, then the performance cannot be considered OUTSTANDING.

TO ME, the award should only be given to the actor whose performance you cannot possibly imagine being played by anyone else. (That, of course, doesn't mean replacements can't surpass that.)

---

Basically because for whatever reason the producers chose to not petition for the change and allowed the opening night/billing rule to determine the nomination. Always keep in mind that whatever differences from what is laid out in the rules happen because the producers of a show petition for an exception to be made.

What I'm most curious about is how many petitions get denied, since we typically only hear about the petitions that the committee chose to grant.

I still think One Man Two Guvnors should of petitioned Best musical since it would have likely won, and it is more of a musical, in that its music actually propels the plot, than Once is and is better written than NEWSIES and ONCE combined. 1m2g would of likely won best musical, Cordon's performance still would have one, and best book would have been a shoe in.

Back to this year's race though. I think people are counting out Osnes by focusing on the Matilda's, when in reality I think she is the front runner, due to her Broadway Cinderella story. I also think Cinderella/Pippin will give Matilda some still competition in Best set and Cinderella being the odds on favorite for best costumes.

better written than NEWSIES and ONCE combined

Says the poster with a Newsies avatar. Under no stretch of anyone's imagination was One Man, Two Guvnors a musical, but there's no point talking about hypotheticals from last year.

If anyone is being largely overlooked for some reason for best actress in a musical I think it's Patina Miller. This could be a very interesting three-way race.

---

Is Gentlemen Prefer Blondes that played at City Center eligible? If so Hilty was amazing!!

---