It could...but it's unlikely to sweep the awards leading up to the Tonys...because of Hamilton, which I suspect will do just that.
I'm not thinking Something Rotten will get across the board raves. (The reviews on here are divisive enough to make me think that-I know the board isn't the same as the critics, but still, the opinions are so varied. Besides AE, I have yet to see outright hatred for Fun Home.)
I'm not saying it's a slam dunk-far from it-but, stranger things have happened. (Once beat Newsies, which did get pretty strong reviews.)
Is Fun Home eligible for the other awards again this year if it was nominated and even won some of the awards last year? That could, but hopefully wouldn't, take away from some of the award steam building up to the Tonys for this show. Not sure if anyone has talked about this point before.
It won't be eligible for any of the theatre awards that include off-Broadway. Hopefully that shouldn't harm its chances at the Tonys.
My question is: would Emily Skeggs be eligible for the other theatre awards since she wasn't eligible last year? It seems like it would be unfair to shut her out just because the SHOW was playing at the Public last year.
I know that at least with the Drama League, Alan Cumming was eligible and nominated for the re-staging of Cabaret since he did not win the performance award the first time around. (This is actually similar to the Tony rule. Had he not previously won best actor for the Emcee, he would have been eligible for a second nomination). So I believe at least for the Drama League, Emily Skeggs WILL be eligible. And possibly the entire cast since none of them took the sole performance award (but perhaps not enough time has passed?). I think Skeggs will have a hard time getting nominated at these precursors though. How many of the League and Drama Desk voters would be invited to the show if she is the only aspect of the show eligible?
I am so glad it was drizzling after Fun Home tonight because it was a great cover for how much I was trying to hold back tears from this beautiful show. This is a masterpiece in every sense- writing, performances, design, direction, all flawless.
I've been listening to the recording since November, so I was fairly familiar with the score and most of the story, but I still found myself so engaged, especially with the second half of the show. The string of numbers that happen in that half, starting with Changing My Major and ending with the Finale, are all stunning and pretty much had me sobbing. And the performances supported by this brilliant work are so, so terrific. All three Allisons are so charming and moving, and Sydney Lucas in particular is wonderful. Michael Cerveris and Judy Kuhn are each giving excellent performances, heartbreaking in their own unique ways.
I know this post is more gushing than any kind of critical analysis, but I can't say enough how much I adored this. I hope it has a long life on Broadway and I cannot wait to go back again.
I am a firm believer in serendipity- all the random pieces coming together in one wonderful moment, when suddenly you see what their purpose was all along.
I liked it and I didn't like it. The memoir is a beautiful and personal work, and the musical was probably the best musical that could be made out of the work, but the material resists adaptation. The problem is that while the memoir feels like a private conversation between you and the author, the musical is a group of people coming together to tell a story, and it just doesn't come off as well. I didn't like the cast album, but the music works better in the theatre. The cast was uniformly excellent, but in the novel, Bechdel spends about half the book justifying her father, and when his actions are just presented in front of you, he becomes particularly unpalatable. Cerveris does good by the part, though. If I hadn't read the book, I would probably say it was a really good musical, and it was, but when compared to the flawless book, it's just not up to snuff.
@Fantod - I just finished the graphic novel and I know what you mean. The show and the book is different for sure, especially in tone, but I don't see it being at odds with each other. Loved the book for Alison's work. And now I love the musical even more for Jeanine, Lisa, and Sam's incredible work to bring their interpretation to stage.
That said, I can see this working more in favor for those who watched the show first before reading the book - just like watching a film adaption first before reading the book it was based on.
In any case, what I personally found incredible is that both the show and the book left me with that same "feeling" (which I won't even begin to describe with my poor writing skills) and believe this is a testament to how well the creatives of the show managed to capture Alison's "soul" of her book.
I don't totally disagree with everything Fantod said. Loved the novel, fell in love with the musical. I found the musical to have more heart, more emotion. I felt the book was analytical. (Maybe because she explained away so much of it.)
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
This is really a delightful show - funny, inspiring, heartbreaking. This is, I think, Tesori's best work yet, and Lisa Kron's book and lyrics are just amazing (even more so, considering this is a first venture at a full length book musical for her). The performances are all wonderful to watch - the kids don't overact and the adults are models of subtlety and restraint as well. Sam Gold appears to be one of the few directors who knows how to effectively stage a show in the round.
I have a few (perhaps trivial) quibbles - I might like more of the songs to have full beginnings, middles, and ends, but those that do ("Fun Home" [one of the funniest songs I've seen in years], "Ring of Keys," "Changing My Major," "Days and Days" [I'm guessing at these titles, as there's no song list in the playbill]) are all wonderful, satisfying songs. Cerveris' "mad scene" felt a bit rambling to me (although mad scenes do ramble, by nature), but his obtuse chilly persona is the perfect match for this disconnected narcissistic character.
That said, I sadly suspect that this adventurous show, even were it to win the Tony, is not going to find a foothold with the mass tourist market any more than other adventurous transfers like Caroline or Passing Strange.
Still, I'm glad that Fox et.al. brought it uptown.
I have the same concerns, but am hoping for the best...and maybe a good year or two run.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
I was stunned at the life Next to Normal had on Broadway...and I think Fun Home is a far superior show. In some ways, I find the family dynamics far more accessible in Fun Home than Next to Normal. My family is nothing like the Bechdels, and yet...
I think, no matter what happens, it's a triumph to have a musical of this quality on Broadway. It's a show that only deepens the more you revisit, and that is something to celebrate.
Saw the show last night and was absolutely stunned by how wonderful it was. I won the todaytix lotto and my friend and I ended up in the front row, which is a perfect view for this show. It made it feel so intimate, like you really were sitting right in the living room with them.
The book is very close to my heart, and I was a little bit nervous going into the show that I wouldn't have the same powerful emotional response that the book had got from me. I shouldn't have worried at all, because if anything, I was even more emotional at the show. As a gay teenager, watching a character on stage struggle with some of the same moments I have (Coming out, realizing you're gay, etc) was enough to get me tearing up, simply because I had never seen a character in a musical have to face those issues before.
Michael Cerveris is giving a true performance of a lifetime as Bruce, a deeply flawed and complex character, who has to be seen through the eyes of Allison at many different moments in her life. His Edges of the World is simply astounding.
All 3 of the actresses playing Allison are incredible, and I truly wish they could all be given an award for the way they take one person at different points in her life and make her whole. Sydney Lucas is phenomenal as young Allison, her Ring of Keys absolutely floored me.
Judy Kuhn. Wow. Her Days by Days is something so raw and real, even though I personally have never experienced a family situation like that, I still connect to the emotion of the song. It goes beyond just what is going on in the show, to be a song about a moment that I think everyone has experienced at some point in their life.
The staging on the show in the round is absolutely perfect, with the set constantly moving. Every seat has a good view, and even better, every seat has a different view. I could see this show five more times in five completely different places, and experience something new each time. The way the set pieces move is brilliantly done, huge kudos to Sam Gold and David Zinn for that, as well as Ben Stanton who is doing some very clever lighting design work.
Is one song still being performed with the actors sitting on a turntable?
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." Thomas Pynchon, GRAVITY'S RAINBOW
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
My blog: http://www.roscoewrites.blogspot.com/
Last night the revolve was still being used for Telephone Wire. I can't imagine they'd change it- it's a very effective way to stage that song.
In regards to the staging and seating, I can't imagine there's a bad seat in the house. I was in one of the $75 seats in the 100 section, and so many of the moments felt pitched directly at me. But the show is done so well, I imagine that every section feels that way.
I am a firm believer in serendipity- all the random pieces coming together in one wonderful moment, when suddenly you see what their purpose was all along.
Not sure if this is a spoiler or not, so don't read if you haven't seen the show
I was disappointed that Alison announced at the very start of the show, how and why her father died, I think it would have hit me harder if I had not know that!
Well I didn't want to get into it, but he's a Satanist.
Every full moon he sacrifices 4 puppies to the Dark Lord and smears their blood on his paino.
This should help you understand the score for Wicked a little bit more.
Tazber's: Reply to
Is Stephen Schwartz a Practicing Christian
I have a few (perhaps trivial) quibbles - I might like more of the songs to have full beginnings, middles, and ends, but those that do ("Fun Home" [one of the funniest songs I've seen in years], "Ring of Keys," "Changing My Major," "Days and Days" [I'm guessing at these titles, as there's no song list in the playbill]) are all wonderful, satisfying songs. Cerveris' "mad scene" felt a bit rambling to me (although mad scenes do ramble, by nature), but his obtuse chilly persona is the perfect match for this disconnected narcissistic character.
That said, I sadly suspect that this adventurous show, even were it to win the Tony, is not going to find a foothold with the mass tourist market any more than other adventurous transfers like Caroline or Passing Strange.
"
I actually think the fact that those songs you singled out--I'd add Telephone Wire and maybe Maps there too--do have full proper beginnings and ends (more or less,) helps for those moments to stand out--and as you imply, it makes sense that the "mad scene" in particular doesn't.
I suspect and at least hope that the family and "coming of age" aspect of this show--even with the prominent themes of sexuality--might make the show have a healthier run than the ones you mentioned. True, Caroline had issues with that too but it also was presented as a sort of opera and I think people who heard about it but didn't see it simply largely didn't know what to make of it.
I was disappointed that Alison announced at the very start of the show, how and why her father died, I think it would have hit me harder if I had not know that!
"
Sorry, sine that is right at the start of the book and the show, I refuse to give it spoiler space
I think it would have been a big betrayal of the source material to not do it that way. I also think the story simply would not be as effective--I mean essentially the instigation for it is Adult Alison examining her life to try to figure out why her father did it.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
I saw both Fun Home and Something Rotten this week. Loved them both. Something Rotten is a lot of fun! The second act kind of falls apart, although as a whole the entire evening is just fun and well worth seeing. Fun Home, on the other hand, is just sublime, important, amazing theatre. Wow!
I think Fun Home will win the Tony for Best Musical. It won't get choreography, or costumes. It's a toss up for Direction, although I think Sam Gold will pull it off What worries me is that we are going to have a repeat of The Light in the Piazza Vs. Spamalot again.
I thought The Light in the Piazza should have won that year. It would be a shame of Something Rotten won over Fun Home. Fun Home is just too important a work.
But on the other hand.. WHO CARES what wins!!? Go see both of them. They are both wonderful.
I hope that Fun Home will win, it is a much better show, but I am worried about its commercial prospects. Next to Normal didn't win best musical, and I would say Fun Home is even harder to sell.
I dunno--a coming of age story, advertised the right way isn't necessarily a harder sell than a family dealing with depression... And, as mentioned, Next to Normal despite its subject matter and its lack of Best Musical win, did *run* (and I think was fairly successful on tour.)