Fun home or an American in Paris? — Page 2

"Also, I will personally never forgive Craig Lucas if his movie-to-stage adaptation wins."

I think his libretto for AAIP has been pretty universally reviled. I was meh on it myself, despite loving most of the evening that was hung on it.

I expect best book AND best score will go to FUN HOME, with no argument from me.

But the show as a whole hits me differently. Much like the year RAGTIME won best book and score but the Best Director and Best Musical Tonys went to THE LION KING, I feel that's the way this year will roll as well.

Fun Home. Not only the most original musical, but it's the best one of the four nominated shows. The best one.

It's just so difficult to choose a winner out of these two shows. They are both so different and so special. An American in Paris is big, and gorgeous and classic Broadway, and Christopher Wheeldon's direction and choreography is some of the best I've EVER SEEN. Fun Home on the other hand is a game-changer. It is completely original and intimate. I loved them both so much, and felt so much while watching them. I think that Fun Home is going to win due to the momentum it's gained this season and last season, but both deserve it. (and so do Something Rotten! and The Visit)

Riedel is also not giving Fun Home the time of day what-so-ever. He only ever mentions it in passing.

I suspect he dislikes it but can't find any dirt to spin into drama.

Updated On: 5/13/15 at 10:10 AM

I think it’s definitely going to be a close race. And to some degree it is a shame there has to be one winner since both shows are so different.

Fun Home is often credited with being a game-changer in the world of musicals, and on many levels I agree. It certainly feels different than anything else … and originality in theatre deserves to be lauded. However, my main feeling after seeing Fun Home was that it felt more like a play than a musical. There weren’t any “hummable” tunes and I would be hard pressed to come up with a single melody from the show (two weeks later).

It was however, ridiculously well acted, and Judy Kuhn could sing the phone book and I’d pay to hear it. Still, I think if you took away the fact that it was about lesbians, the praise for the show as groundbreaking would diminish precipitously. I think it might even border on “emperor’s new clothes” territory. I can’t help but feel like so many critics confuse anything LGBT with avant garde.

Again … don’t get me wrong … it’s an extremely well acted show. There are more than a few scenes that are interesting. But dramatically? I couldn’t get past the fact that there was ZERO drama in the actual plot. The audience is told at the beginning of the play that the father is gay and kills himself because the daughter comes out. The entire play is just a description of how that happens.

And again … it’s incredibly well acted. If only this was nominated in the play category!

On the other hand, AAIP is a masterpiece. I think the easiest way to make my point is to list the obstacles that AAIP had to overcome (and did):

• No b’way celebrities or box office names in the cast yet they have outsold every new show. When’s the last time that happened … especially in a season with so many choices of quality. AAIP should be getting the kind of credit that Rent and Once received for casting unknowns and succeeding.


• Casting this huge show! Every member of the cast is a true triple threat (and one could argue that a few in the cast including Leanne Cope are quadruple threats … just ask any chorus gal what it’s like to do 8 shows a week on point)


• No original score … which everyone knows is a knock against it when it comes to the Tony race … yet they managed to make Gershwin seem modern and non-juke-boxy. Another way to make this point is that NONE of the criticism around this show has been about the score. The silence in this regard is the great unsung praise of this show!! How little in fact has been said about the fact that the creative team had the entire Gershwin catalogue at their disposal and were able to find a way to both honor what was in the movie but create something new.


• To re-write a story that honored an iconic movie yet somehow avoid comparisons (this alone is a ridiculously incredible feat). I mean, for God’s sake, this could have been a mine field of “he’s not Gene Kelly” or “she’s no Leslie Caron” or “how dare they try to remake an American classic.” None of that ! Huge!


• Lastly, Christopher Wheeldon has managed to bring back the idea that dance can be a narrative part of musical theatre … a la Agnes de Mille and Jerome Robbins. Anyone who cares about Broadway should recognized the immense contribution this show is making to the canon, and how this will probably light the fire of the next great director/choreographer sitting there today mesmerized by An American in Paris.

Welcome to the board with your first post.

No b’way celebrities or box office names in the cast yet they have outsold every new show. When’s the last time that happened … especially in a season with so many choices of quality. AAIP should be getting the kind of credit that Rent and Once received for casting unknowns and succeeding.

Gershwin is the celebrity.

And the Best Picture-winning movie bearing the same name.

Those are what sold this show.

Casting this huge show! Every member of the cast is a true triple threat (and one could argue that a few in the cast including Leanne Cope are quadruple threats … just ask any chorus gal what it’s like to do 8 shows a week on point)

The relative weakness in acting and singing has been a criticism of the show. The dance capabilities are not in doubt.

No original score … which everyone knows is a knock against it when it comes to the Tony race … yet they managed to make Gershwin seem modern and non-juke-boxy. Another way to make this point is that NONE of the criticism around this show has been about the score. The silence in this regard is the great unsung praise of this show!! How little in fact has been said about the fact that the creative team had the entire Gershwin catalogue at their disposal and were able to find a way to both honor what was in the movie but create something new.

This comment is just strange. The source material itself is downright non-juke-boxy. It isn't being drawn from multiple sources. That's not a praise, just a fact. Why would anyone expect there to be criticism around the show's use of old Gershwin tunes when it's the major selling point. Lack of criticism of this =/= unsung praise. WTF?

To re-write a story that honored an iconic movie yet somehow avoid comparisons (this alone is a ridiculously incredible feat). I mean, for God’s sake, this could have been a mine field of “he’s not Gene Kelly” or “she’s no Leslie Caron” or “how dare they try to remake an American classic.” None of that ! Huge!

Again, a very weird form of praise. The comparisons are everywhere. For example, the New York Times review of the show mentions comparisons to the movie repeatedly, including in the first paragraph. No one would dare to state that it is too daring to make a musical on an existing movie, because remaking movies is a mainstay of Broadway these days. WTF?

Lastly, Christopher Wheeldon has managed to bring back the idea that dance can be a narrative part of musical theatre … a la Agnes de Mille and Jerome Robbins. Anyone who cares about Broadway should recognized the immense contribution this show is making to the canon, and how this will probably light the fire of the next great director/choreographer sitting there today mesmerized by An American in Paris.

Are you actually suggesting that the idea of dance being a narrative part of musical theatre is something lost? Dance has been a continuous part of narrative in recent musical theatre.

So has shilling.

No original score…which everyone knows is a knock against it when it comes to the Tony race…

Now should it really matter if a musical has an original score or not?

*Ain't Misbehavin', Jerome Robbins' Broadway, and Fosse were all revues.
*Cats may have had original music, but most of the lyrics weren't.
*The Lion King only had half original songs.
*Contact wasn't even a musical at all.
*Jersey Boys had no original songs in it at all.
*Once only had two original songs in it.

What do they all have in common? THEY STILL WON THE TONY FOR BEST MUSICAL!

Updated On: 5/15/15 at 09:00 PM

Anything gay related wins with me, to be honest.

Loved Fun Home. I can't imagine a better production of this musical. If it wins best score and book, how can it not win best musical?

An American in Paris just won the Drama League award for Best New Musical. For whatever that is worth as a progrosticator of the Tony Award.

Keep in mind, guys: The reason why Fun Home isn't nominated for anything except for the Tonys is because they ran for everything else, last year. If they were eligible for running again since they're on Broadway, it would have been a different ballgame. So, FH could still take the Tony. AiP happens to be very lucky that FH isn't eligible for other awards.