How the heck did Xanadu get nominated?

Have you actually seen the show? If I hadn't seen it I'd probably be saying the same thing, but I have and thought it was brilliant.

---

Its a very entertaining show! and its the second BEST REVIEWED show next to Passing Strange.

C'mon? must we discuss this? Dont worry.. it wont win the TONYS!

J*

Three words: Douglas Carter Beane.

---

Updated On: 6/5/08 at 10:48 AM

it was a very weak year...

Why do people ask questions like this without backing up their questions with more substantial thoughts? I mean, you obviously saw it...right? It's an entertaining musical.

---

and foa's coolness points just went way up

---

In my opinion it WAS a weak year...here is my assessment of the four nominated musicals:

CRY BABY: Awful book. Awful score. Both leads are miscast. Good choregraphy though. It was the pity nomination of the year (like The Wedding Singer two years ago).

IN THE HEIGHTS: Great score. Very weak book. It should win because it is the best of the four nominated. In a strong year for musicals though, ITH might have even been overlooked.

PASSING STRANGE: A performance art piece posing as a Broadway show. Awful book. Awful score. Painful acting. The worst show I have ever seen in my entire life. However, I do realize it got across the board rave reviews, and by that respect, yes, it deserved a nomination.

XANADU: A show based on a painful movie. I did not care for it, but I guess it could be considered fun...and it certainly is fluff. I just think its existence on Broadway is kind of pointless, but regardless of what I think, yes, it also got rave reviews, so it deserved to be nominated. And regarding Douglas Carter Beane's book, I did not care for it, but I think he will win because the nominating committee will give him credit for creating a book that "works" considering that the original movie did not work AT ALL.


That being said, IN THE HEIGHTS is the favorite to win Best Musical and it did not get as favorable reviews as XANADU or PASSING STRANGE, which I think is kind of funny.

I will agree with Barcelona only in the fact that I have to watch who I recommend it too.

My 17-year-old son and my partner would hate it, while my daughter, some of her friends and her best friend's mom would love it.

Really depends on your sense of humor.

I have only seen XANADU, PASSING STRANGE, and IN THE HEIGHTS. So the comments below pertain to just having seen these three nominated shows:

XANADU -- The BEST overall production. Solid score, solid book, solid acting. There are NO holes or weak points ANYWHERE. Generally speaking, the only reason why people may not like it is because of WHAT it is (not HOW it was executed). It's a show that makes fun of itself and its genre. For what the show is and does, I think it is BRILLIANT! PLUS, you have some great unique add-on factors: rollerskates, on-stage seating and interaction, Kerry Butler, Mary Testa, Jackie Hoffman, Cheyenne Jackson, and one of the BEST ensembles I have ever seen.

PASSING STRANGE -- understanding that it was PERFORMANCE ART, I thought it was a solid book, a strange score (that worked 3/4 of the time), and OUTSTANDING performances. However, these performances were performed in a strange void. A void that obviously confused many, but also won over many. Personally, I thought it was mediocre performance art and the only reason why it's getting the attention it is getting is because it is unique to the Broadway scene. It's "cool" to like. The one thing I kept on hating and hating throughout the show was Stew. Until the very end of the play, I just couldn't stand him. He was distracting and irritating.

IN THE HEIGHTS -- A new "flavah" for Broadway yet again. I'll be brief. This COULD have been the best of the season if it weren't for a WEAK book. Usnavi's character sung so fast I missed lyrics a lot of the time. I immensely enjoyed myself a lot of the time, but I equally felt "?" a lot of the time.

So at the Tonys, do we reward extreme rarity/fresh flavah/originality, even though those shows include problems? Or do we reward the overall BEST show of the season which had NO problems?

So if you don't care about the show's structure and writing, then it all comes down to taste.

---

From another angle, look at the "overlooked" ones: Young Frankenstein, which was a mega-disappointment; Little Mermaid, which was recycled Disney (enough said); Catered Affair, which bored the hell out of everyone; and Glory Days, which was a misfire from the get-go and should never have been on Broadway in the first place.

Xanadu, on the other hand, was entertaining, well-performed by a dazzling cast, fast-paced and the most fun of any show this season. No, it's not Guys and Dolls or My Fair Lady or Gypsy. But it's the best of a problematic lot and does what it sets out to do. Having seen all the nominated shows and most of the un-nominated ones, I would give it the prize in a heartbeat. Also, don't discount the idea of its winning -- with a tour planned to begin next season and a production planned for London, someone must be doing something right. So, Fie on You! Yeah, FIE!

And Huzzah for the most fun show in NY right now!

---

"a show about a roller disco and greek gods"
Honey, they didn't come up with that. It's called a PARODY. And a hilarious one at that. Granted, I'm not sure it's best musical material, but it definitely deserved that nomination.
------------------------
""this show was mostly only fun if you are gay or have some love of the 1980's. If you are neither, then the show completely misfires."

I'm neither gay nor do I love the 80s. Yet, I enjoyed the show...nothing "completely misfires" for me."

Same here!
-----------------------

And finally, it's not trying to be a genius work of art, it's purpose is just an all around good time and it accomplishes that goal.

---

SOUTH PACIFIC and DEAD MAN'S CELL PHONE were not commercial productions.

---