Including Non-Nominated Musical Performances: Yay or Nay?

nay, wasnt worth it AT ALL. Some of those awards should have been there for the world to see, not some dumb 2-minute mess.

I thought it was a great idea.

Megan Mullally was the highlight of the segment.

---

They should have made Megan do the whole song with the talking part and not sing it so fast.

Definitely yay.

The performances keep the show interesting. And the community really needs to take advantage of this public platform to sell the merchandise. The tourists are now the people keep the business alive, and a chance for people outside of New York to be exposed to even more options is absolutely a positive.

---

It was a step in the right direction. I think it might need a little bit of work, but it definitely added a more celebratory atmosphere to the Tonys. Now, let them include performances by the plays and I'll be happy.
It worked really well. I thought Megan Mullally was in great voice but milked the Karen Walker schtick too much (which she doesn't do at all in the cast recording or the other clips I've seen of her in the show, so I don't know if she did it because it was on TV). I still think the LITTLE MERMAID costumes are laughable. And A CATERED AFFAIR just kind of didn't get a chance to stand out, perhaps from the uniqueness of the score.

---

Nay. It was nice that they were recognized, but I didn't really enjoy any of the performances. I would have rather seen other awards. Apparently, it was confusing to some of my friends, who thought they were all nominated for Best Musical.

Yay in theory, nay in practice. All it did was painfully highlight just why these shows weren't nominated. Of course, some of the shows that WERE nominated weren't much better (I'm looking at you, Grease and Cry-Baby).

---

They really should bring back the PBS Creative Arts Hour, and break up the award presentations during that hour with the non-nominated musicals.

I liked the idea, but I really only liked Megan's performance. I almost wished that they would have done a little more with the nominated play revivals instead.

---

YAY. If they're just plain not ever going to give any time to the nominated plays, then why not have more musicals? At the very least, let people like Faith Prince - who received a nomination herself despite her production being overlooked - knock out a little performance alongside the Best Musical Nominees.

Face it, an awards ceremony that has four musical numbers and a lot of people weeping as they thank Jesus and momma (okay, I'm exaggerating; as far as I can tell, it was a pretty good year for speeches) does not an entertaining three hour ceremony make. XP

And why look down on doing things to increase ratings? If ratings aren't respectable, the Tonys could go the way of the Oliviers, which haven't been televised for many a year. It's bad enough having to watch a bitty, jumpy webcast of the Tony awards; not watching them at all would be VERY sad.

---

Updated On: 6/16/08 at 06:33 AM

Yay

I'm in the minority, but I say Nay. I mean, do the Oscars spotlight non-nominated films? On another point, win or lose does not necessarily a hit make and vice versa. Look at Passion -- it got a slew of awards and closed by the end of the year -- it was too problematic a show and word was getting out. On the other hand, Smokey Joe's Cafe did a great number on the Tony's that ensured its long and deservied run, even though it got no Tonys. The numbers haven't been all that great for Spring Awakening -- it's on the half-price every weekend. Just my opinion. If a show's gonna fly, it flies.

---

You can't really compare the Oscars to the Tonys.
As Smaxie said, movies are indeed readily accessible to just about everyone. Also, the range of movies that get Oscar nominations is so much wider than the range of musicals that are nominated. It's just nice to take a look at what the season had to offer.
Again, it needs work, but it was a nice experiment and I hope it becomes a sort of tradition.

---