Is Avenue Q Over rated??- Page 4

[stage_door76]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 7:57am

avenuq q is completely overrated.

COMPLETELY.

it's very easy to be popular when you poke fun at authority, politics and human relationships.

it deserved a tony for its originality (in the sense that it was the first musical of its kind to officially make it to broadway for an extended season after ripping off funny life instances) and for its stoicism.

but it did not deserve to win best musical.

but hey, thats just my opinion.

go and see the light in the piazza. now THAT is a real show.

[pab]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 8:56am

"go and see the light in the piazza. now THAT is a real show."

A REAL show? So what is Q a FAKE show?

I love Piazza, but that comment just makes no sense.

[kasim]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 9:20am

Its ok Urban :) I appreciate all the comments either plus or minus for it.

I guess in the end it should have won a tony, even if its not deserved (imho) just to inspire others to make musicals more original and get rewarded for it.

[pab]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 9:34am

So kasim, let me get this straight. You started this thread by saying:

"NOW granted i have NEVER seen the show."

Now you are saying:

"I guess in the end it should have won a tony, EVEN IF ITS NOT DESERVED (IMHO)".

So, you think it's not deserved based on what other people have said or what you heard in the cast recording or have seen in previews? After all you have NEVER SEEN the show but "In Your Humble Opinion" it did not deserve a Tony. Wow.

Do you really think the Tony voters were sitting there saying "Let's give "Avenue Q" the Tony this year to "inspire others to make musicals more original"?

Again, Wow!

Updated On: 10/19/05 at 09:34 AM

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 9:50am

"I doubt Avenue Q would've lost the Best Tony Award regardless of whether it said it was going on a national tour or not. To say it would is grasping at straws."

I somewhat agree. I don't think the road presenters make up a lot of the voters, but at the same time, they were telling people to vote their heart, when in fact they were stabbing it. They vigorously campaigned, something no show has ever really done (publicly, that is). Had they sat back like the rest of the shows, it probably would not have one. I wouldn't be surprised if the votes were really close and the road presenters pushed it to Avenue Q (I believe Spamalot just barely edged out Spelling Bee this past year).

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 11:23am

Pretty much everyone I know that's heard the Q CD without seeing it has had a similar reaction. "Yeah, that's cute. It's funny. But the music isn't very good, and THIS won the Tony???"

I tried to explain to them that it works so much better "live" in context.

Sometimes the score alone is reason enough to come to this conclusion that it is overrated, even without seeing it. If you can't get past a score you feel is sub-par, I can't argue that this is a valid opinion. After all, the score is the heart and soul of a musical, even if it isn't "everything."

[nydirector2]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 11:24am

Wow...this has had so many postings.

First off...I want to address the concerns of the person who believed that Caroline or Change would have been a better choice for the Tony that year. Frankly, Caroline is just not a very well constructed show , overall. The abstractness of the piece is confusing rather than informative and the plot points just did not capture the audience. The story, as well, seemed a bit...well...overdone. There have been so many books, plays, movies, etc. written on the subject, and since the Public is very politically conscious with their works, it was just a bit outdated for them. The entire time I watched I kept asking myself, "Why do this show, now?"

Concerning the Producers/Presenters debate. What you are talking about is the League of American Theatres and Producers, Inc.'s Spring Road Conference that occurs each May shortly after the Tony nominations are announced. The people attending these conferences are the presenters, the producers, the theatre owners, the booking agents, the marketing directors, and anyone else involved through membership with the League. Approximately half of the Tony Voters are members of the League(the other half is the American Theatre Wing). During the week, there are lunches and cocktail parties that are sponsored by shows, management companies, or booking agencies. Because there are so many Tony voters from out of town, the shows also use this time to campaign for Tony votes. Avenue Q did in fact sponsor a lunch for the conference where the cast members performed a skit written for their Tony campaign(Wicked and other shows from the season also sponsored a party.) At this time, the producers, as with every other organization, announced that they had plans to tour. PLANS. When Steve Wynn came up with a more promising offer, the producers decided that a sit down production would be better, both artistically and financially. Now...a LOT of things are said at this conference to get people excited about upcoming tours and productions, but in the world of entertainment, only a select few come into fruition. Any person in the industry knows this to be true, so to say Tony Voters were hoodwinked into voting for Q is actually false. Besides, Presenters only make up a certain precentage of Tony Votes in the first place. Hopefully that set the record somewhat straight.

Oh...and West Side Story totally should have beaten The Music Man, Hair should have beaten 1776, Tommy should have beaten Kiss of the Spider Woman, Into the Woods should have beaten Phantom, Sunday in the Park with George(which won the Pulitzer) should have beaten La Cage, Ragtime should have beaten Lion King, Parade should have beaten Fosse, Piazza should have beaten Spamelot, Urinetown should have beaten Millie, and above all...nothing should have won in 2000, unless they could have given a Tony to Off Bway's The Wild Party.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 11:41am

I didn't realize the Road presenters (to simplify that bloc of voters) made up that much of the Tony's voters. Steve Wynn's offer came well before the nominations for the Tony's were announced. Deals like that take months of planning. So they knew when they announced that they weren't going to tour. But they did in fact announce that they were in fact going to tour. I couldn't find it on Playbill.com (asearch for Avenue Q yielded no results for some odd reason), but a quick search in the New York Times points you to the article (it was archived and I wasn't about to pay for it). I specifically remember it being announced that they were touring. And the problem most people saw wasn't the fact that they were doing a sit-down in Vegas. It was the fact that it was EXCLUSIVE to Vegas. No other city could present the show, and many of the Road voters did feel duped. The entire week after the Tony's there were articles everywhere about it. No one, except those involved with Avenue Q, thought there was nothing wrong with this situation.

[nydirector2]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 12:03pm

I remember the articles that you're speaking about. But once again, the same thing can be said about a lot of tours that were supposed to go out but never made it. If you've been in the industry long enough, you know that nothing is final until contracts are signed, and even then, different situations can come up that would throw off a possible tour or show. Look how many Broadway shows have come and gone in the past few years....even to the point of having marquees up, but ended up not making it.

The post Tony articles were mostly gossip rags and critics trying to tell a good story. Nothing is more entertaining and juicy to read than some kind of scandal...even if it isn't a scandal at all. Just a situation that happened that got blown way out of proportion by people who weren't even present at the Conferences(press people are not allowed at the various functions).

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 12:56pm

But the point is they told everyone they were touring, when in fact they had no intentions of touring. The sit-down negotiations started long before they announced the tour, which came right before the Tony nominations. They lied. Plain and simple, no matter how you sugarcoat it.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 1:15pm

I do not understand why so many people were surprised that Q won Best Musical that year.

Of the 4 nominees it opened to the best set or reviews (nearly all raves) and had been doing excellent business. The only question was whether a small show could compete against the more elaborate productions. WICKED opened to a lot of mixed and negative reviews, and despite its popularity was never considered the season's strongest show. Even by season's end it had still not become a huge pop culture juggernaut. CAROLINE got better reviews off-Broadway; many critics felt it had lost something in the transfer. BOY FROM OZ was widely considered an old fashioned star vehicle. Great as long as Hugh was on stage to carry it. Nothing without him.

So going into the Tony awards Q's win should have seemed a no-brainer.

All these theories about tours and road presenters just made good promotional copy. A tour is not considered certain until it is booked. All the shows say they plan to tour. (Still waiting for that tour of STEEL PIER promised back in 1997!)

Over-rated? Well any show that gets hyped (by awards as well as critical consensus) as the "Best" of the season is in fact over-rated. The critics fell all over themselves for THE PRODUCERS when it opened. It's great, entertaining, a lot of fun but not the greatest musical ever written (and please...let's not start THAT list again.)

[Plum]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 1:43pm

A couple of disagreements, frontrowcentre. First of all, Caroline was actually thought to gain something in the transfer. And Q wasn't a "no-brainer" for the simple reason of the Urinetown-Millie precedent, the epitome of "commerce usually beats art." And no show was more commerce-happy than Wicked. Should-win isn't always the same as will-win.

[nydirector2]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 2:12pm

Frontrow...thanks for backing me up on such unprecedented events. I think Fosse takes things a bit too literally.

As for the person who commented about Caroline or Change...did you see it before and after the transfer? I can see how it lost something.

Often times many people think that listening to the the cast recordings and readingt he boards is the same as seeing the shows. Also, I feel as if a lot of people on the boards see shows as fans rather than as trained theatrical audience members. Unfortunately, when I see a show now, I tend to dissect it to the point of which I can't really enjoy it anymore. Occasionally, I can put aside my training, sit back and enjoy something. For instance, I thoroughly enjoyed Good Vibrations. Was it horrible? Yes...and I can say that without a guilty conscience. People on the board tend to fall madly in love with a show as a fan because of the stars involved, the source material, or the catchiness of the music...without for once looking at the dramatic structure of the piece. At the same time, they take pleasure bashing shows that they didn't like....once again without looking at the artistic merrit of the piece.

[Ourtime992]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 2:33pm

As usual, FrontRowCentre articulates the argument perfectly.

[kasim]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 2:50pm

"Do you really think the Tony voters were sitting there saying "Let's give "Avenue Q" the Tony this year to "inspire others to make musicals more original"?

Again, Wow! "

_yes :) i do :)

And yes, most say wow to me :) so thanks :) :-p

[Tir Na Nog]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 3:46pm

****"Do you really think the Tony voters were sitting there saying "Let's give "Avenue Q" the Tony this year to "inspire others to make musicals more original"? ****

That's actually not to far off. What is surprising me about this thread is people actually think a large number of Tony Voters were all about "Wicked" winning Best Musical. The truth is they were not. Most people who know a thing or two about theater were not happy with "Wicked". I don't know any Tony voters who voted "Wicked" for Best Musical. Most people voted for "Q".

[pab]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 4:48pm

Well, DUH! of course most people voted for "Q" otherwise they would not have won.

And kasim, I hope that all the people who say wow to you don't mean it the same way that I did. If so, I would then really feel sorry for you.

[teth]

Posted: 10/19/05 at 4:54pm

It's funny how kasim avoided pab's response to the "Q-doesn't-deserve-the-Tonys-even-tho-I've-never-seen-it" post.