Is Patina Miller the frontrunner for Lead actress right now? — Page 4

In my opinion, the number of times an actor or actress performs a role (let's say, 2 or 8 times a week) shouldn't matter.

After all, it should be only about the performance, and since most voters only get to see ONE performance before voting time, the fact that (for example) Patina has been doing that performance 8 times a week for a few weeks shouldn't be relevant. They (I suppose) will evaluate the performance they actually saw, in the same way oscar voters evaluate the final film and not the hundreds of takes that were filmed.

Also, a big portion of the audience will see the actor or actress perform just once, and not eight times a week. Hence, the "8 times a week" factor, should not matter, at least regarding Tony nominations.

And I know that doing a role 8 times a week is a merit on itself, however, I don't think that should count in the voters decision-making process.

In this sense, since -in my opinion- the performance is what matters, I think that it should be possible to nominate JUST ONE of the Matildas. It would be cruel, but they are different actresses, each one doing a different performance. Sharing the role should not translate in sharing the nomination in an authomatic way.

(I have only seen Matilda in London, by the way, and I liked it a lot)

I'm not going to say whether the Matildas or Patina should win - I thought both were great. However, to respond to the Matildas vs. Lilla Crawford. The Matildas are 2/3 years younger than Lilla. They might both be children but that is a HUGE difference. I didn't see Lilla because she was out, I believe due to problems caused BY performing 8 shows a week. And, IMO, the role of Matilda is more difficult than that of Annie, especially with the age gap.

I don't entirely understand the argument that because more people play the role it makes it less special. Maybe I'm just not understanding the argument, but that seems to come from similar rhetoric that no understudy/replacement/alternate will ever be as good as the original. I get that its slightly different with the actual award but that argument doesn't quite make sense.

Finally, I thought Block was a lock for a nomination. Maybe I'm blanking but are there other major front runners besides the Matildas, Miller and Osnes? I assumed it would be the three of them, Block, and maybe Dilly or Lilla Crawford?

Can someone explain to me what exactly was so amazing about the role of Matilda? Besides the fact that some people are saying that it's amazing someone that young has the brain capacity to memorize lines and sing songs, I really don't get what's so special about the role, or the show as a whole.

And in a year when THAT is the role that people assume is the role to beat, I think that says a hell of a lot about the musicals we were presented with this season.

If all four girls are equally wonderful (let's pretend they are) how can it be outstanding? You are proving that it's not special by saying they can all do it.

To me, it has NOTHING to do with how many performances they do in a week.

I've seen Patina, I've seen one Matilda. Patina created so much more than Matilda (and I liked my Matilda.)

---

Thi thread and your argument confuses me.

I actually really like the point dramamama just made about how outstanding a performance can be if four of them are doing it together, (I'd never considered it framed that way) but I would like to address another point:

Simply put, the Tony's will allow joint nominations in cases where the nominating committee (a much smaller group) will see all the performers and adjudicate whether they can be considered jointly equal in terms of their performance. There is, to my mind, no debate to be had about the merits of joint nominations to that particular point; voters are being assured of a relative measure of equal value before they vote.

I personally think I would vote between the Matildas and Patina. They both made such impressions on me, they dominate my memories of each show. I was impressed by both Sophia (the Matilda I saw) and Patina for different reasons and look forward to tossing around in my mind reasons for each to see if I can come to a consensus in my mind.

---

>> "Can someone explain to me what exactly was so amazing about the role of Matilda? Besides the fact that some people are saying that it's amazing someone that young has the brain capacity to memorize lines and sing songs, I really don't get what's so special about the role, or the show as a whole."

Do you have access to neighbors' kids, nieces or nephews that are 9 or 10 years old (4th or 5th grade)? If so, ask them to verbally tell you a story - any story about what they did today. (I'll wait...)

[muzak version of 'Girl from Ipanema' plays softly overhead...]

How'd they do? Were you captivated? Did they include details that allowed you to "see" their day? Could you "feel" what they felt as their day progressed?

If you were impressed, that's really wonderful. That kid will probably always be the life of the party and grow up to be a success - but don't get that kid an agent just yet...

Try the same experiment, but this time have the child tell you a story about something that happened to someone else. Ask them to demonstrate what the other person felt as they tell you the story.

Easier still (than the above) - give them a book and have them read the story to you out loud.

Are you still impressed by how they communicate to you?

To ask an adult to show the emotional range that is required in the song "Quiet" is not such a hard task, but to get a layered performance of those emotions from a 9-year-old is very different. Most 9 or 10-year-old don't have the capacity for emotional recall (if they've felt those emotions before).

Think back to when you were 9 (4th grade). What were your acting chops like?

The role of Matilda isn't the "ever-optimistic", (almost) one-note of Annie. She's angry, reflective, melancholy, loving, and most of all an incredible story-teller (I'm thinking of "I'm Here"). Most 9 or 10-year-olds can't even tell you how their own day went and keep an adult interested.

PS: It's not about "the role that people assume is the role to beat". It's not about a role, it's about meeting the challenges of performing a role.

Updated On: 4/20/13 at 06:04 PM

>> "From the local acting awards I got when I was 8 years old in guessing my actin chops were still pretty good when I was 9."

You say that, but make me feeeeeeel it!

In my opinion the nominations should be as follows:

Carolee Carmello: Scandalous
Laura Osnes: Cinderella
Patina Miller: Pippin
Sophia Gennusa/Oona Laurence/Bailey Ryon/Milly Shapiro: Matilda
Stephanie J Block: Drood or Lilia Crawford: Annie

I left out:

Annaleigh Ashford: Kinky Boots
Deborah Cox: Jekyll and Hyde
Erin Dilly: A Christmas Story
Valisia LeKae: Motown-The Musical
Taylor Louderman or Adrienne Warren: Bring It On

Updated On: 4/20/13 at 06:31 PM

I'm intrigued regarding Carolee Carmello. I've read a lot about how bad the show was, but did anyone see her performance? Did she shine in spite of the material? I think it's possible that she might have.

I don't understand John Adams argument about most 8-year-olds not being able to tell a story well, so therefore the Matildas should get the Tony. By that reasoning, should we give a Tony to the cat of Breakfast at Tiffany's since most cats wouldn't sit still on stage like that?

I just listened to "im here" and im pretty sure i could find some 8 yr old from a crappy community theatre and have them learn it in a week...honest to god...

>> "I just listened to "im here" and im pretty sure i could find some 8 yr old from a crappy community theatre and have them learn it in a week...honest to god..."

Define "learn it".