JUST GIVE SUTTON THE TONY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!- Page 2

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:05am

I forgive you.

[joniray]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:10am

Coondiggitydog, have you even seen any, let alone all, of the other possible nominees for Best Actress for a musical?

[Coondiggitydogg]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:17am

YES! and i honestly think that unless something like last year when tonya was sick during the week that the tony voters were around, Sutton Foster will without a doubt take the tony home. I was impressed with victoria clark, but there are flaws and she doesnt carry the spectrum of emotion like Sutton, nor does she do it aswell as sutton. I love sherrie but this is STIFF competition. I doubt chrisitna will be able to pull it off, just from what i have heard on the road. BIG NO'S TO THE JUKEBOX SHOWS. And dessa rose is beautiful but again SUTTON TRUMPS THEM ALL

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:18am

and Dessa Rose is Off-Broadway and doesn't qualify...good argument though... Updated On: 3/31/05 at 12:18 AM

[StephanietheStar]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:21am

That's a GREAT word to describe Sutton...Effortless...she is just a born natural talent..amazing

[Coondiggitydogg]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:24am

Ur right my bad. But umm ARE THERE NE OTHERS???? Eden might be lucky to get a nom. it would be for her singing, cause we know there is nothing there with the acting. Ramirez is featured. Dilly-IDK haven't seen but i think that is featured too, and no where near the level of SUTTON.

Effortless is better then "ASTONISHING" i'm sry but am i the only one with a huge problem with that song??

[joniray]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:26am

Coondiggitydogg, what flaws did you find with Clark's performance? (I've already stated my issue.) Which character (Sutton's or Clark's) did you think was better written, had the better material to work with, and do you think that will effect how the voters vote?

[Coondiggitydogg]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:31am

I think that emotion wise sutton had more to work with. The script has it's humor and its serious points. I think that because of that the emotional spectrum for Sutton is fuller. I am not saying Victoria Clark is a bad actress by any means but i feel her portrayal had holes in it. I agree with the accents, they were off the target. I think she has a charming beautiful voice. For me Sutton just POPPED. SHE sparkled, and dazzled, and lived out Jo March I don't think Clark did that.

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:32am

I personally think that Sutton's voice overshadows her "good," not "amazing" acting skills. Victoria Clark can act, and has great material. Sutton's material ismediocre at least, and for me, I only liked Sutton when she sang in Little Women.

[StephanietheStar]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:35am

I love the song "Astonishing"....I didn't care for it the first few times but listening to the clip and reliving that moment in the theatre I HEART IT! i'll be singing it in voice lessons as SOON as the sheet music comes out!

[Coondiggitydogg]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:37am

I loved how she took to being the tomboy. She was soo goofy, and awkward in a REALLY REALLY GOOD WAY. She makes Jo March. When her family is in danger or of importance she makes it the most important thing. She really does a fantabulous job. I think she actually has a lot to work with in this show. The story overall sucks but her part is written for a all around actress, and she comands the stage while having fun.

[Coondiggitydogg]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:38am

did u honestly like the song or did u like sutton doing the song. I think that sutton did an amazing job and that is why i like the song. In general the song is mediocre

[joniray]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:42am

Coondiggitydog, I'm just curious as to what you thought the "holes" were in her performance. Besides her accent, I mean.

I think all the performers in Little Women, including Sutton, are at a disadvantage because they seemed to have been directed to act as if they were in an operetta. The acting style throughout the piece was extremely broad and "affected." I think Clark benefits from being in a more subtle piece and, therefore, getting to act in a more naturalistic way.

[Coondiggitydogg]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 12:56am

I can see where you are going with that. I do agree that there is something contrived within the feeling. I don't think the operetta part is played up that much. I think the otehr girls do get caught in the feeling of the play and are there fore affected but i really found Sutton truelly natural, sincere, and complete in this piece.

I really don't want to take away from Clark, she is great and the show is great but i just feel that Sutton outshines her on stage.

[Thenardier]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 1:00am

NO, let's not...

[joniray]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 1:02am

Although I really liked Sutton, and I thought that one of the things she did really well was bring humanity into the role while not being out of synch with the overall broad acting style of the piece, I guess I'm just surprised that you seem so convinced that she has already got the Tony in her hands. It seems like a much closer race to me than that (and Clark does seem to have an awfully lot of buzz behind her to be so easily dismissed).

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 1:47am

nah, this is Clark's year to win something. she's been overdue for quite awhile, and this is one role where she can fit neatly into a category and doesn't have to suffer the indignity of competing against a huge name star; in which case the award goes to the name star by default as an investment toward Broadway's future. Last season's TONY's were all about going with the predictable Actor/Actress awards, this season is when the committee makes up for it by addressing the question "When's Victoria gonna get hers?"

I dig Sutton Foster just fine, but there's just no good reason why she would win again this year when audiences have barely had time to recover from Millie.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 1:54am

Am I the only one to think that Sutton majorly overacted (Granted, I saw it in previews)? I mean, I loved her voice and loved her in the second act, but she really dissapointed me in the first act, since I finally got to see a REAL broadway star. I think the saving grace of the show had to be Maureen McGovern and the girl who played Beth. Both women made me cry during their songs.

Posted: 3/31/05 at 4:21am

I didnt see Little Women but I think Victoria Clark does an amazing job in LITP. She does have an incredible amount of buzz around her. Im not sure that whether or not the actor has won previously should ever really factor in but sadly it probably does. Likewise, the fact that LITP is scheduled to close a week after the Tonys is also noteworthy but im SURE the people at Lincoln Center realize this and I would personally be very shocked not to see this show extend after they open.

Posted: 3/31/05 at 4:34am

Im VERY curious as to why alot of people are saying "Victoria Clark is Overdue to win somthing" ...What has she been in before that people think shes so wonderful? basecly shes done nothing more than small featured ensamble roles on Broadway. Her biggest role was SMITTY! and thats a nothing role. I havnt seen her performance in Piazza, so Im not to judge THIS years Tony Race, although I wouldnt say shes "overdue."

Was there somthing in the past that she was good in and had a big part that Im forgetting?

[LittleFish8386]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 8:45am

Just Kill LitteFish Now.

[joniray]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 8:52am

Mistress Spouzic, you would be shocked if LITP doesn't extend? I would be shocked if it did. The only times I can remember a musical at the Vivian Beaumont extending in the past ten years was Contact, and that was a real crowd-pleasers and a dance show that used well known music. I know you love LITP, but it is just not the kind of show that is accessible to the general public. It's not selling well now (practically every performance is being offered on TDF for $32) and it's unlikely to get good word of mouth outside of the theatre community, even with strong reviews. So why would you expect it to extend?

Posted: 3/31/05 at 10:17am

I said why: because its closing date would make it unlikely to win any awards at the Tonys. It would be smart to move that date. I mean, lots of people expect it to win something- score, lighting, best actress, whatever it is... but there are politics involved and giving awards to shows or people that the general audience wont have the opportunity to go see isnt as beneficial as awarding a show thats still standing.

Updated On: 3/31/05 at 10:17 AM

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 10:34am

I just wanted to chime in on the sutton/vicki thing...Sutton is channeling her exact performance as Millie into Little Women, hoping exuberance and spunk will steamroll over a horrible show. For the most part, it works, but it's too reminescent of Millie. I think Tony voters will look elsewhere as a Tony for her now is not going to "annoint" her anything.
Clark, however, has years of experience, tons of lead replacements, a few supporting created roles and now a major lead (she carries that show so well). It's her time. If she fell flat on her face, I'd say no, but she's blessed to have the most fully realized character in a major new musical this year.

[ashley0139]

Posted: 3/31/05 at 10:42am

Sutton was the only thing I liked about LW. I thought the show was pretty boring and and the songs were alright. But Sutton makes it worth it to see it. Definetly loved her!