Julie Andrews and the Tony- Page 2

[MCfan2]

Posted: 12/15/17 at 9:39pm

I spent years being mad at Judy Holliday for robbing Bette Davis of her "All about Eve" Oscar. Then I found out she robbed Julie Andrews of her "My Fair Lady" Tony and I got mad all over again.

Don't dogpile on me -- I know it wasn't her fault and she didn't actually "rob" either of them. And I know she was talented, but I don't think she was half as talented as either Bette or Julie, and it just bugs me!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 12/15/17 at 10:00pm

No.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/16/17 at 1:47am

Their greatest strengths were totally different.  

Bette Davis was a great movie actress who could not do comedy (try to watch one of her few comedies), and she had no success (dare we say failed) on stage; Julie Andrews was a great singer / musical comedy star and an okay non-musical film actress (If you doubt that, go watch Hawaii or Torn Curtain or The Tamarind Seed, to name three off the top of my head).  Judy Holliday was one of the movies' greatest comediennes, despite her limited portfolio; on stage, she appeared in lead roles in only three shows, two of which were huge hits.  She won the Tony for one, the Tony's didn't exist when she appeared in the other.  

If you don't like Born Yesterday or Bells Are Ringing, watch The Solid Gold Cadillac or It Could Happen To You or Adam's Rib.  She was unique.  

Unfortunately, since she died in her early 40s, she does not have a huge portfolio of films or Broadway show credits.  Bette Davis and Julie Andrews 'visible' careers lasted about three times as long as Holliday's.  Don't mistake limited portfolio with less talent.

[MCfan2]

Posted: 12/16/17 at 11:54am

Jarethan said: "Their greatest strengths were totally different.

Bette Daviswas a great movie actress who could not do comedy (try to watch one of her few comedies),and she had no success (dare we say failed) on stage; Julie Andrews was a great singer / musical comedy starand an okay non-musicalfilm actress (If you doubt that, go watch Hawaii or Torn Curtain or The Tamarind Seed, to name three off the top of my head). Judy Holliday was one of the movies' greatest comediennes, despite her limited portfolio; on stage, she appeared in lead roles in only three shows, two of which were huge hits. She won the Tony for one, the Tony's didn't exist when she appeared in the other.

If you don't like Born Yesterday or Bells Are Ringing, watch The Solid Gold Cadillac or It Could Happen To You or Adam's Rib. She was unique.

Unfortunately, since she died in her early 40s, she doesnot have a huge portfolio of films or Broadway show credits. Bette Davis and Julie Andrews 'visible' careers lasted about three times as long as Holliday's. Don't mistake limited portfolio with less talent."

Eye of the beholder. I've always thought Holliday was overrated, as was Born Yesterday as a whole. I like her very much in the movie version of Bells Are Ringing, but otherwise she just doesn't do a lot for me. I can acknowledge objectively that she had talent; I just don't think it was Davis- or Andrews-level talent. (And btw, I thought Davis was terrific in The Man Who Came to Dinner and Pocketful of Miracles. )

[The Other One]

Posted: 12/16/17 at 1:02pm

I reiterate every word in mcfan2’s post. I will add that Judy gave a fine performance in the wonderful Adam’s Rib, but I don’t at all get how she won awards over Andrews, Davis or Gloria Swanson, for that matter.

Actually, I don't think Born Yesterday is an overrated play, although its film version depoliticizes it into a safety zone which makes it seem both dated and slighter than the play actually is. 

Updated On: 12/17/17 at 01:02 PM

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/17/17 at 1:05am

The Other One said: "I reiterate every word in mcfan2’s post. I will add that Judy gave a fine performance in the wonderfulAdam’s Rib, but I don’t at all get how she won awards over Andrews, Davis or Gloria Swanson, for that matter."

I don't necessarily disagree, in fact, re winning vs. Davis and Swanson; but Holliday didn't cause Davis to lose, Anne Baxter did.  She took away votes from Davis.  It is also possible that Hollywood wasn't ready for a three time Oscar winner.  67 years later, there are only two people who have won three lead actor / actress Oscars: Katherine Hepburn, who didn't even win her second until 1967 (in 1968) and Daniel Day Lewis.

Based on everything I have ever read and having listened to the cast recording a ridiculous number of times, I continue to believe that Holliday won against Andrews because the voters believed that she deserved it.

My issue was with the person who trivialized her career / talent.  IMO she was an extraordinary and unique talent.

[John Adams]

Posted: 12/17/17 at 8:40am

Jarethan said: "My issue was with the person who trivialized her career / talent. IMO she was an extraordinary and unique talent."

Each to his own but, for what it's worth, I agree with you.

I feel certain that Julie Andrews would have won the Tony for Victor/Victoria had she accepted the nomination, even though I don't think the role was necessarily worthy of a win. I think she would have won because Tony voters wanted to award the recognition of her career accomplishments, rather than that particular role (which is fine by me).

Her choice to decline the nomination, and especially in the way that she did, is still (IMO) both classically gracious and unintentionally historical (well, in media terms).

I mean, really... Who will ever forget, even OUTSIDE the theater world, what the word "egregious" means (and how many people knew what it meant before Ms Andrews employed its use)?

I don't feel like Julie Andrews ever held any type of grudge against the Tony Awards organization, as might be implied by some posts above. She was simply making the choice to support her castmates (and perhaps Rachel York in particular - who knows?) in that singular instance.

IF she is awarded an honorary Tony at some point, I feel like she would accept it graciously and humbly.

 

Updated On: 12/17/17 at 08:40 AM

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/18/17 at 1:33am

MCfan2 said: "Jarethan said: "Their greatest strengths were totally different.

Bette Daviswas a great movie actress who could not do comedy (try to watch one of her few comedies),and she had no success (dare we say failed) on stage; Julie Andrews was a great singer / musical comedy starand an okay non-musicalfilm actress (If you doubt that, go watch Hawaii or Torn Curtain or The Tamarind Seed, to name three off the top of my head). Judy Holliday was one of the movies' greatest comediennes, despite her limited portfolio; on stage, she appeared in lead roles in only three shows, two of which were huge hits. She won the Tony for one, the Tony's didn't exist when she appeared in the other.

If you don't like Born Yesterday or Bells Are Ringing, watch The Solid Gold Cadillac or It Could Happen To You or Adam's Rib. She was unique.

Unfortunately, since she died in her early 40s, she doesnot have a huge portfolio of films or Broadway show credits. Bette Davis and Julie Andrews 'visible' careers lasted about three times as long as Holliday's. Don't mistake limited portfolio with less talent."

Eye of the beholder. I've always thought Holliday was overrated, as was Born Yesterday as a whole.I like her very much in the movie version of Bells Are Ringing, but otherwise she just doesn't do a lot for me. I can acknowledge objectively that she had talent; I just don't think it was Davis- or Andrews-level talent. (And btw, I thought Davis was terrific in The Man Who Came to Dinner and Pocketful of Miracles. )"

Bette Davis did not have a comedy role in either of those movies.  She probably had the one straight role in Pocketful of Miracles.  She was excellent in Man...Dinner, but again she had the straight role in a comedy in which most of the laughs came from Woolley, Durante, Sheridan, and many of the supporting players.  I stick with my position on that.  The worst was The Bride Came COD.

Updated On: 12/18/17 at 01:33 AM

[newintown]

Posted: 12/18/17 at 7:53am

"I feel certain that Julie Andrews would have won the Tony for Victor/Victoria had she accepted the nomination, even though I don't think the role was necessarily worthy of a win."

As pointed out already, she was a nominee, and was on the ballot. Her wish to decline the nomination was hers alone, and not accepted.

"I mean, really... Who will ever forget, even OUTSIDE the theater world, what the word "egregious" means (and how many people knew what it meant before Ms Andrews employed its use)?"

I believe that there are a surprisingly large number of speakers of the English language who knew and used the word long before Ms. Andrew's speech.

Updated On: 12/18/17 at 07:53 AM