I agree with all the comments regarding the "high expectations" vs. "low expectations" factor for these shows, but the fact of the matter still remains that there is a large contingent of Tony voters who want the industry to appear "smart". That group will likely still go for Matilda. I also think the road contingent will believe that Matilda will be more family friendly and easier to sell to subscribers. Those things combined lead me to believe Matilda has the edge, but as many have pointed out here, you really never know.
It is equally possible that when the voters see MATILDA, they will find it overrated with unintelligible lyrics and generally a downer whereas KINKY BOOTS is fun. I don't believe for a second that voters care whether the industry as a whole appears be smart or not. If that were the case, Catherine Zeta Jones wouldn't have even been AT the Tony Awards much less nominated and winning...
I think this was covered in someone's earlier post, but, the wild card here is the out of town Tony voters. Those are the ones with the eye for post-Broadway marektability and feasibility to turn a buck in the outer markets (meaning touring).
I am slated to see both in a few weeks when I visit NYC, but it strikes me that Matilda would have a higher overhead on the road and thus less profitable. Kinky Boots doesnt seem to have as much of a need there. How does that impact the out of towners? Vote Matilda to help drum up the business for a lengthy sit down production to cover costs or vote Kinky Boots to add hype to a lower cost touring show?
Not having seen both, I am looking forward more to Kinky Boots as I loved the story behind the movie which was based on a true story (even though I was also charmed by the Matilda movie). Curious to see what Cindy Lauper has written for the show (have not heard any tunes from either show). It is just nice to know that there are two (relatively) quality shows competing this year. But the reality is, a lot of times it is the economics of modern day theater that rules the voting rather than the quality of a production (but not always).
As to the out of town producers, remember Avenue Q - the little show that could and then (if memory serves) did (clandestinely) sell its soul to Las Vegas. If I remember correctly, that deal was exclusive to putting the show in in Vegas and initially hosed the out of town producers who thought they would get the touring production (I know the touring of that show happened eventually but not until after the "exclusive" Vegas experiment kind of didnt produce).
Matilda would do much better on the road. It's a family musical and parents will pay big money for it.
Kinky Boots is a fine show, but nothing interesting or groundbreaking. The set, as someone said, is not inventive. The staging and choreography are lackluster, and the story is predictable from the first few lines.
I just don't think "fun" deserves to win over something as brilliantly crafted as Matilda.
I can't even begin to tell you how much I despise the idea that "Best Musical" only means "Musical That Can Earn The Most Money". The award is absolutely meaningless. It's the biggest award of the night and the one that most times means nothing at all.
Sadly, Jordan, I think that's the way most awards go. They only matter for what you can do after the fact: demand more $, get a more showy 'next job', etc. It's been a long time since it really had much to do with quality.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Kinky Boots is a fine show, but nothing interesting or groundbreaking.
Which is exactly why it will tour just as well. It's a show with drag queens completely devoid of homosexuality. No gay couples, no gay affection, no sex. The lyric "Sex is in the heel" is the most risque moment in the show and the only "love story" involves heteros. It's about as Middle America as a musical with drag queens can get AND it can boast Cyndi Lauper's name.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Why do people think "Cyndi Lauper" is a big selling point. I'm not sure middle-American really cares about her that much. Her show on WE wasn't a hit, etc.
I don't think Kinky Boots is going to be some big sell-out hit in Tampa.
It IS kinda groundbreaking because it's not really about drag queens. It's about two guys, one of whom just happens to be a drag queen. And they are both feeling the same types of feelings. It's not overtly sexual, it's not edgy..it's pretty family friendly. Lots of people take their kids to see it...without worry...and maybe open up some conversations about people who are different.
Everyone even ...in middle America...have families that have to deal with their children who are considered to be outcasts - whether or not they are gay, drag queens, nerds, overweight, etc. and lots of people feel unaccepted by their fathers. They may feel differently but they aren't that different. It's pretty much like Matilda in a lot of ways..which is why they are both so popular I think.
I can't really see why either play wouldn't be popular in middle America.
WiCkeDrOcKs... The "backlash" regarding BILLY would be from industry people who I know to have been burned by that show. They had assumed big things, invested big money and banked heavily on the tours being profitable which they were not. I'm not talking about people on these boards having an issue with BE. I'm saying that BILLY/MATILDA could have some unfortunate parallels. Look... don't get me wrong... I think that MATILDA is clever and it certainly has a nice visual production. I just don't believe that MATILDA will be embraced on a level commensurate with the overly effusive praise of the critics.
BTW... did anyone else notice that, conveniently, the Ben Brantley "Rejoice" comment has the same number of letters as "Matilda"... how nice for the ad campaign.
I'm taking no position here. I have friends involved in both and I don't feel right pitting the two shows against each other.
However, in what world is MATILDA a downer? It was a fabulously staged musical with an ending that touched me so deeply, it still gives me chills to think about it. Yes...it was an odd, dark children's story. Shocking coming from the mind of Roald Dahl! It's wonderfully quirky, and I was delighted by it.
I think people are stamping MATILDA with a "downer" connotation because it is dark in its themes and approach, and even in its staging. But it's hardly a downer. Just because there isn't fabulous glitter flying around in every other song, and just because every song isn't a big upbeat ensemble performance doesn't make it a downer. By time the we get to the newt scene, in fact, it's a pretty joyous explosion through the curtain call. Seeing Matilda finally "rewrite her story" is anything but depressing.
I have to say I was moved and uplifted by both shows in very different ways.
Updated On: 5/7/13 at 05:47 PM
Yeah, i think that it's going to be Matilda with the hype and praise. But, I don't know yet
I'm seeing Matilda in NYC next Satuirday and I'm seeing Kinky Boots on YouTube (if it's still up :P) on Friday , so I will see for myself. And Best Score? Come on, hands down: Matilda. It is so much bigger and creative than Kinky Boots. Listen to School Song and hen I Grow Up.
Why do people think "Cyndi Lauper" is a big selling point.
I don't think she ever stopped being a well-respected or well-known artist of the music industry. I didn't even know she had a show on WE, but my interest in watching a reality show about her has nothing to do with my interest in her music. I do know her name definitely piqued interest in the show since it was first announced.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Am I the only one who fund the lyrics almost impossible to hear at a lot of points at MATILDA? Everyone is raving about the great lyrics in these songs but I found it almost impossible to enjoy between the unintelligible lyrics and the screeching voices of the kiddies.
I was not familiar with the lyrics or the score beforehand. While I found the faster passages hard to understand (I saw it in the first week of previews), I found most of it understandable.
I think this thread is fascinating. Personally, I am very grateful for the discussion. I had a couple of thoughts about some points raised above:
For those who feel Kinky Boots is not innovative, can anyone recall another show about a bromance between a genderqueer protagonist and a straight guy? For those who think that's a mainstream story, which part of Chelsea do you live in?
For those who complain Lola's character is not as easily pigeonholed as it should be as transsexual, gay, whatever, I wonder whether it has occurred to you to consider that that ambiguity – the refusal to be pigeonholed – is precisely what makes Lola's character interesting? And that mainstream folks are responding to that in surprising ways?
To those who proclaim Kinky Boots less of a "thinking man's show," (others' term, not mine) than Matilda, below is a link to an ABC news interview with Cyndi Lauper last week after they named her person of the week. Check out the part where she mentions that because she speaks with a Queens accent, people sometimes mistake her for a "dummy," but says "I'm no dummy." I have nothing but respect for this woman – her talent, her character, and her intelligence. Perhaps the audience liking it aren't all dummies either. I'm not.
For those who think Kinky Boots can't play Tampa, do they get ABC in Tampa?
I think it's shortsighted to assume saying one is less "thinking man's show" than another is a slight on the writer of the lesser. In my opinion, it's praise of the writer of the former. Tim Minchin's lyrics for Matilda have her discussing quantum mechanics, philosophy of mind, comparative mythology and many other incredibly dense topics (not to mention references to Doctor Who and Dennis Kelly's book making great use of the Western canon) all in the context of young children and they manage to make it not seem out-of-place for these characters to be thinking these things. It is, to me, a great accomplishment to incorporate so much dense material into such a precocious-yet-not-overly-so pint-sized frame.
I'm not saying Cyndi Lauper's a dummy to say that Tim Minchin and Dennis Kelly's show is more of a thinking man' show.
Words don't deserve that kind of malarkey. They're innocent, neutral, precise, standing for this, describing that, meaning the other, so if you look after them you can build bridges across incomprehension and chaos. But when they get their corners knocked off, they're no good anymore…I don't think writers are sacred, but words are. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.