Kudos to Jonathan Pyrce -His Response to the Replacement Tony Award Debacle- Page 2

[bjh2114]

Posted: 5/20/06 at 5:54pm

"In reality, the whole award should just be forgotten, and replaced with "best ensemble""

Completely agreed!! I have been saying for years that there should be a best ensemble award.

[ifagirlisntpretty]

Posted: 5/20/06 at 7:56pm

I don't see how there is anyway DRS could officially know how many people went to see him. Maybe two went together? There is really no way of telling. So to say definitely only 16 is very dubious, in my opinion.

[Pippin]

Posted: 5/20/06 at 8:18pm

My guess is that the voters get comp tickets that go through the theatre, and if that is the case, They would be able to keep track of how many voters came.

at least that's how the theatre company that I work for works.

[ifagirlisntpretty]

Posted: 5/20/06 at 8:55pm

Right, but if you get a pair of tickets--could you not bring another admin committee member? Some of these people are friends, I'm sure...

[Pippin]

Posted: 5/20/06 at 9:05pm

my thoughts exactly. I wouldn't expect them to get two comps and bring a non-voting friend.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/22/06 at 1:34pm

"Right, fine, dandy, whatever. But my point is...who is to say that he received even 11 votes? We don't know, he could have gotten 5."

That point is entirely moot. The Committee did not follow the rules they specifically set for nominations, which required 16 votes to secure a nomination. That means each performer would have to have received 100% of the votes of those who kept their committment to attend the performances in order to secure a nomination. Had all 24 members attended the performances and no performances found worthy of nomination, then it would be a different matter. It's like the Oscar voters who refused to see Brokeback Mountain and vote in the category anyway. They should be removed from the committee.

[cmleidi]

Posted: 5/22/06 at 1:45pm

Is it possible that some voters did come to the show, but Pryce was out? My friend has tried 7 times to see the show with Price in it, and Pryce has been out each time. If you take it seriously, how can you vote for a performance you haven't seen?

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/22/06 at 1:46pm

'I wouldn't expect them to get two comps and bring a non-voting friend.'

Wait...what??? Why would that be? Were I a voting member, I'd bring my boyfriend or another friend. Not another member who can secure their own tickets.

Why is Jonathan Pryce pissed? Not because he didn't win the award, but because they admin committee f*cked up...not mathematically or what have you...but by not even all showing up. Are you kidding me? And then, to have a rep basically say, 'Well, this award was made for Reba MacIntyre (sp??) and, since no on is a great as she, no one deserves it' is preposterous. It's one thing to f*ck it all up...it's another to not take that responsiblity and basically insult every replacement actor eligible by saying that they simply didn't do a good enough job.

F*ck them.

[Ourtime992]

Posted: 5/22/06 at 2:45pm

what bothers me is that this award turned out like the pulitzer did this year. both committees released statements to the effect of, "here are the people we considered, and we didn't really think that any of them were good enough." if you aren't going to give an award, don't come out afterward and announce nominees or finalists, especially if you haven't even done your job of seeing them.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 5/22/06 at 6:51pm

""Right, fine, dandy, whatever. But my point is...who is to say that he received even 11 votes? We don't know, he could have gotten 5."

That point is entirely moot. The Committee did not follow the rules they specifically set for nominations, which required 16 votes to secure a nomination. That means each performer would have to have received 100% of the votes of those who kept their committment to attend the performances in order to secure a nomination. Had all 24 members attended the performances and no performances found worthy of nomination, then it would be a different matter. It's like the Oscar voters who refused to see Brokeback Mountain and vote in the category anyway."

Mister Matt, I think you misunderstand the point of my post. By that post I mean that the ENTIRE damn point is moot. We don't know if he would have received enough votes anyway, so there is no point in Jonathan Pryce (specifically him) being upset. I am not saying the committee didn't screw up, I am saying that the whole Jonathan Pryce argument is unrelated and should have nothing to do with it.
Updated On: 5/22/06 at 06:51 PM