New Tony rules are likely to ice out The Lightning Thief — Page 2

Broadway61004 said: "Jordan Catalano said: "“Lightning Thief” winning Best Score would definitely be on track with 2020, though. It would make absolute sense this year that some of the worst music ever created would end up on the same list as “Follies”, “Fiddler”, “Cabaret”, “South Pacific”, etc. etc."

To be fair, though, that list also includes Cats."

Yes, Cats, that has one of the most memorable music and one of, if not the best, known ballads in the musical theater cannon.

I'm fine with changing the rules with such an abbreviated season. It seems to shock people every time when not so great shows wind up on Broadway, but it happens every season. A Tony award isn't a participation trophy.

With that said, I don't think this was done specifically because of Lightning Thief. We're dealing with an unprecedented season where none of the potential nominees can be rewatched before voting. A discussion of quality needs to happen more than ever before. The last performances on Broadway were in March; it's the end of August.

I do think Lightning Thief has a good chance of being nominated for Score. If it does, it's probably going to win as we've yet to have a year where the score of a play has won, even when the score of a play features songs sung by performers onstage. It could get in for Book, as well. The production was pretty bad on Broadway, but I think the actual show is good for what it is. It's a musical adaptation of a YA book written for a YA audience. It's going to make a killing when they finally license it to schools and community groups.

In 2006, the Pulitzer committee decided to give no award for Drama because they felt that no play that season was "Pulitzer-worthy." That year, they were also facing an abbreviated season because they shifted from a spring-to-spring season to a calendar year, so they were only judging shows opening between March and December (otherwise, Rabbit Hole would have won that year instead of a year later). The Tonys should follow suit and recognize the absence of a great work doesn't make the mediocre works any more award-worthy.

''The trophies should be half size this year since it was half a season.''

To be fair, these 2019-20 Tonys would represent more than ''half a season'' (6 months). They would cover about the first 10 months. And the nominations would be chosen from a field of 18 shows. For the record, I believe there have been complete seasons, like 1985 and 1995, which were represented at the Tonys with even fewer shows than that.

DaveyG said: "The trophies should be half size this year since it was half a season."

I just imagined them, those tiny lil dudes. Hilarious.

jonartdesigns said: "Speaking of freezing out, it sounds like they’ll eliminate Best Actor in a Musical all together. Aaron Tveit just can’t catch a Tony nomination."

An award which he would basically win by default isn't really much of an award.

The Best Score category is really tricky. On the one hand, like in 1995, we have one original musical score that would essentially be given the trophy by default (unless, of course a play happens to win) which seems almost unfair to compare to past Tony winners who actually had to compete against somebody else. But at the same point, if we want more original scores to be written for Broadway, is it really the right thing to do to say to the one show that bothered to write an original score this year "sorry, since no one else stepped up and gave you any competition, you're automatically ineligible for a Tony"? I hate the thought of Lightning Thief being a Tony-winning score, but I also hate the thought of the Tonys automatically disqualifying someone for an award just because there's no other competition. It's kind of a lose-lose situation.

As someone in the target demographic for The Lightning Thief who went and enjoyed the show, I thought I'd throw in my thoughts.

I listened to the cast recording from the off-broadway production and enjoyed the music enough to justify paying the very low ticket price. It's not a good musical, it's not anywhere close to a good musical. I went in with the expectations I would have for a concert, and with those expectations I greatly enjoyed it. Music might be the most subjective part of a musical, as everyone has very different tastes in music whereas a set or book can be much more objectively evaluated. The score for the Lightning Thief was not written as broadway music, it was written as a "rock score" targetted more towards younger fans.

The Lightning Thief does not have a tony worthy score, but I think in this season a nomination (or possibly even the win if it falls that way) would not be the worst thing in the world. As far as the production/design categories go, I think this new rule is definitely a good thing. In my opinion, The Lightning Thief plays more like a concert than a musical, so leaving it out of any categories except score (and maybe lighting) makes sense.

qolbinau said: "It would be nice if they gave him a nomination even if they didn’t give an award though. "

I think that’s almost worst? Like you were the only one nominated and didn’t win. I’d rather just not be nominated.

AdamFeldman said: "Ice out" is a little slangier but it's a fairly common substitutefor "freeze out" these days. (See, for example, its use in this article by Emily Nussbaum in 2016, the year she won her Pulitzer:https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/23/drinking-and-drama-on-vanderpump-rules.) I chose it here because it has a slightly more mean-girls connotation."

In the scheme of things it doesn't matter, but that example actually underscores the distinction. "Ice out" refers (even these days) to inter-personal behavior, whereas "freeze out" (which can be used inter-personally of course) extends to things without a pulse. Like The Lightning Thief. <ducking for cover >

Broadway61004 said: "is it really the right thing to do to say to the one show that bothered to write an original score this year "sorry, since no one else stepped up and gave you any competition, you're automatically ineligible for a Tony"? I hate the thought of Lightning Thief being a Tony-winning score, but I also hate the thought of the Tonys automatically disqualifying someone for an award just because there's no other competition. It's kind of a lose-lose situation."



I understand your reasoning here, but there's a couple things to note:

You mention in your post that a play might happen to win, but that possibility doesn't seem to be present in your argument. Lighting Thief ISN'T the only show that bothered to feature an original score. There are a whopping EIGHT plays that are eligible in this category, some of which actually did feature strong scores.

As a result, I think this specific case isn't a good example of the scenario you're talking about. However, I do think your point is relevant to other categories this year, particularly in the Lead Actor in a Musical category. I think you raise a good point about the dilemma of "is it fair to deny a show their fair shot just because there's little to no competition." EXCEPT:

If I'm understanding correctly, it's not the lack of competition that would eliminate a category. It's the absence of ANY "worthy" contenders.

It seems that the "worthiness" (in their opinion) of the few contenders IS taken into consideration when deciding whether to eliminate the category or not. For example, if they feel that Aaron Tveit and/or Chris Mccarrell are worthy of nomination, they won't disqualify them by eliminating the category. They won't be disqualified unless the powers that be find them unworthy of recognition. At least that's how I understand it, based on the rules and the precedent.

So if we imagine that Lightning Thief really were the ONLY eligible show for Best Score (which, again, it's not). In that scenario: if the score isn't deemed "good" enough for the category to even take place, then they will have lost their shot at Tony recognition fair and square - not because they didn't have enough competition to compete, but because the Tonys don't like it enough on its own terms to feel that giving out the award is warranted.