So not really a rant.
Would have liked to see Norbert get a nod
Surprised Beautiful wasn't nominated for scenic design
Would have like to see Mazzie nominated
Surprised (but happily) about Bryce Pinkham
Happy about Jared Spector and Anika Larsen
But if look at it as a year with really good/difficult choices and a set if shows that ANYONE OF WHICH would have taken a ton I awards in the late nineties.
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/18/11
GoldenBoy, what you say about The Realistic Joneses is just about what everyone said of the plays of Ionesco, Pinter, Brecht, Beckett, Pirandello, Satre and the rest when first seen. They have all endured nonetheless. Of course no genre is to everyone's taste and I respect that. For me, a drippy soap opera like Bridges holds no interest but certainly no offense to those who enjoy that sort of thing. Although I tend to lean toward classic musical structure, I can accept that there are those who don't without holding it against them.
Things I'm happy about:
All of Beautiful's nominations
Celia Keenan-Bolger's nomination
All of Violet's nominations.
Things I'm mad about:
Lachanze not being nominated.
Marin Mazzie not being nominated.
All of Gentleman Guide's nominations. (For some reason I just HATE that show.)
Michelle Williams not being nominated.
If/Then not being nominated for more.
Bullets not being nominated for more.
Rocky not being nominated for Best Musical
I'm not really sure what's behind Cabaret not being nominated. I may have missed something about it being ineligible But it would have ben nice to see it perform.
"I'm not really sure what's behind Cabaret not being nominated. I may have missed something about it being ineligible But it would have ben nice to see it perform."
Since it is the exact same production team, lead actor, lighting, set, concept, etc., they probably felt they did nominate it already, the first time around.
12 pages of rants, so far.........does go to prove 1 thing is correct, that awards are definitely subjective.
I think it was Kad, who said that he see the awards being spread out this year, which I agree with.
All the Bridges fans are vexed because it didn't get nominated, it wouldn't of won anyway, but not being nominated, I see as being very positive, this will strengthen it chances of winning best score, which is seen as a consolidation prize to best musical, thus ensuring at least if it does win best score, it will be remembered by theater historians.
Yes, because as someone who can predict the future, I'm sure you know it would not have won best Musical.
Things I'm mad about:
All of Gentleman Guide's nominations. (For some reason I just HATE that show.)
That's mature.
"12 pages of rants, so far.........does go to prove 1 thing is correct, that awards are definitely subjective."
I knew that yesterday, though.
I knew Beautiful would clean up. Best word of mouth of any show this year.
Go Jessie - the most critically praised star making turn since Streisand portrayed another singer from another generation who was hung up on her man....
"Things I'm mad about:
All of Gentleman Guide's nominations. (For some reason I just HATE that show.)
That's mature."
How is that immature? I bet you have a show that you hated as well. This thread is for ranting. I simply expressed my opinion.
"How is that immature? I bet you have a show that you hated as well. This thread is for ranting. I simply expressed my opinion."
I think it is because you didn't want something to get noticed merely because you personally didn't find it interesting, as opposed to it just not being a show that spoke you. Not every show is for everyone, but that doesn't mean the stuff you dislike should be overlooked.
I don't hate many shows, but the ones I do, I tend to not post about. I prefer to express positive opinions, or indicate your dislike via omission, by saying "I hope either After Midnight, Aladdin, or Beautiful win Best Musical."
Regarding why Cabaret wasn't nominated, there was a change in the nominating process this year. In the case of five eligible shows or less in a category (there were only four eligible musical revivals), the nominators picked their top three respective shows. If there had been three votes or less separating the third highest selected show from the fourth most selected show (assuming that some of the nominators voted for Cabaret), Cabaret could have been added to the slate by the accounting firm. But evidently, it didn't receive enough votes to do so. The language is below:
Where there are five or fewer eligible shows in a Best Show category, at the Tony Nominating Meeting, the Nominating Committee will be instructed to cast one vote each for three eligible shows as nominees on his/her secret ballot. Such ballot shall be collected and tabulated by a representative of the Accounting Firm. The three eligible shows with the highest number of votes will automatically be the nominees in such category. The Accounting Firm will determine if a fourth nominee shall be added to the category in the event that the difference in votes between the third highest ranked show and the fourth highest ranked show is three votes or less.
BWW just sent me an e-mail alert at 9:34 p.m. to alert me that the Tony Nominees were announced this morning!
Chorus Member Joined: 11/18/11
Does anyone else wonder if the producers of BULLETS will be able to persuade Woody Allen to show up to the TONYs? I suppose that if they are desperate for publicity, they may attempt to get him to present, despite him never showing up to the Oscars. Besides, the box office numbers for "Fading Gigolo" prove that his controversy has not affected people's desire to see Woody. It will be interesting to see if they can persuade him to attend or not.
Well, they do have the distinct advantage of not asking him to leave NYC, so that is definitely on their side...
Woody's presence in the midst of his scandal would not be a positive PR move for the show so I doubt they will push. Plus, as I recall the "Best Book" category isn't even televised so I doubt it would be worth the energy for him to go.
The scandal is pretty much over at this point, no? Not that there was anything more than resurfaced allegations.
Woody Allen presented a tribute to New York at the Oscars in 2002.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpwF6fbLFw4
"Bullets" has been very ginger with their promotion of Woody in regards to the promotion of the show and I don't think that will change for the Tonys. The initial shock is over and done but the prejudices and opinions of him have not changed... he was not vindicated as of yet. I remember when they gave a lifetime achievement award to Kazan at the Oscars a few years ago and people in the audience were visibly not having it due to his alleged involvement in the black listing in the 50s. Never underestimate the US publics ability o hold a grudge. All that said, he hates these things and for that reason alone I don't think he would go even if everyone loved him.
In a rather bizarre twist, Woody Allen's competition in the Book of a Musical category, Douglas McGrath, co-wrote the film version of Bullets Over Broadway with him, for which they received an Oscar nomination. Only Allen is credited here, surely some of McGrath's ideas made it to the stage?
in an adaptation the author is the person adapting from a previous piece of material. I am sure there is a credit somewhere that says "Based on the motion picture written by Woody and McGrath."
How is that immature? I bet you have a show that you hated as well. This thread is for ranting. I simply expressed my opinion.
At least let us know why you hated it. By saying "I hate it but I don't know why" can't make us take your rant seriously.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/24/14
I'm very sad for Williams, but at least it's her first time on Broadway. Radcliffe has been there 3 times, and still got nothing. I can only assume that his category was really that difficult as they left out Stewart, McKellen and, the biggest snubb for me, Denzel Washington.
I didn't believe in the nominations that Act One received, but I'm glad for the recognition for Twelfth Night, Glass Menagerie and Hedwig. Also, seems that I will have to see Aladdin after all.
"... he was not vindicated as of yet."
Well, it is past the statute of limitations at this point, and there was no trial then. So, I think he just gets slandered/libeled every time Farrow and co. decide to bring it up.
Videos