In 2010 Hunter Foster started a group seemingly protesting that people like Catherine Zeta Jones and Scarlett J H got Tonys etc.
https://playbill.com/article/hunter-foster-starts-facebook-group-give-the-tonys-back-to-broadway-com-191093
1. Did this achieve anything?
2. Is it or was it actually ever a problem?
I remember a few things from that year. As a frequent viewer of CUNY TV's Theater Talk (even to this day I rewatch episodes), there was a complaint that there were so many stars on Broadway, but then the next season they wondered where are all the stars were.
2010 was also an incredibly lean year, at least in my opinion. Coming off of 2009, which had some really high points. I remember too Jen Cody (Foster's wife) being vocal, and there being a feeling that they were making a mountain out of a molehill, and many people were rubbed the wrong way by the whole situation. Basically, who stole a job from Hunter Foster that made him upset.
The recession was beginning, and anything to keep Broadway afloat was a go. Hell, that year's opening number at the Tony's was basically called "Songs that Get Played on the Radio that are in Musicals". (Frank Sinatra, the mainstream hits from Promises Promises, Everyday Rapture. Green Day". Speaking of the Tony Awards, I believe this was the first ceremony where critics were not a part of the voting block, which is why some people felt Memphis won Best Musical over Fela.
fashionguru_23 said: "I believe this was the first ceremony where critics were not a part of the voting block, which is why some people felt Memphis won Best Musical over Fela."
What happened was that all the theater critics and reporters lost their Tony voting privileges as a "conflict of interest". Which meant that most of the remaining Tony voters were producers, theater owners, and presenters of touring productions. So there was the sense that they were going to champion shows in which they have financial stakes. Although the following season, members of the New York Drama Critics Circle were welcomed back into the voting body.
Jeffrey Karasarides said: "fashionguru_23 said: "I believe this was the first ceremony where critics were not a part of the voting block, which is why some people felt Memphis won Best Musical over Fela."
What happened was that all the theater critics and reporters lost their Tony votingprivileges as a"conflict of interest". Which meant that most of the remaining Tony voters wereproducers, theater owners, and presenters of touring productions. So there was the sense that they were going to champion shows in which they have financial stakes. Although the following season, members of the New York Drama Critics Circle were welcomed back into the voting body."
Okay, I didn't realize that was why they were stripped on their voting ability. How can you possibly justify that reasoning considering everybody else who votes? That makes zero sense.
I remember for a while there, part of the conversation for Best Musical was always what will tour better, especially in the South
If they're not based on merit alone, why do we even care about them?
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/14/11
It was definitely a weird year with how many Hollywood folks won (and a bit ironic that two of the "stage" stars that won, Viola Davis and Eddie Redmayne, have subsequently become much more associated with film and TV than theatre). But looking at the nominees, who else was going to win? Maybe Alfred Molina over Denzel, but Denzel was also hugely acclaimed in that performance. There was no one else in Actress in a Musical that delivered anything Tony-worthy. Jan Maxwell was the only real competition in Featured Actress. It was just, frankly, a kind of weak year for "Broadway" actors performances.
Videos