Snubbing Young Frankenstein: Roger Friedman's 411

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 6:24am

Broadway Snubs Young Frankenstein

If I were a betting man, I would have found a bookie and put money on this — Mel Brooks’s “Young Frankenstein” would be snubbed by the Tony Awards.

The show didn’t get a nomination for Best Musical. The Tony panel picked instead “Cry Baby,” which is said to be quite awful, and the hoary “Xanadu.” The other nominees in that category are “Passing Strange” and the atrociously derivative “Into the Heights.”

Why is “Young Frankenstein” so loathed by the American Theater Wing? Simply because the producer, Robert F. X. Sillerman, wouldn’t play ball with them. He wouldn’t publish box office numbers, and he stayed open during last fall’s strike. The result: I was told by everyone I knew in the Wing that “YF” would fall to spite and get as little as possible.

It’s too bad, although I am happy for Andrea Martin and Christopher Fitzgerald, who got supporting actor nominations. They should win, but I doubt they will. It’s also too bad because Mel Brooks’s decision to come to Broadway with “The Producers” and now “YF” has been a boon to the theater district economy, profile and popularity. Did I say that only the record business shoots itself in the foot? Don’t get me started.

Meantime, kudos to movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. Famed for getting Oscar nominations in the past (like zillions), he now has 20 Tony nominations thanks to his producer status in “August: Osage County” (7); “Boeing Boeing” (6); Tom Stoppard’s wonderful play, “Rock n Roll” (4); and “Young Frankenstein” (3). The former play, too, should win Best Play at the Tonys (June 15th) which means Harvey has now cornered the legit market as well.

Hoary? I had to do an online search for that definition:
from Merriam-Webster.com:
hoary

Main Entry: hoary
Pronunciation: ˈhȯr-ç
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): hoar·i·er; hoar·i·est
Date: 1530
1 : gray or white with or as if with age
2 : extremely old : ancient
— hoar·i·ness noun

I personally wouldn't categorize "Xanadu" as hoary... with the possible exception of Zeus. It may be set in a decade gone by, but it seems to have a vibrant and exciting personality. I can't wait to see it on June 11th, in less than a month.

I'm looking forward to seeing some BWW members out and about during my Big Apple journey. from RC in Austin, Texas

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 6:40am

I had a great time at Young Frankenstein, but feel that it got exactly the three nominations it deserved.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 6:41am

Unless your name is Roger Friedman, you may want to provide a link to the source.

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 7:14am

Let your fingers do the work. It's rather simple.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 7:19am

Updated On: 5/5/09 at 07:19 AM

[WEBManBWay]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 7:22am

It definately got snubbed! Cry-Baby!!! Come on! Also I think Roger and Sutton deserved nominations!

[broadwayjim42]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 7:42am

Roger Friedman's is as bad or worse that Michael Riedel in how he either bashes or shills. He's been talking up YF since last year as if it were the greatest thing since sliced bread. If he liked it that much fine, but more often than not, whether it be a CD, a movie or a show, he often comes off as a shill and has a really creepy obsession with all things Michael Jackson.

[buddharich]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 7:51am

I prefer Young Frankenstein to Passing Strange - PS was my least favorite show of at least the last 10 years. I know many loved it; it gave me such severe headaches, listening to that horrendous score, and those terrible performers. Young Frankenstein had some fun moments, but was marred for the same reason Cry-Baby was marred: poor leads.

[ken8631]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 8:22am

I thought it was just OK (and I'm a Mel Brooks fan), and I liked the South Pacific revival a LOT better.....

[justafan2]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 9:40am

I also feel very disappointed that YF got snubbed---I feel that Roger Bart does a wonderful performance and that the show in general is much more enjoyable than the critics reported. I guess it's personal taste, but each person I know who has seen it really thought the cast and music was very good and deserving of a Tony nod.

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 9:46am

I feel sad that Roger bart did not get nominated more than the entire show.

But I wouild have loved to have seen it happen either way.

[WOSQ]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 9:50am

When using the term 'former', it means the first of two, not the first item on a list of, say, four.

The opposite is 'latter' which means the second of two. These terms are often misused these days.

Where is the copy editor?

And who in hell is Roger Friedman and why does he matter?

[Anakela]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 10:11am

...and he stayed open during last fall’s strike.

Um, didn't Xanadu too 'stay open' during last fall's strike?

And 'former' can mean the first on a list of four, actually- Webster says "first in order of two or more things cited or understood." Although with this writer maybe you could have an argument against the 'understood' part, lol.

[OrdinaryJukebox]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 10:37am

It's a little too white bread, if you know what I mean.

"Passing Strange" as Best Musical? "In the Heights"? Really? These "musicals" along with "Cry Baby" and "Xanadu"? This is the saddest group of nominations I've ever seen.

Why couldn't they nominate five musicals this year?

-Vincent

[uncageg]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 10:56am

Is this Roger Friedman from Fox News?

[fengshuihellnyc]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 11:09am

I'm sorry but YF is one of the worst shows on broadway right now. There is nothing entertaining about the show and it falls soooooo short of what the film did when it came out in the theaters. I've had several friends all whom left at intermission due to the the big skunk that was being waved at them on that CAVERNOUS CAVE of a stage and theatre. When I went I chose to stay to watch the second act... Big HUGE mistake (sorta like this show) I wish I had left... it only got worse from there. As much as Ilike Roger Bart in the Producers and the few other things that he's done... lets face it... He's not Leading Man material. Sutton is an amazing performer but her casting in this show just felt like poor sutton has been in a string of playing the same character in all the shows shes been in since Milly. Andrea Martin was one of the only people who I feel really even gave the show anything that might even be remotely interesting. The show, though it would have been difficult, either needed to be in black and white like the film or there should have been a sight gag addressing this. As I sat in that audience I was like something isn't quite right and couldn't get over the fact it wasn't B&W once I figured it out.
Also I know at least 4 people who are eligible voters. All 4 walked out of it at intermission. Same for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. All 4 Walked out at intermission. So you really can't neccessarilly blame economics for YF not getting a Nomination. And really lets face it... Though YF is probably selling at 60-70 percent at the box office (as it seems this is what its doing)thats really not something that toutable considering the cost of the show is in an upwards of 24-30 million and the size of the theatre and running costs its probably breaking even. Also the fact the BoxOffice has seemingly dropped its Premium tix as many of those end up on tkts isn't a great sign. I'll laugh when YF is rehearsing and good old Spider Mans director walks down the hiltons isle and start directing where they want the set. Lets all just face it... YF is a big lump of poo and its on its way out. Mel Brooks must be pretty upset.
Updated On: 5/14/08 at 11:09 AM

[uncageg]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 11:15am

Is "Into the Heights" a new musical we didn't know about?

[fengshuihellnyc]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 11:21am

PS Lets just pray that the joke about Blazing Saddles being a Musical Next Year was just a really bad joke MB was playing on us.

[TimesSquareRegular]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 11:36am

Arrogance earns its own rewards. Snubbed? Hardly, it is simply a mildly entertaining show that might have fared better if it hadn't presented itself as the be-all and end-all of Broadway musicals. (Interesting that it's now reduced to peddling tickets as low as $65 for orchestra seats.)

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 11:46am

I guess Friedman's selective memory overlooked the fact that Young Frankenstein also received mostly moixed-to-negative reviews. His hypothesis of why it didn't receive many nominations is interesting, but he sure didn't give much evidence as to why it should have received more nominations.

It’s also too bad because Mel Brooks’s decision to come to Broadway with “The Producers” and now “YF” has been a boon to the theater district economy, profile and popularity.

The Producers, yes. Young Frankenstein? Not so much.

[changinandhow]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 11:48am

I do not believe Young Frankenstein got snubbed, hardly - they got nominations for their actors (the two best from what I hear) and some technical nominations also. People are moaning about the critically trashed Cry-Baby getting a best musical spot and the snub YF received in this category, but... point me in the way of the fantastic YF reviews that I must have missed?
Updated On: 5/14/08 at 11:48 AM

[James885]

Posted: 5/14/08 at 12:03pm

I think Young Frankenstein got what it deserved. The score and book are so-so, the sets are great (Wagner rightfully deserves the nom), and the two cast members who were best reviewed also got nominations. I don't think anyone,except maybe the die-hard fans of the show, expected YF to sweep the Tonys the same way The Producers did.

[mntwister]

Posted: 5/17/08 at 4:02pm

I completely disagree with you. Young Frankenstein was totally snubbed. This score was much better than The Producers score was, it definately showed how Mel Brooks had matured since his first show as a composer. Take the song Let My Creature Live and He's Loose, very dramatic operetic drama, great vaudeville like Together Again, great balleds, showstoppers, awesome comedy like Please Don't Touch Me, old fashioned Broadway like Join the Family Business. This score is brilliant and there is no question about it.

To nominate Xanadu as best musical, where a large percentage of songs are from the movie, where this is a totally original score?

I have always had respect for the Tony organization and its voters but now my attitude has changed. To not even be included in nominations is a total snub in my opinion and frankly I am appaled. This score at least deserved a nomination, it's brilliant.

And so what if all the critics didn't care for it, should that matter when it comes time to judge the score? And what about Roger Bart, who does a brilliant job as the lead?

[blaxx]

Posted: 5/17/08 at 4:32pm

Into the heights?! For real?

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 5/17/08 at 4:33pm

I hated Roger Bart in this role, while I've loved him in The Producers and The Frogs. He was trying way too hard and it was evident. I much preferred his understudy, Matthew LaBanca, who I saw in previews.