""3.5 out of 4 stars. And it shouldn't be called a rave. She called Ken's "weak performance" a "garbled mess." "
Quick question about how shows are rewarded the Tony in light of this observation.
This show seems to be getting raves, even though one of the leads (portraying perhaps one of the most iconic lead roles in a Broadway show) isn't getting great reviews.
To get the Tony for revival, would the show need to be performing on all cylinders, especially when it comes to the leads? And if one of the two leads isn't pulling it off, would that hurt its chances?"
Pretty much every single Tony Award-Winning revival within the last few years had something held against them.
Anything Goes-While Sutton Foster got rave reviews, some people still felt she was miscast.
Porgy & Bess-There was that controversy started by Stephen Sondheim because he was so unhappy to hear that they were tampering with the work of Dubose Heyward.
Pippin-There were criticisms against Patina Miller's performance calling her 'mechanical', especially as they recall how Ben Vereen had much more charisma in the role of The Leading Player.
Hedwig & the Angry Inch-While it was a minority opinion, there were people who felt Hedwig really got glammed up for Broadway.
Also keep in mind that theatre critics aren't Tony voters anymore. So therefore, the remaining Tony voters are just going to vote on what they liked most.