B. I was using it as a reference of time. My grandkids and great grandkids are millenials (Through my husband. But my husband and I have been together for 36 years and while his kids are my step kids, the grandkids and great grandkids are mine) and I would NEVER insult them. In fact I defend them ferociously. If anyone is to blame for the "participation trophy" it's the parents of millenials.
But after all is said I will try to watch the way I say things more carefully. Can't say it will always be the case, but I will try.
Dolly80 said: "herewegoabc said: "Count me in on the Jagged Little Pill love. I'm thankful I got to see it twice before the shutdown. Elizabeth Stanley was the standout for me, but I also loved Celia Rose Gooding's performance. I know Patten is the likely winner from that show, but I would love to see Gooding get some recognition. And though I loved Stanley's performance, I'd be thrilled to see Adrienne Warren get her Tony.
On the play side, I'm just hoping for some Michael Urie recognition. I loved his performance in Grand Herizons. The standout in a group of topnotch performances. "
TheaterMania's David Gordon has posted Part 2 of his Tony handicapping series, this time focusing on the actors. The nail-biter is: What'll they do with Leading Actor in a Musical? There are only two eligible candidates: Aaron Tveit (''Moulin Rouge!'' ) and Chris McCarrell (''The Lightning Thief'' ). To me, both deserve to be Tony-nominated, so I hope they keep the category. Besides, there's a precedent for only 2 nominees In Leading Actress in a Musical (in 1959 and 1995).
Also: Three actors from ''The Inheritance'' are eligible for Leading Actor in a Play: Andrew Burnap, Samuel Levine and Kyle Soller. What are the odds that they all make the cut in a Leading category? It's rare. It happened at the 1960 Tonys with Leading Actor in a Musical: Jackie Gleason, Robert Morse and Walter Pidgeon, all for ''Take Me Along.''
Also: Three actors from ''The Inheritance'' are eligible for Leading Actor in a Play: Andrew Burnap, Samuel Levine and Kyle Soller. What are the odds that they all make the cut in a Leading category? It's rare. It happened at the 1960 Tonys with Leading Actor in a Musical: Jackie Gleason, Robert Morse and Walter Pidgeon, all for ''Take Me Along.''
Soller has the best bet of the three considering he carries most of the play. With the amount of potential nominees, I only think Burnap would have the better chance of sneaking a potential second slot in the category
Check out my eBay page for sales on Playbills!!
www.ebay.com/usr/missvirginiahamm
SouthernCakes said: "Aaron winning for MR would be an insult to the award. Great voice but some of the worst acting I’ve seen. "
That is so true lol... but with the long amassing career he has had on Broadway at such a young age... I’m not mad at it. It’s not like we’re awarding a nobody.
best actress is definitely Adrianne Warrens... but there were wonderful performances in the other shows as well.
on a random note, will company be eligible for nomination for best revival? it was only in previews, but will they maybe make an exception? from what i heard the show seemed pretty good in previews...
Company only had 9 previews. If West Side Story and Girl From the North Country, which both officially opened, were deemed ineligible due to a now earlier cutoff date, there’s no way Company will be eligible.
Slightly off topic but, when it comes to the acting awards in a musical, how much consideration is given to an actor's singing ability vs acting? There are some leads in musicals who are much stronger singers than actors and vice versa.
Philly Theater Girl said: "Slightly off topic but, when it comes to the acting awards in a musical, how much consideration is given to an actor's singing ability vs acting? There are some leads in musicals who are much stronger singers than actors and vice versa."
This is highly situational. I'd say the voters are looking at the sum total of a performance as opposed to singing or acting individually. Just thinking of a few past winners, there are obviously plenty with great singing ability like Stephanie J. Block and Cynthia Erivo. But there's also Tony Shalhoub who's role hardly required any singing at all. Just depends on the situation.
The awards are for the best performance in a musical, whatever that means to the nominator, voter, or even for a specific show. I like to look at Movin’ Out as an example: Although none of the performers won, the show was deemed a musical by the Tony committee and therefore the four principal dancers were nominated for Best Performance by a Leading/Featured Actor/Actress in a Musical, and Michael Cavenaugh was also nominated in the Featured Actor category for singing and playing the show’s Billy Joel catalogue. These five didn’t have traditional roles for a Broadway musical but were still nominated for their overall performances.
Not all roles are triple threat roles, and awards are subjective. But as stated by the categories themselves, overall performance should be what is judged.
Philly Theater Girl said: "Slightly off topic but, when it comes to the acting awards in a musical, how much consideration is given to an actor's singing ability vs acting? There are some leads in musicals who are much stronger singers than actors and vice versa."
This is a big question that possibly deserves its own thread. There will probably be a lot of different opinions and strong disagreement as to the answer, as we just don’t know what’s going on in the Tony Voters’ minds. And no one will agree on what constitutes “good acting.” But here is my personal observation, which is influenced by my personal opinions:
In theory, singing and dancing in musical theatre should always be in service of the acting. The acting should be the bottom line, the basis for everything, because ultimately the medium is a form of storytelling. So by extension, the Tony Awards IN THEORY should always prioritize acting over anything else.
Unfortunately, I personally believe that a vast majority of musical theatre actors under the age of 40 (roughly) are actually not very strong actors. I think most musical theatre school programs are designed to churn out cookie-cutter performers who sing and dance while vaguely emoting and delivering lines in a way that makes basic sense. I don't think they really teach how to act well. (This isn't to say that there aren't plenty of younger MT performers that I love, but it's usually because of their voice, their charisma, their stage presence, their comedic timing, etc. - rarely because of their technical acting abilities).
So when it comes to the Tonys, I think that the nomination slots are often filled out by a lot of great singers, great performers, with a lot of charisma, etc. But it's my personal observation that in recent years, the Tony WINS frequently go to really strong technical actors. Not always, but often enough that I really think the strong actors have a noticeable edge over performers who coast along on their singing and their stage presence. Of course, this is the great irony: acting is undervalued in many areas of the musical theatre culture, and yet it's the strong actors who often win the Tonys.
TheaterMania has posted the third part of its ''Predicting the Tonys'' series, and it focuses on the designers: Costumes, Lighting, Scenery and Sound. On the musical side, it's pretty cut and dried, since there are only 4 shows eligible: ''Jagged Little Pill,'' ''The Lightning Thief,'' ''Moulin Rouge!'' and ''Tina.'' On the play side, there are 14 options per category. But all hell could break loose if the Tonys combine plays and musicals ...
Philly Theater Girl said: "Slightly off topic but, when it comes to the acting awards in a musical, how much consideration is given to an actor's singing ability vs acting? There are some leads in musicals who are much stronger singers than actors and vice versa."
@JBroadway summed this up very well. But one other thing to note is I think a lot of it has to do with the role itself. For instance, John Lithgow in Sweet Smell of Success and Tony Shalhoub in Band's Visit--both playing roles that had relatively little in terms of complicated singing, where the acting is clearly the focal point of the role. And since they both acted those roles brilliantly, that was plenty enough to overlook their weaker voices and give them the Tonys. But if either of them were to take on something like Billy in Carousel, where the songs are such an integral part of the role, no matter how well they acted it they likely would not have won.
Yes, I agree with everyone. It all comes down to believability to me, and that is ultimately what a good actor excels in, no matter their technical skill in singing or dancing. Elaine Stritch, one of the greats, isn’t known for to be a great singer, but she can certainly sell a song (and probably should have won some competitive acting Tonys).
The results from their eligibility meeting have been released. The big surprise here is that Jane Alexander and James Cromwell were both considered featured, as they are below the title. Personally, I thought both of them gave great performances. If I had my way, Alexander would take the award over Lois Smith, as I thought Alexander's performance was far superior. But I doubt that will happen, given the buzz around Smith, and her long career without a Tony.
Also, while I know that the official purpose of this meeting was just to make rulings on those 3 plays, I'm still surprised they didn't take the opportunity to make announcements about any last-minute changes to the categories or rules.
From Time Out New York: When asked to clarify the status of the rules, the Tony sent us this reply: "Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the rules have been adjusted for one-time only to ensure broad recognition of excellent work that occurred during the abbreviated Broadway season while also protecting the integrity of the Award. Performance and creative categories will be handled in a similar manner to how show categories have been handled in the past few years.”
Time Out's Adam Feldman speculates that the ''adjusted'' rules for ''excellent work'' could spell bad news for ''The Lightning Thief.''
It'll be so awful if poor Aaron gets snubbed from a Tony yet again and this time, because of a peculiar situation. They just can’t move Daniel and Sean to Leading, so they can keep a giant category in?
I'm thinking Moulin Rouge and Slave Play are going to stumble into a bunch of awards but maybe I'm overlooking the other eligible shows. If it's not clear, I think either show getting a lot of nominations/wins would not be a good thing.
''It'll be so awful if poor Aaron gets snubbed from a Tony yet again and this time, because of a peculiar situation.''
I couldn't agree more. Dumping the category would be terrible. Plus, there is the historic precedent of having only two nominees in the corresponding Leading Actress in a Musical: in 1959 and 1995.
''They just can’t move Daniel and Sean to Leading, so they can keep a giant category in?''
I don't know if the Tonys can still reverse that. What I can't figure out is why didn't ''Tina'' petition Daniel J. Watts to be Leading, alongside Adrienne Warren, in the first place? Kobna Holdbrook-Smith, who played the same role of Ike in London, won the Olivier for Leading.
Ultimately, the Tonys have the discretion to do whatever they want. 1989 was another skimpy year for Leading Actor in a Musical. No one was above the title. But the Tonys went with Jason Alexander and Robert La Fosse from ''Jerome Robbins' Broadway'' and bumped up Brian Lane Green and Gabriel Barre from ''Starmites'' to Leading.