The 74th Annual Tony Awards (2021) - News & Discussion Thread- Page 9

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 11:45am

Welp, I guess Moulin Rouge! will probably have the accolades to even consider reopening at the Hirschfeld late next year. This year's Tonys are absolute nonsense IMO. I probably won't be watching. 

For what it's worth, I would rather stay patient and see a larger 2021-22 Tony season in the future without MR and Jagged Little Pill. I thought Rouge was the biggest letdown of the season save for a few elements, and although Jagged was a little better, it didn't live up to my expectations. 

 

Updated On: 10/8/20 at 11:45 AM

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 12:00pm

FINALLY!!!! And looks like THE LIGHTING THEIF is indeed eligible, telling from the BW article. So, I guess that the Tviet vs. McConell showdown is on.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 12:24pm

Jagged was awful except for the main performance.

[MayAudraBlessYou2]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 1:18pm

Where is BroadwayWorld getting this "likely happening in early December" info??? If you got a source spill it. Literally the only outlet reporting that. Press release says nothing about a ceremony date. 

[PianoMann]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 1:30pm

NYT's theatre reporter Michael Paulson mentioned a ceremony "some time in December seems likely" in his tweet announcing the news; sounds speculative, but I'm sure he's somewhat aware of the internal discussions.

https://twitter.com/MichaelPaulson/status/1314220814221430790?s=20

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 2:07pm

Well, I like that this is still happening, and even though most people don't think of December as Fall, it's fine. Looking forward to next week! 

[JSquared2]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 2:54pm

disneybroadwayfan22 said: "FINALLY!!!!And looks like THE LIGHTING THEIF is indeed eligible, telling from the BW article. So, I guess that the Tviet vs. McConell showdown is on."

Since there is no "showdown" to speak of -- the more likely scenario is that they will combine lead and featured actors in a musical into a single category -- as they have done in the past when there was a dearth of eligible nominees.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 10/8/20 at 3:13pm

I feel like they would have announced already if they planned to combine categories? If not before now, then today would have been the perfect time to announce it, since it's very likely that the decision has been made already. I suppose they could make the decision on Tuesday when they have their final meeting, but it seems unwise to make such big decisions on such short notice, and then make the voters vote in these new/combined categories immediately after making the decision, without any time to put thought into the new pool of contenders. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the rules, as they currently exist, do allow for a scenario in which the nominating committee deems both Tveit and McCarrell unworthy of recognition, thereby eliminating the category. Or, they can say that Tveit is worthy, and McCarrell is not, thereby giving the award to Tveit by default. I think both of those scenarios are possible within the existing parameters of the voting process. But combining categories, or making Tveit/McCarrell eligible in a different category, is a whole other ballgame that would require its own set of deliberations. And like I said above, it seems like those deliberations would have happened by now. 

Again, I'm no expert on this, and I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood the rules. 

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 12:17am

JBroadway, I pretty much agree with your diagnosis of the Leading Actor in a Musical category. To me, the most sensible and deserving solution is that the Tonys nominate Aaron Tveit and Chris McCarrell. Both got their share of laudatory reviews. Ben Brantley in the N.Y. Times raved about Tveit's ''appealing exuberance and gleaming voice,'' and David Rooney in the Hollywood Reporter said: ''Tveit has never been better or in more glorious voice.'' Greg Evans at Deadline.com hailed McCarrell for being ''boyishly engaged and vocally blessed,'' and Frank Rizzo in Variety praised his ''sweet vulnerability, offhanded humor'' and the purity of his singing.

If you have only two legit contenders in a category, so what? Historically, there are two precedents (1959 and 1995) in which there were only two nominees for Leading Actress in a Musical. It seems unlikely that they would just rule Tveit or McCarrell worthy, so one of them wins essentially by acclamation. It also would appear odd if both were eliminated and the Tonys dumped the category altogether. It would look weird to have a Tony for Leading Actress, but not have one for Leading Actor. (At the 1985 Tonys, they eliminated BOTH Leading Actor and Leading Actress in a Musical, so there was some symmetry to that.)

I also don't think the Tonys would be eager to combine categories: like creating a non-gendered Leading Performer in a Musical, which has never happened before. Setting a precedent like that opens another giant can of worms.

But who knows? We'll just have to wait until next Thursday!

Updated On: 10/9/20 at 12:17 AM

[Broadway61004]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 9:34am

JBroadway said: "I feel like they would have announced already if they planned to combine categories? If not before now, then today would have been the perfect time to announce it, since it's very likely that the decision has been made already."
 

It's likely they'll make those final decisions on Tuesday, I would imagine.  That's not to say there are going to be any category changes, but the last time they met at the end of August, they were just establishing when the season was going to end and a general timeline for when things would happen.  I would guess that at that point they said "we'll discuss specific category changes at a later time" and since this is the first time they've met since, it would make sense if those final determinations were made on Tuesday.  I wouldn't at all be surprised if there aren't any changes, but I also wouldn't at all be surprised if there were.

Wayman_Wong said: If you have only two legit contenders in a category, so what? Historically, there are two precedents (1959 and 1995) in which there were only two nominees for Leading Actress in a Musical. 

I agree that in 1995 this would be a no-brainer and there would only be the two nominees, but over the past 25 years it seems the Tony committee has really looked at categories, eligibility, etc. a lot more closely.  Remember, if this was 1995 Alanis Morisette would be eligible for Score (as Pete Townshend was in 1993 and Rodgers and Hammerstein were in 1996).  They may very well still just stick with the two nominees, but I think it's still very likely they end up either a) combining the categories somehow (either male and female or leading and featured) or b) have a separate vote to determine if Tveit and McConnell are "worthy" and make a decision based on that.

[imeldasturn]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 9:38am

In many ways the 1995 is not a great example. Glenn Close would have won a Tony any year for that performance, while Tveit and McCarrell wouldn't even get a nod in a busy season

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 5:02pm

If this Broadway season had played out as scheduled, I believe Tveit would've gotten a Tony nomination, alongside Isaac Powell (''West Side Story'' ), Rob McClure (''Mrs. Doubtfire'' ) and possibly Tony Yazbeck/Harry Hadden-Patton (''Flying Over Sunset'' ). (For the record, the Outer Critics Circle named Tveit as one of its 2020 honorees for Best Actor in a Musical.) 

Granted, it would've been harder for McCarrell to make the Tony cut because he's lesser-known and his show wasn't received as well as the others. But to me, his appealing performance was just as good and as worthy as a number of others I've seen nominated in Leading Actor in a Musical.

Ultimately, it comes down to the tastes of the Tony nominators. I'm sure we can all scroll through the list of past Tony honorees and express our joy, surprise or disdain at who was or wasn't nominated, let alone won.

Updated On: 10/9/20 at 05:02 PM

[ACL2006]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 5:25pm

Knowing the 2020-21 season is officially toast, I'm happy we're getting the Tony Awards for this past season.

[Ravenclaw]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 7:05pm

I know it's been said before, but they really should be taking this opportunity to de-gender the acting categories. This year, with only a half-season, is the perfect time to try that out. It doesn't look like that's what they'll be doing, but it makes far more sense to nominate all lead performers in the same category than force lead roles to compete against supporting roles. As more and more people come out as nonbinary, it's important to give them an avenue through which their work can be recognized without forcing them into gender categories into which they don't fit. Not to mention the fact that the separate gender acting categories  imply that the work women and men do onstage is of some different quality or type. The way the world is changing, this change is going to have to happen eventually--they can either wait 10 years until outrage and petitions force their hand, or they can be leaders and set an example for film and television awards to follow. If they don't de-gender the acting categories this year, and it looks like they won't, they're missing a big opportunity. I know all this has been said before (and probably in this very thread) but it bears repeating.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 10/9/20 at 11:39pm

''They should be taking this opportunity to de-gender the acting categories. This year, with only a half-season, is the perfect time to try that out.''

First, I'd say that 10 months constitutes more than ''a half-season.'' And there are past complete Tony seasons that have comprised about the same number of eligible shows. But more importantly, the 2019 Tony Rules and Regulations have no provisions for de-gendering the acting categories.

In fact, the Tony rules list 25 specific categories and spell out the titles of the 8 acting categories. They even have a provision in case there is only one eligible candidate in a certain category; a majority of the Nominating Committee can, by secret ballot, grant that candidate the nomination.

Perhaps, the Tonys will de-gender all the acting categories in the near-future, but they would need to lay more groundwork, examine the ramifications and rewrite their rules. Preferably such a substantial change would be announced at the beginning of a season; they shouldn't ''try that out'' at the last minute.

Updated On: 10/9/20 at 11:39 PM

[Ravenclaw]

Posted: 10/10/20 at 12:36am

Even though time-wise, far more than half the season elapsed, we all know that the last two months before the Tony eligibility cutoff are typically packed with openings, and the planned 2020 spring season was no exception. In the Best Musical category, for instance, only four musicals are eligible out of eight that would otherwise be eligible had the season carried on as usual. None of the three musical revivals are eligible. So, while not a half-season in terms of length, it's certainly a half-season in terms of openings.

And yes, I'm aware that there are pages and pages of rules regarding Tony eligibility and voting. I'm also sure you're aware that nearly every year, the Tonys announce significant changes in their rules--be it eliminating categories, reinstating categories, eliminating a large number of eligible voters, or shifting eligibility requirements, all those things have happened in recent years. And the categories will be de-gendered in time, the only question is if they will do it now, ahead of the curve, or in the future, acting behind the times. Many prominent regional theatre awards (including DC's Helen Hayes Awards and Chicago's Jeff Awards) have already made the move to de-gender acting categories, and more and more are doing so each year.

As for your concerns about them rushing to make a last-minute change, by the time the nominations are announced next week, it will have been more than seven months since the season abruptly ended. No, they shouldn't have to hastily make a decision within the next few days, they should have "examined the ramifications," as you say, over the last seven months. When I said they should "try that out" this year, what I meant was not that it's a simple little change, but when in such an unprecedented time which requires the committee rethink major questions--including whether or not the awards should happen this year, which was not a given--it's worth reexamining other rules, like the ones regarding gender in acting categories, which suddenly seem small and solvable in the wake of the current moment.

What better time to make such changes while on a hiatus? Because inevitably, very soon, a person who identifies as neither male nor female will be giving an award-worthy performance on a Broadway stage, and the Tonys will have to reckon with their system and make changes. Across the nation, theaters and theater workers are spending time during this hiatus to figure out how to make the industry more inclusive, welcoming, and fair. There's no reason the Tonys shouldn't be doing the same.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 10/10/20 at 12:39am

As I've said many times on this board (potentially even in this thread), I'm 100% in favor of de-gendering the categories. I think the fact that we still have gendered categories is silly. And from an artistic sense, it makes MUCH more sense to combine the gender categories than it does to combine leading+featured. 

But I agree with Wayman that doing it this year, on such short notice, doesn't really make sense, for the reasons I stated in my earlier post about combining categories. 

[unclevictor]

Posted: 10/10/20 at 10:17am

Doesn’t make much sense that this is happening. What’s the point? No one can see any of the shows. Most of them are going to close anyway. Why not use the $$ that’s going to produce this digital show and spend it on new air filtration systems for the theatre’s. Or help pay the actors health insurance? Or anything else.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 10/10/20 at 12:43pm

unclevictor said: "Doesn’t make much sense that this is happening. What’s the point? No one can see any of the shows. Most of them are going to close anyway. Why not use the $$ that’s going to produce this digital show and spend it on new air filtration systems for the theatre’s. Or help pay the actors health insurance? Or anything else."

The "points" have been rehearsed here many times. To name two: 

1. Many here (not me but that's beside the point) are very eager for this. If you are not, you don't have to watch but it is silly to pretend that there is no point for anyone because there is not for you.

2. Producers and the League as a whole see significant benefit in marketing both individual shows and the Broadway brand in general. You don't? Fine. Maybe you don't understand how marketing works. 

 You don't know what shows are going to close, unless they have announced, because like everyone else, you don't know anything. And if by "close" you mean on Broadway, again that betrays a lack of understanding of both other reasons to continue promotion and marketing, and the importance of marketing the brand. 

Speaking of "points," what's the point of an air filtration system designed to aid in preventing the spread of covid? Theatres are not going to reopen so long as this is a concern. (Also, as has been rehearsed, many/most Broadway theatres cannot be retrofitted for these systems because of their age in any event.) Further, the amount of money that the show is going to cost is less than the amount of money to install air filtration in just one theatre. Similarly, the amount of health insurance that could be paid (the mechanics of doing this are elusive in any event) with this money is de minimis. 

Frankly, people don't respect back seat drivers.  

[unclevictor]

Posted: 10/10/20 at 12:55pm

Don’t agree with anything to just spewed, hogan.
Anyway

[HogansHero]

Posted: 10/10/20 at 3:10pm

unclevictor said: "Don’t agree with anything to just spewed, hogan.
Anyway"

The 2 numbered items in my post are objectively determinable facts. I can easily see how one might disagree with the sentiments of those I reference but please tell me that you don't actually disagree with my statement of the fact that they hold these beliefs. I have more respect for you than that.

[Rogerdellibovi]

Posted: 10/12/20 at 1:52pm

Just a curious question for those who support degendering the categories. Would that mean only two performances are given Tonys per season? Like on lead and one featured? And how many nominations in a typical season would go to each of those categories? 

[Tag]

Posted: 10/12/20 at 2:13pm

Rogerdellibovi said: "Just a curious question for those who support degendering the categories. Would that mean only two performances are given Tonys per season? Like on lead and one featured? And how many nominations in a typical season would go to each of those categories?"

Yes, the amount of awards given gets cut.  And the acting categories would double in nominees (at least that is what has happened in other similar degendering situations).  You could potentially also have, let's say, 7 women up against 1 male...or vice versa.

[JBroadway]

Posted: 10/12/20 at 2:25pm

Rogerdellibovi said: "Just a curious question for those who support degendering the categories. Would that mean only two performances are given Tonys per season? Like on lead and one featured? And how many nominations in a typical season would go to each of those categories?"

 

Ideally, they would find some other way of dividing the categories, which would have more to do with the actual performance. For example dividing it by comedy vs. drama, or original vs. revival. Now, that isn’t a perfect solution either, because you may still have a huge imbalance one side – for example, there may be way more dramatic performances than comedic performances, especially for plays. And the reverse may be true for musicals. Plus, the lines between comedy and drama are often blurry, but that could be sorted out through the eligibility meetings just like leading vs. featured (which is also up for interpretation). A split between original vs. revival is easier to determine, but you’d still have potential imbalances.

But while using this kind of split might bring up practical issues, on an artistic level it still makes way more sense than splitting by gender. And ultimately, the point of awards are to recognize artistic work. Plus, it allows for non-binary people to enter the race without forcing them to align themselves with one of the gendered categories (which has already started to happen in some awards bodies). And I'd say that's more important than having cleanly-defined awards categories. 

Another possibility is to combine the categories, but double the nominees and have 2 winners in each category. This might seem strange, but ultimately it’s accomplishing the same goal: the same number of performances get recognized. 

I’ve heard some people complain that a system like this would create a situation in which men could dominate the awards over women. While I can see this as a potential concern, I actually don’t think this would happen; if you look back at some of the recent Tony wins and nominations, I think there are tons of amazing performances by women that could have easily won even in a de-gendered category. Plus, that sort of comparison wouldn’t even necessarily have to take place if there are 2 winners per category. I think the most likely scenario is that the voters would (perhaps subconsciously) continue to vote for 1 man and 1 woman out of habit, but at least there would be room for non-binary people in the mix.

Plus, with regards to the “what about male-heavy categories” issue, I would say: that problem has already been persisting in all of the other (non-gendered) categories. And yes, it is definitely a problem. But to that I’d say 2 things: (1) I think it would be less of a problem in the acting categories, because there are generally more opportunities for women onstage than offstage. And (2) is the answer to this problem to divide the playwrights, directors, and designers up by gender? Should we have a category for “best female set designer” just because the category is usually dominated by men? Of course not! The answer is to look at the hiring practices, and make sure that there are enough opportunities for women that, come time for the Tonys, the category will naturally be more balanced.

The same is true for acting: if there came a year that was heavily dominated by male nominees, then that shows that there’s a problem with the equity of roles being written, and stories being produced.

And IMO, dividing playwrights, directors, and designers up by gender is just as nonsensical as diving actors up by gender. We’re just more accustomed to the latter.

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 10/13/20 at 2:21am

GoldDerby.com, the awards website, has posted its preview/podcast for the 2020 Tony Awards. Tom O'Neill and Sam Eckmann (from GoldDerby) and Michael Musto (Queerty) and Brian Scott Lipton (Cititour) debate who will (and won't) get nominated this Thursday. How many of ''The Inheritance'' actors will make the cut? Will movie stars, like Tom Hiddleston and Jake Gyllenhaal, get a slot? Who are the real front-runners? Among the pundits' opinions:

Lipton: ''The surest bet [to win a Tony] is Adrienne Warren as Tina Turner in 'Tina!' This was absolutely the performance of the year, maybe of the decade.''

Musto: ''Eliminating the category [of Leading Actor in a Musical] would be a mistake. And it's unfair to Aaron [Tveit], who's really fantastic [in 'Moulin Rouge!']. Isaac Powell obviously would've been a great contender, but ['West Side Story'] isn't eligible. ... Just give [the Tony] to Aaron.''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4nZS6Y_BiQ

Updated On: 10/13/20 at 02:21 AM