The Kristin/Kelli/Chita competition...- Page 11

[NYadgal]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 5:08pm

Time Out NY: Give the Tony to Kelli

I agree with every word that David Cote wrote in that article.

Every word.

Updated On: 5/29/15 at 05:08 PM

[bjh2114]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 8:37pm

Bless David Cote for putting my thoughts and reactions to Feldman's piece better than I could put them myself earlier in this thread. I'm so glad he published that response. And his comparison to Merman/Martin is super apt.

[mc1227]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 8:50pm

I never thought I would write these words  but I wholeheartedly agree with Cote on this topic and with his rationale.  Rewarding  an actress who continually challenges herself vs a gifted actress who does what she does well yet again.  Kelli has been magical in her last 2 shows and for many before that.  She gives a moving and memorable performance that will finally give her the Tony.

[vfd88]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 9:18pm

I wonder how Leanne Cope feels about all of this...

[ljay889]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 9:21pm

I'd assume she's grateful to be nominated in such a strong and competitive category.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 10:57pm

Thank you, David Cote.

[UnwoundFantasies]

Posted: 5/29/15 at 11:42pm

It baffles me that Kelli has never won any award or recognition ever. I truly hope, and think, she'll win this year.

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:04am

""Give it to Kelli, who shows that a diva should be measured not by the showy extravagance of her style, but by the complexity and soulfulness of her character."

This."

Not this.  IMO.

Divas can come in many forms and can be measured in more than just one way.  Sometimes the showy and extravagant is deserving of a Tony.  Sometimes a more subdued performance is. Comes down to personal preference and the way the Tony voters swing that year.

But just because one doesn't like KC or her style, or the style of the character she's playing, doesn't mean she isn't doing a great job presenting a highly impressive performance in a complex role and is very deserving of the award.  

There are a lot of ladies who couldn't pull this role off.

 

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 5:23am

"But no, they can’t both win."

Er, no, they actually could.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 6:23am

"There are a lot of ladies who couldn't pull this role off."

That could be said of any of the roles nominated.  He even admits that Kristin is doing a very good job in the role.  His argument is that it's not enough of a departure from what we usually see from her.

[little_sally]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 10:15am

""There are a lot of ladies who couldn't pull this role off."
That could be said of any of the roles nominated.  He even admits that Kristin is doing a very good job in the role.  His argument is that it's not enough of a departure from what we usually see from her."

 I think that's why I wasn't as impressed with Kristin as many other people. For me, it was an obvious performance.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 10:19am

I think some people's personal issues with Kristin are blinding them.

[_IrisTInkerbell]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 10:39am

Thanks, bilbo! I think people hugely underestimate how hard comedy is and how hard Kristin has worked to create this performance.

"His argument is that it's not enough of a departure from what we usually see from her."

About that. When have we ever seen her do what she does in OTTC on stage? I don't feel like her performance here has more similarlities with shows like Wicked or The Apple Tree than Kelli's performances in her various shows. Every actor has a certain style, which is why different people like different performers. But even if you were to say that she's just doing what she's doing best, you have to keep in mind that she has yet to win a Tony for that. Because she has not. You can't possibly compare her performance in Charlie Brown to On the 20th... and she only got a featured Tony for that. Also, why does it have to be a departure? She's playing a role she was clearly born to play, and it's stepped up to the plate and delivers is perfectly. Any other performance wouldn't be true to the character and the show. Why would that be a reason NOT to give her an award? You might as well say Anna is not enough of a departure of what Kelli usually does and she shouldn't get an award for because of that. That's just silly to me.

I agree that it's a shame that Kelli has never won in all those years, and she should have one already. I just don't think that this is the year and the performance she should get it for. Yes, I'm sad for her, but it doesn't mean that I still think Kristin's was the stronger performance.

I wonder how many people would campaign for Kelli now if she had won last year.... but it really shouldn't be a part of anybody's consideration. This years Tony is about this years shows and performances, and not how many times a performer was snubbed and overlooked in the past, and how deserving the person may be to have *a* Tony on their resume.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 11:10am

Iris, you reeeeally don't want to thank Bilbo. He's one of the most notorious trolls this site has ever had and now he's "rebranding" himself here, but he still holds numerous other screen names. It's best to ignore him all together. 

Just a friendly note since you seem too nice to get involved with that mess. 

[bjh2114]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 12:35pm

Iris, I would argue that her Apple Tree performance and her On the 20th performance are actually VERY similar in may ways.  I would say her Charlie Brown performance, while also comedic, was the most different from all of her recent showings (other than Promises Promises... which was different but dreadful).  Honestly, the best thing I've seen her do in "recent" years was Stairway to Paradise at Encores!.  I just really wish she didn't rely on mugging all the time.  It's possible to do comedy without it.  Don't use it as a crutch.

[_IrisTInkerbell]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 1:05pm

Well, even though I disagree, I would argue that since she was entirely snubbed for Apple Tree that would be all the more reason for her to be recognized now. It's not like she won a bunch of Tonys for what you consider very similar performances.

And as I said before, I think everything she does in OTTC perfectly suited for the show and the character. It's screwball comedy and relies heavily on physical comedy, which is exactly what she (and the rest of the cast, most notably) deliver in the best possible way. Maybe that's just not your type of comedy. That's alright, I'm super picky with comedy and get often just am not amused by things other people consider funny. But that doesn't mean she isn't great and what she does.

[valeposh]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 2:41pm

I have zero issues with Kristin. I like her. For me, I just appreciated Kelli's subdued depth more than Kristin's showy role. I love them both.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 2:53pm

I saw both performances. I have to agree with the folks that are saying Kristin is giving a performance just like her previous performances. When I saw the show I felt like I was watching Kristin Chenoweth as Kristin Chenoweth playing Lilly Garland. Kelli's performance, on the other hand, is subdued, beautiful, and rich. In my book, there shouldn't even be a question as to who should win between the two of them.

[valeposh]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:07pm

"I saw both performances. I have to agree with the folks that are saying Kristin is giving a performance just like her previous performances. When I saw the show I felt like I was watching Kristin Chenoweth as Kristin Chenoweth playing Lilly Garland. Kelli's performance, on the other hand, is subdued, beautiful, and rich. In my book, there shouldn't even be a question as to who should win between the two of them."

 

Completely agree. If any of you saw Glee (ew, I know), Kristin's character there was even sort of similar to her Lily Garland. It was just hard to see her as "Lily", while I felt like Kelli lost herself into Anna, and it was beautiful. Again, just my opinion. 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:20pm

C

 

H

 

I

 

T

 

A

[AngusN]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:25pm

His argument is that it's not enough of a departure from what we usually see from

However, she is not nominated for Most Versatile Performer. She is nominated for Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role. That is what we should be judging the ladies on, and it appears that in most people's opinion, Kristin is giving the better performance.

 

Updated On: 5/31/15 at 03:25 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:40pm

I have no diva in this game.  I'd be happy if either Kristen or Kelli or Chita won (although, my favorite performance was Kristen's, and I'm saying that as someone who is a far bigger fan of Kelli's than of hers).  And I wouldn't be unhappy if Beth won either.  I liked Leeann's performance but don't think it's at all in the league of the other four's.

But I can't agree that Lily/Mildred is not enough of a departure from what we've usually seen Kristen do.  Or, even if that were the case, that that would be a good reason to discount what she's doing in On the Twentieth Century.

The last time I saw Kristen Chenoweth, she was playing Fran in Promises, Promises, a character about as far from Lily (or from Mildred) in On the Twentieth Century as you can get.  

Kristen did not succeed as Fran.  Her performance was a colossal failure, and not just because she was arguably miscast.

Nor is, for instance, Glinda at all like Mildred Plotka.  And only superficially does Glinda bear any resemblance to Lily.  

Lily is not a childlike witch who used to be a prom queen and grows to embrace more fulfilling truths about friendship and communal responsibility.  She's something else entirely: a woman who used to be a mouse who learns to play the game of being a self-dramatizing highly theatrical star who can take care of herself in the cutthroat world of show business.

Kristen played both Glinda and, especially, Mildred/Lily extremely well, understood perfectly who these two (and a half) characters were and made them very different and memorable.

Lily is obviously the role Kristen was born to do and she surpasses all expectations.  But that doesn't mean that Lily's like every other woman she's ever played before.

whoops: sorry, KRISTIN!  I can never spell her name right.

Updated On: 5/30/15 at 03:40 PM

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:52pm

I feel that if some think Krisin's lily character is very similar to her past roles, then perhaps they really weren't paying much attention to her other performances. Or maybe perhaps some are just trying to justify why she shouldn't win the tony and this is all the dirt they could muster up.

In any case, I'm positive kristin will win but I would rather see Beth take the gold this year. But that isn't happening. 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 3:57pm

It's just too bad that there isn't a single human being that gives two sh*ts what you think, troll. 

[Kad]

Posted: 5/30/15 at 6:05pm

I have to wonder specifically what people mean by "subdued" and "subtle." Subtle is often used a lot as compliments, not just for Kelli's performance, and that seems incredibly vague to me, a way to praise without exactly saying anything (aside from the fact that it seems like "subtle performance" is an oxymoron in a Broadway house, in which you have to play to the back row).

And moreover, why should subtlety in a musical drama be more award-worthy than broad strokes in a comedy? Twentieth Century is broad-strokes musical comedy, not Wildean comedy of manners. 

I like Kelli O'Hara very much, but I do not find her any more diverse of a musical theatre performer than Kristin. That is not pejorative, by the way. She is always classy, always composed, always has a hint of heartbreak, but is in no way a chameleon. I would love to see her in an earthier, grittier, unrefined, and maybe even crueler, role someday soon-  her equivalent to Audra in Lady Day. A performance like that would be her major, surefire Tony bait.

I feel Chenoweth carries On the Twentieth Century in a way Kelli has never done with a show. Her absence is palpably felt; when she gets onstage it's like an Alka-Seltzer is dropped into the proceedings. Her effervescence carries the show to greater heights, as it should: Lily is a star role. She has the best jokes, best songs, the best moments. Kristin meets all of that with aplomb, and a lot of it is from her natural onstage personality.

I don't think actors always need to, or even should, disappear completely into a role. It's the parts of themselves overlaid and added onto the character as written that make performances exciting. I think O'Hara is carried by the material; I think Chenoweth carries the material with her. Neither is wrong, though I think doing more of the latter often allows for more idiosyncratic and memorable performance.

Our most beloved divas aren't recalled for their subtlety or being subdued.

 

 

 

Updated On: 5/30/15 at 06:05 PM