The strangest Tony win- Page 3

[Plum]

Posted: 9/15/04 at 11:58pm

Weak, weak argument, Up In Won. The length of a musical's run is not directly related to its quality. Unless you think Cats is the best musical of all time?

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 12:00am

UpInWon: The argument for Hairspray is also weak. Hairspray is still running because it's entertaining. And it's new, compared to the other two. Lots of people have seen some version of Gypsy and Nine before. Tony Awards don't always reflect the best, but the most marketable...

[uncageg]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 12:06am

UpInWon.....that is something nobody can be sure of unless it is done. And actually, no show is for everyone. We all have different tastes.

Posted: 9/16/04 at 2:34am

"I thought you were going to go rent a video?"

I rented Bonnie and Clyde. Excellent choice, excellent movie. Thanks for asking.

"So, you'd have simply eliminated the category that year, since, according to you, no one in any of the shows apparently deserved the trophy? Fine -- as long as we're clear on that one, now"(?????)

Where in any of my posts did I say I'd have eliminated the category? LOL Never. I said my choice for featured actress would not have come from SJC. You jumped to the knee jerk reaction by assuming I'd have eliminated the category.

"Remember that YOU ARE the one the started a thread about the strangest Tony wins of all time, not any of the rest of us. If you want to now backpedal and say, "oh it's really strange how this woman I don't even remember won, but, then, it's not really important"

Wow. You really aren't reading ANY of my posts. LOL Please point out to me where I have backpedaled in any of my posts? You can't, because I haven't. In fact, I have said over and over again that nothing will change my opinion of Boston's performance because with live performance because there is no ability to go back in time to reassess. Yup, sounds like classic backpeddling to me. Of course, I think you already know that or you wouldn't be attributing phony quotes to me as the main basis for your argument. Since you haven't read any of my previous posts, I'll reiterate that I still stand by my original post that I believe Boston's win was strange and that I didn't understand it. And while it was great to see a Queenie that broke the Mammy stereotype, I remember (based on an old TW interview, circa 1993) that the powers that be were already looking to depart from the Mammy sterotype with or without Boston in the role. Besides even if Boston's departure from the Mammy stereotype was entirely her decision, I don't understand why that's a justification for her win. I also stand by my followup post that her win puzzled me more than it angered me. Your suggestion that disagreeing with a win means one must be angry about it is unsettling. And in my case, it's simply untrue. I disagreed with Avenue Q winning best musical this year but it didn't make me angry. I preferred Caroline but I didn't love it enough to get angry when it didn't win. Same thing with Boston in 1995(?). Maybe ten years from now, I'll start reminiscing again and wonder why Avenue Q won best musical, but I won't be angry about it. That's silly.

".... well, that's fine..... feel free to redefine all of the parameters of the thread (you started it after all)....."

I'm not the one redefining the thread by posting fake quotes or repeatedly reading into things. My original post still stands as it was submitted, unedited and unaltered. Nothing has been redefined. Although several followup posts have managed to stray from the original topic. But I wasn't the one bringing age into the topic, or taking it to a personal level, or stating my opinion as a fact. :)
Updated On: 9/16/04 at 02:34 AM

[alterego]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 2:44am

I can totally understand how Helen Gallagher won for No No Nanette over Elaine Stritch in Company.Most obviously the Lucille character is on all through the show, whereas Stritch pretty much only had one scene and one number.In any other show hers would be thought of as a 'supporting actress' role not 'leading actress'.

I still can't understand how Contact won though.

[Effie]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:46am

re: Harvey F. and Marissa W. winning over Bernadette P. and Antonio B., I would much rather see an actor in an original role win over someone performing in a revival. Unless it's an absolutely amazing re-interpretation of the role.

I'm not an actor, but I assume it's a lot harder to mold a performance while the writer and composer and director are tinkering and finding a show than stepping into something that's already mapped out. And since the re-writing that takes place during the workshop/preview part of the process is influenced by what an actor brings to the table, I think the actors involved should get extra credit.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 5:09am

I have read each and every one of your posts, which is why I am more than a little confused. Apparently, I must go through this very, VERY SLOWLY, or else you cannot follow the logical syllogism at work --

You have said:

"I'm sitting her reading through past Tony winners and I don't even REMEMBER Gretha Boston in Showboat. LOL Was she even in the show? That win totally blows my mind."

And then later....

"And for what it's worth, I wouldnt have given the Tony to any of the women from SJC either."



The nominees for Best Featured Actress in a Musical in 1995 were:

Gretha Boston (Showboat)
Brenda Braxton (Smokey Joe's Cafe)
B.J. Crosby (Smokey Joe's Cafe)
DeLee Lively (Smokey Joe's Cafe)

Those are the four.

Four.

To re-iterate:

You said you "don't even REMEMBER Gretha Boston in Showboat."

You said that you "wouldnt have given the Tony to any of the women from SJC either."

But, those were the ONLY four that were nominated.

Those four.

FOUR.

BUT.

You VERY CLEARLY stated that NOT ONE of those FOUR deserved to win the TONY.

Which is why I THEN STATED (coming the only conclusion a rational, literate, logical, English-speaking human being could come to), that then "you'd have simply eliminated the category that year, since, according to you, no one in any of the shows apparently deserved the trophy."

(Feel free to scroll up and point out if there are any "PHONY QUOTES" in anything that I have said).

You then responded:

"Where in any of my posts did I say I'd have eliminated the category? LOL Never. I said my choice for featured actress would not have come from SJC. You jumped to the knee jerk reaction by assuming I'd have eliminated the category."

"LOL Never" right back at you.....

Please excuse my "knee jerk," but who exactly would you have voted for having eliminated the only four possible choices in the category? Liza Minnelli? Ethel Merman? Idina Menzel (just for fun)? None of the above? (the only apparent option that you have left yourself......).

Updated On: 9/16/04 at 05:09 AM

Posted: 9/16/04 at 5:44am

I see that going slowly didn't help you much. You really don't see any other option?

In my opinion, I didn't feel any of the four nominated actresses that year deserved to win. However, it's true that I believe there was an actress deserving of the award that year. It's just that she wasn't nominated. Just as, imo, Michael Hayden deserved to win lead actor in a musical in 1994, but he didn't get nominated either. Updated On: 9/16/04 at 05:44 AM

[magruder]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 6:16am

Who was the actress?

I understand if you feel that the four nominees for the category weren't the people you would have chosen. But given that they WERE the four nominees, and Boston won, it's just the designation of that win as "strange" that I'm not getting.

[magruder]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 6:42am

Looking at that season, Sunset Blvd. and Smokey Joe's Cafe were the only new musicals, and Show Boat, How to Succeed in Business WIthout Really Trying and Gentlemen Prefer Blondes were the musical revivals.

I recall that Lonette McKee was ineligible to be nominated for her Julie in Show Boat, because she had been nominated in 1983 for the same role.

So, the other supporting women who were not nominated that year were:

Alice Ripley, Sunset Blvd.
Victoria Clark, How to Succeed
Lillias White, How to Succeed
Luba Mason, How to Succeed
Patty Darcy Jones, Smokey Joe's Cafe
Karen Prunzik, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes

EDITED TO INCLUDE: Elaine Stritch (!), Show Boat. Forgot about that snub.

Is it one of those? I'd have nominated Victoria Clark if I had my druthers, but alas...

Updated On: 9/16/04 at 06:42 AM

[Taryn]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 7:20am

I've personally never understood how William Daniels wasn't even NOMINATED for 1776.

[magruder]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 7:42am

Well, that was William Daniels' own doing. He refused his supporting actor in a musical nomination, saying that John Adams is the leading role of 1776. As right as he is about that, had he accepted the nomination, I think it can be safely assumed he would have won, rather than Ron Holgate for the true supporting role of Richard Henry Lee.

[LittleFish8386]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 1:07pm

Moving on...

I really dont think John Lithgow is all the spectacular. I saw him Sweet Smell as well as A Retreat from Moscow, and quite frankly his annoys me. Updated On: 9/16/04 at 01:07 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 1:51pm

well, i DO think age matters when it comes to aesthetics...i shudder to think what i thought was good when i was 17! i'd like to think that your critieria for quality changes as you become exposed to more shows, books,films, etc. but maybe not..

as for tony f***-ups...

La Cage over Sunday
TLK over Ragtime

These two seem the most egregious....and popular on the board

[Derek2]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 2:38pm

Ugh, Nathan Lane winning any award! He is so bad!

Hahaha^Just kidding. Just wanted to make sure u were all still following. I LOVE Nathan

Hmmmmm let me see...

As much as I love "How To Succeed In Business" Im still a bit confused how it won the Pulitzer Prize for drama. I played Bud Frump last year and I loved the show but I dont see how it is so...dramatic? Although it did deserve all of its 7 Tony Awards!

What about "Two Gentleman From Verona"? That won the Tony Award right? Im not saying its a bad show, I havent even seen it but its not well remembered right? Whats it about and what other shows were nominated that year

I was also surprised Wicked lost to Avenue Q this year. I love both shows but you know, it was just the favorite thats why. Not saying I wasnt happy it won, I love both Avenue Q and Wicked, I was just surprised.

Also Godspell and Grease not winning Best Musical, or at least recieving more nominations. Both are somewhat old and still very popular.

Stephen Schwartz winning no awards. Pippn was great!

[FosseBoi]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 2:57pm

Avenue Q winning everything it won. It dident deserve ENYTHING but laughs. WICKED, the best musical EVER, deserved EVERYTHING that AQ won.

[BT]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 2:59pm

Well, this thread just got unsalvagable.

Updated On: 9/16/04 at 02:59 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:00pm

well, FosseBoi, after that highly literate post, I've no doubt the Tony Committee will whisk away all those Ave Q Tonys and give them to their rightful owners! :) We all typo, honey...it's "all good" as the kids say these days

[Derek2]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:01pm

Fosse-that was an "uh oh!"

I love Wicked. It was the best show Ive ever seen. But in history there are many shows that are just as good and some that are better. Classics like WSS and The Music Man. ALso Guys and Dolls and Funny Girl and Hello Dolly and Mame and Fiddler. Not saying I dont love Wicked though...cuz I do....love it that is

[FosseBoi]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:16pm

All I'm saying is that AQ did NOT NOT NOT deserve their Tonys. I dont know if that statement about the Tony commity give those Tonys to WICKED was sarcastic or not, but they REALLY should.

[Love4Cheno]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:18pm

I was wondering when this would become yet another WICKED THE BEST MUSICAL EVER! vs. WICKED SUCKS!

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:19pm

it was sarcastic, FosseBoi; just keep in mind, the Tonys are voted on by people who often have a financial stake in the outcome--Ave Q launched an aggressive campaign to win Best Musical, and since Wicked's national tour was secured and marketed well before the Tonys, i'm sure alot of voters wanted to boost a little show that might have died off in NYC with no hope of a tour or a Vegas gig...that's all...and everyone loves an underdog!

[wickedfan]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 3:22pm

I'm glad Avenue Q won. I love Wicked. But Avenue Q deserved their Tonys just as much as Wicked did. Probably more. Anyways it showed that the underdog CAN win, and I'm glad for that.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 4:13pm

"Okay! Out of Gypsy, Hairspray and Nine, can you tell which ONE of those THREE is the only one of the three remaining on Broadway? Coincidence it won everything? I think NOT!"

That's not really a valid argument. It would be if the category being contested were Best Musical, but if you think the length of a run hinges on the Tonys for Best Actor/Actress, then it would stand that Hairspray would have closed after Marissa and Harvey's departures.

[BWayBoy88]

Posted: 9/16/04 at 5:22pm

As much as I love Pippin(it is one of my favorite shows) I dont think Stephen Schwartz stood a chance against Sondheim that year.