Tony Awards Scrap Best Replacement Award

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 7:56am

We'll that was a waste of an idea.

From Riedel:

"JONATHAN Pryce, the acclaimed star of "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels," has won the day: The Tony Award for Best Performance in a Re-Created Role, a new prize this year, has been scrapped.

Pryce savaged the replacement Tony last month in The Post after Tony officials announced that, while both he and Harvey Fierstein ("Fiddler on the Roof") had been nominated, no award would be made.

"I found it ultimately insulting to all of us who were eligible," Pryce said at the time.

Fierstein called it a "creepy award" because it was "a backhanded slap at the person you replaced."

The Tony Award Administration Committee last week voted unanimously to abandon it.

"What was intended as something positive turned out to be negative," says a member of the committee. "And the theater does not need a negative award."

The prize was nicknamed the Reba McEntire Award after the country star who took over for Bernadette Peters in "Annie Get Your Gun" in 1999 and elevated a mediocre revival into a smash hit.

Producers thought the possibility of winning a Tony would entice big stars into joining long-running shows. But Tony officials struggled to come up with a mechanism for awarding the prize, finally deciding to leave it up to the 24-member administration committee.

Pryce was furious to learn that only 16 of the 24 administrators bothered to see his performance.

A person on the committee said: "Jonathan's unhappiness certainly had something to do with our decision. His performance was highly valued, and the award should have been presented to him. It was our mistake that it was not."


http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/hail_king_kevin_entertainment_michael_riedel.htm

[mominator]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 7:58am

I just love Homer moments! (D'OH!!)

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:04am

This is going to be a great trivia question in a few years:

"What Tony category never had a winner?

[mominator]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:22am

Agreed Margo, must file this one away!

[dirty rotten guy]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:27am

What a bunch of morons. The create the award in a year than clearly has a standout, but deny him the award. Then they take some heat and say that he should have gotten the award and decide to get rid of it all together!? Priceless.

[bjh2114]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:31am

"What a bunch of morons. The create the award in a year than clearly has a standout, but deny him the award. Then they take some heat and say that he should have gotten the award and decide to get rid of it all together!? Priceless."

At least they learned from the misake...would you rather them continue to screw up from year to year?
Updated On: 6/23/06 at 08:31 AM

[EponineAmneris]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:35am

VERY interesting.

I can see all sides of this and feel it's for the best.

[dirty rotten guy]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:35am

Id rather them learn from their mistake and instead of scraping it all togther, make it like any other category. Then you wouldnt have this kind of drama, but people like Pryce could still be awarded for their fantastic performances. To me, that would make much more sense.

[DreamFlyer22]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:36am

Oh lord. I love it, I love it.

But, yeah. At least they got rid of it NOW. Good idea on paper... no friggin' clue how to implement it in practice...

[bjh2114]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:40am

"Id rather them learn from their mistake and instead of scraping it all togther, make it like any other category. Then you wouldnt have this kind of drama, but people like Pryce could still be awarded for their fantastic performances. To me, that would make much more sense."

I agree, but does this really make them morons? They made a mistake. I think this award was scrapped for various reasons, a big one being Harvey's sentiment about how it felt like a back-handed slap to the person being replaced.

[DG]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:43am

I still think Mr. Pryce looks a little silly through all of this.

[dirty rotten guy]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 8:44am

I think the fact that because THEY made a mistake, they are going to deprive many exceptional replacements of winning a Tony is horrible. To me, yes, that makes them morons.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 9:10am

I still think Mr. Pryce looks a little silly through all of this.

Agreed. Chill, dude. If you want to be an actor to act, then act. If you want to be an actor to win awards, then get a job at Blockbuster.

Updated On: 6/23/06 at 09:10 AM

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 9:13am

I never got the point of this category anyway. The Tony Administration committee has the ability to reward replacements and others any time they want to and have done so in the past (Richard Burton got one for his performance in Equus). They also give out Special Tonys every year -- Sarah Jones got one this year after they decided to eliminate the Unique Theatrical Event category (or whatever it's called). They should simply be more aware of first rate replacements when they come along and more willing to honor truly notable, but otherwise ineligible, performances.

Updated On: 6/23/06 at 09:13 AM

[LifeoftheParty227]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 9:18am

Next year they have announced that they will be implementing an award for Best Standout Ensemble Member - Play and Best Standout Ensemble Member - Musical.



Oh wait, just in. They cancelled it.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 9:18am

I think Pryce comes away as being extremely boorish about all this. I question whether he was in the show long enough (I thought the minimum was six months) to even be eligible. Pearl Bailey got a special Tony Award as a replacement in Hello, Dolly! and maybe that's the way this kind of thing should be handled in the future. To think that every replacement actor would have beem in a snit for not being nominated or winning is more than I can bear

[Craig]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 9:23am

Broadway producers must be groaning a bit. On one side, they lost the ability to entice a performer by dangling that award as a possibility in negotiations and on the flip side, they lost the ability to re-energize their show's marketing by not being able to add the nomination and/or win to their campaign. Which I could see helping an older show boost attendance.

I fully understand both sides of the issues. Just a shame overall.

[Magdalene]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 9:51am

When good ideas go bad.....

[MOXIEINTHECITY]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:08am

If they were going to have an award like that, then why not create an award for Best Performance by an Actor in a Revival. I mean, where does it end?

My feeling is, if they were so great for the role and gave such a wonderful performance...then why didn't they originate the role?

I think they should do an overhaul on all the categories. The nominees this year all had such diffent roles that it was almost impossible to compare them to each other. Seriously, how do you compare John Lloyd Young to Michael Cerveris? (I'm using that as an example. Not looking to start a "he wuz robbed" debate.)

I don't know...I kind of like how the Golden Globes do it...they seperate out Comedy and Drama.
Mixing It Up In The Bedroom

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:12am

My feeling is, if they were so great for the role and gave such a wonderful performance...then why didn't they originate the role?

Oh dear, hun.

[popular_elphie]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:18am

There could be any number of reasons that they didn't originate that role. You cannot use that against it.

If the Tony people wanted to set rules and give out the award, they could've done it. They're really the ones who made it a negative award because they weren't prepared, but announced it anyways.

[jv92]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:20am

This proves that The Tony Awards are awful. They just don't give 'em out like they used to.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:24am

Bleh. It was a really good idea.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 10:36am

What an idiotic fiasco.

I thought the award was a good idea originally, of course I assumed that they had worked out logistics BEFORE announcing the award (I mean, that seems like the logical progression, correct?) but they managed to prove me wrong and with great gusto.

[littlelotte64]

Posted: 6/23/06 at 11:11am

"My feeling is, if they were so great for the role and gave such a wonderful performance...then why didn't they originate the role?"

I completely disagree with this. What if it a fairly long running show and the person they got as a replacement couldn't have possibly been able to do the role when the show began. So you think that if a show is 10 years old, they should get a ten year old to play a role because he'll be fantastic at it in ten years?

im apologize if i sound mean, i just think that it doesnt work that way unless its a really new show. and even then im a little iffy about saying that.