no noms for Odd Couple?

[mrslovett7]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:36pm

I'm not complaing, I haven't even seen it yet. I'm just surprised as seeing it's such a big name play and has some huge names in it.

Was there a reason why it didn't get nominated, did it not qualify or something?

[Fabrizio2]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:37pm

I don't think it was that good.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:37pm

Well, the ensemble of the cast was far from impressive, the show is highly outdated, and the direction was nothing revolutionary or new. That said, I still enjoyed it.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:38pm

A lot of the "star" shows got snubbed.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:39pm

'Twas a horrible, severely miscast production.

[mabel]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:40pm

I didn't care for it either. I know the general consensus seems to be kind of blech about it, but I'm thinking it's gone a bit downhill lately. The replacement for Garrett was terrible (just a bad Brad impression) and Matthew Broderick was pretty terrible (a HUGE disappointment for me, as I was really looking forward to finally seeing him in a show).

[Mr. Tuttle]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:41pm

If you saw this couple, you would know why no noms.

[mabel]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:41pm

Yankeefan, I think they totally could have kept the cast...imho, it would have been infinitely more interesting to have Lane/Broderick switch their roles (either permanently or do a PSH/JCR True West bit and switch every other show). As is though, it just seemed like a tired rehashing of The Producers.

[bially082]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:43pm

Yeah the cast sucked! I've seen better acting from ensemble characters from high school kids! Lane wasn't bad, but not great. Broderick was too mousey. I can't believe that one of the guys in the poker group has won a tony award, he was awful. They all were. The real star of that show was the set. I LOVED the set. I would have liked to have seen it get nominated.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:46pm

Way to go, Mantello.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 7:58pm

Not to mention Lane, Broderick and Mantello all have two Tonys already and have done better work in the past.

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 8:01pm

What does Broderick have 2 Tonys for?

[Horton]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 8:57pm

Matthew has tonys for
Brighton Beach Memoirs & How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying

[sondwisenheimer]

Posted: 5/16/06 at 10:59pm

I completely agree that it would have been better to have the leads alternate roles. It may not have saved this surprisingly uninspired production, but it would have given it at least one interesting slant.

When the project was first announced, the first thing anybody asked was, "Which one's playing Felix and which one's playing Oscar?"

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 2:07am

Im glad these stars didn't get nominated, i was almost positive that Julia Roberts was going to be nominated just because they wanted her to be at the Tonys ceremony.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 3:35am

They could still ask Julia to present. She is on Broadway and her show was nominated for some things. A few years ago, Edie Falco presented even though her work in Frankie and Johnny in the Clair de Lune was snubbed that year. She even made a joke about it, something like, "It is so great to be presenting here at the Tony Awards, where it is an honor just to be nominated. *deadpan*" It was hilarious. If Christina Applegate weren't nominated last year, I'm sure they would still ask her to present anyway. So I think Julia might show up. We'll see.

~Steven

[Taryn2]

Posted: 5/17/06 at 5:39pm

I read a reveiw in dramatist magazine that accused Matthew broderick of playing the same character he did in the producers. It said the intermission was put in the wrong place and completely disrupted the flow of the show. Allthogether it was just a big mess.