one Annie vs. four Matildas?

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 1/23/13 at 8:49pm

So I'm sure this has been discussed before (I'm sorry, I couldn't find any of the old threads) but I was wondering why there are four girls playing the role of Matilda, and only one is needed for the role of Annie. Is Matilda that exhausting of a part? The dancing in Billy Elliot was obviously very intense; no one would expect one child to perform that role eight times a week. But with Matilda dancing doesn't seem to be a factor. Is there an equity rule about age and how many shows a child can perform?

Sorry if this is at all confusing; I've been wondering this for a while. While I have yet to see Matilda, I hope the Matildas aren't a shoe in for the Tony since they will only be performing half the shows a week compared to their fellow nominees, which just does not seem fair.

[Cupid Boy2]

Posted: 1/23/13 at 8:54pm

I see where you're coming from. However, based upon things I've heard, it doesn't seem that Lilla Crawford (Annie) typically performs all 8 eight shows a week. She has two standbys who seem to go on for her often. I could be under the wrong impression, though.

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 1/23/13 at 8:58pm

I think it had to do with British child labor laws. In London they HAD to split the role and I think the producers are just carrying that over, especially to reduce the "you have to see THIS girl!"

I could also be wrong, but isn't Matilda supposed to be in kindergarten? Annie is usually 10-13.

[Jonwo]

Posted: 1/23/13 at 9:13pm

Billy Elliot did it as well but the role of Billy is too demanding to be done by one child eight shows a week, I think Mary Poppins has 6 children alternating the roles of Michael and Jane while Newsies has two children who alternate the role of Les, not sure on The Lion King but I assume they have more than one Young Simba and Nala.

[Nickhutson]

Posted: 1/24/13 at 2:18am

It's recognised that Matilda is the most demanding child role ever written, but it's more to do with the UK Labour laws.

[TheatreKid3]

Posted: 1/24/13 at 11:19am

No offense to the Matildas, but they've got nothing on the difficulty and demands of the kids who play Billy Elliot. Just by shear training required I think it is safe to say Billy is a much more demanding role.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 1/24/13 at 11:28am

I saw MATILDA in London, and was sure that the role was going to be split between two actresses here in the States.

I know the UK child labor laws are strict, which is why four actresses are required. But I didn't think the part was overly taxing to the point of needing four actresses.

[MusicalTheatreGeek2]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 3:43am

It is worth pointing out that the original Billy's were 3-4 years older than the original Matilda's! And at various points there have been 3 Matilda's when contracts have ended, but equally for a while there was 5! I think they just like having 4 so they don't have to rehearse any standbys!

Updated On: 1/25/13 at 03:43 AM

[SoonerOrLater]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 5:10am

I think it was a factor with not needing standbys AND having enough to cover the role. So if child labour laws here meant they needed 3 they've stuck with 4 just to always be covered and cut the work of needing the standbys (as there's always one of the regulars in the building on standby)

I haven't seen the show so can't comment on how demanding it is, but I think it is also an age factor, them being younger than the Billy's or Annies.

[susie777]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 8:00am

No matter how old the child is the youngest that can be on Broadway is 6 yo by law. Yes a child can perform 8 shows a week. It's quite taxing the younger the child. The size of the role is also important. A small role still demands the same hours but not the same tax on the body.

[jaqs]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 8:37am

In london we have multiple Debbies, Michaels and Ballet girls to comply with the limit on hours a child can work.

It always stands out more to have multiples of kids because they dont tend to understudy from other roles as adults do.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 12:29pm

It's recognised that Matilda is the most demanding child role ever written

Recognized by whom?

[himself]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 1:29pm

There's much discussion of labors laws and comparison to Billy Elliot and Annie.
1. There requirement in the US for child performances is more relaxed than UK.
2. The performers in both the aforementioned shows are older.
3. Sadly, they raised the keys for Annie and it was already tough.
4. The girls in Matilda are 10.
5. The score is TOUGH and intense.
6. I'm not sure how any comparison can be made to a show you've never seen...unless you saw it in London...

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 2:57pm

I saw it in London.

The score to what is tough and intense? MATILDA? Certainly not as intense as the role of Annie or Mary Lennox.

[AJ5]

Posted: 4/5/20 at 7:25pm

Mister Matt said: "It's recognised that Matilda is the most demanding child role ever written

Recognized by whom?"

 

Well, though it is not as demanding as Billy Elliot, Matilda has a lot of lines and as a whole Matilda commands the stage for around 1 hour and 35 minutes. Imagine doing that for two matinees every Saturday and Sunday, while also being nine???

Updated On: 4/5/20 at 07:25 PM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 4/5/20 at 8:56pm

AJ - welcome to the boards, but this thread is over 7 years old.

[AJ5]

Posted: 4/5/20 at 11:11pm

dramamama611 said: "AJ - welcome to the boards, but this thread is over 7 years old."


Thank you! And yeah, I know. I just wanted to put my opinion out there. Sorry for any inconvenience!

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 9:04am

There ain't nothing else to talk about except show closures, so it was refreshing to read a little back and forth from back in the day when we actually had something to talk about. 

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 9:18am

And yes, the British child labor laws are different than the United States. When Andrea McArdle played Annie on the West End in 1978 (after Broadway), she alternated the role with Ann-Marie Gwatkin, whereas on Broadway she had the standard adult 8 performances a week schedule.

[MollyJeanneMusic]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 9:25am

It's always fascinating with me to see how different shows utilize their child actors.  I read somewhere that Sarah Charles Lewis (Winnie Foster in Tuck Everlasting) had understudies, but they never had a chance to go on before the show closed, and she therefore did all eight performances every week.  I wouldn't call Winnie the most demanding child role ever, but "Good Girl Winnie Foster" is a pretty tough song to sing, especially when your voice is in that in-between phase when it's starting to change but hasn't quite changed yet.  Yet Lulu in Waitress is on stage for maybe five minutes and has at least two actresses at any given time.

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 9:46am

" AJ - welcome to the boards, but this thread is over 7 years old "

So what, is there a law against revisiting a topic?  - wow.

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 1:46pm

" Thank you! And yeah, I know. I just wanted to put my opinion out there. Sorry for any inconvenience! "

It is no problem and feel free to revisit any thread you like. There are a few "Broadway Legends" here who love to tell people what they should on on this board.  Ever wonder why they even read your post if this was such old news -lol.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 2:23pm

yankeefan7 said: "" AJ - welcome to the boards, but this thread is over 7 years old "

So what, is there a law against revisiting a topic? - wow."

Typically speaking, it is considered poor etiquette to post in a long dead thread. This act is called necroposting. Many boards have policies against it, and some actually make it impossible to do so by archiving the post, thus making it a "read only" entry.

[darquegk]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 4:20pm

The four Matildas would clearly beat the crap out of the one Annie. Easy. Next question?

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/6/20 at 7:02pm

" Typically speaking, it is considered poor etiquette to post in a long dead thread. This act is called necroposting. Many boards have policies against it, and some actually make it impossible to do so by archiving the post, thus making it a "read only" entry. "

If it is poor etiquette like you said than it should be archived and read only. This poster was brand new to the board and right off that bat gets admonished for heaven forbid posting something on thread that still accepts new posts. Other posters had no problem with new post on this long "dead" thread. I will be honest and say I did not know anything about necroposting and I could have made the same "mistake". IMO don't make snarky remark to the poster, make it to the mods of this board.