Should've Won the Tony

I love the Tony Awards. Tony Sunday is basically a national holiday to me, and every year I devote dozens of blog posts to analyzing the various races and predicting likely winners. As I point out every year, the person or production that wins the Tony is not always the most deserving, but the right combination of merit, proper positioning, and backstage politics. As with any artistic award (Oscars, Emmys, etc.) we're all at least subconsciously aware of these other factors, and in the grand scheme of things winning doesn't necessarily matter or affect career opportunities. But even knowing all that, the fact remains that Tonys are the most prestigious award in the industry, and it is just irksome when they get things wrong!

Below are a few of the more egregious oversights in the Tony Awards' 66 year history, people and productions that really deserved to win that damn spinning statuette. I want to make very clear that I am not saying the actual winner in each of these races was undeserving. Of all the Tony winning performances and productions I've been lucky enough to witness, I would be hard-pressed to name one that I thought was unforgivably awful. But if I could magically go back in time and alter the outcome of past Tony races, these nominees would be on the top of my list.

West Side Story for Best Musical (1958)

The original cast of the landmark 1957 musical West Side Story, arguably one of the most famous and beloved stage shows in existence.

Actual Winner: The Music Man

Meredith Wilson's The Music Man has many passionate fans, although I am not among them. In each of the many productions I've seen, I've always found Wilson's magnum opus to be a slight work, overlong and lacking in charm, but I will concede that I am in the clear minority and maybe I'm missing something. However, I bet all but the most diehard Music Man fans would hesitate to say the show is unequivocally better than the Arthur Laurence-Leonard Bernstein-Stephen Sondheim masterpiece, one of the most important and beloved shows in the entire musical theatre cannon. West Side Story rewrote the rules for what a musical could do, the types of issues it could tackle, and integrated dance into the story better than almost any musical before or since. Almost 60 years after its premiere, it still resonates with audiences around the world as a towering achievement in dramatic storytelling.


Ragtime for Best Musical (1998)

Audra McDonald and Brian Stokes Mitchell in the near-legendary original Broadway production of Ragtime.

Actual Winner: The Lion King

To be fair, I understand why Tony voters chose The Lion King for Best Musical. Julie Taymor's eye-popping production is one of the seminal artistic achievements of the past 20 years, despite a pedestrian book and songs that range from stellar ("Circle of Life") to painful ("Chow Down"). Ragtime justifiably won Best Book and Score, which meant the only way to honor The Lion King as a whole was to give the show a Best Musical trophy. But just because I understand why the production won doesn't mean I have to agree, because Ragtime is a near-perfect show that also boasts one of the all-time great original casts. In addition to being unabashedly gorgeous musically, the show's observations about race, human nature, and the enduring spirit of the American dream make it a much richer piece that continually reveals new nuances during each subsequent production. The Lion King without Taymor's staging is just the animated film needlessly padded out; Ragtime is a moving and insightful piece no matter who is at the helm, and that is why it deserved a Best Musical win.


Kelli O'Hara in The Bridges of Madison County for Best Actress in a Musical (2014)

Kelli O'Hara in the sublime, underappreciated The Bridges of Madison County.

Actual Winner: Jessie Mueller for Beautiful

Jessie Mueller is a lovely individual who has continually proven herself both talented and versatile; she deserves a long and fruitful career filled with accolades, including a Tony Award or two. That said, she *stole* Kelli O'Hara's long deserved Best Actress statuette for what is sure to go down as one the golden-voiced soprano's greatest performances, Francesca in Jason Robert Brown's The Bridges of Madison County. Setting aside the fact that it is absolutely ludicrous the multitalented O'Hara is still Tony-less after five nominations in the past decade, her transcendent work in this sweeping musical drama was the kind of performance legends are made of. When people look back at her career many years from now, this will be the performance people won't believe she didn't win for, in the same way many people just assume Bernadette Peters won for Sunday in the Park with George (Peters lost to Chita Rivera in The Rink). The one small piece of solace to be found in this situation is that O'Hara publicly stated that if she couldn't win, she was rooting for Mueller.


Danny Burstein in Follies for Best Actor in a Musical (2012)

Danny Burstein during the transcendent "Loveland Sequence" during the most recent Broadway revival of Follies.

Actual Winner: Steve Kazee for Once

Like with O'Hara, the fact that Danny Burstein doesn't already have a Tony Award is one of the great oversights of the Tony Awards' past ten years. One of our greatest character actors, Burstein is equally at home in musicals and plays, whether they are comedic or dramatic, and Follies is arguably the greatest showcase he has ever had. Burstein took the least interesting of Sondheim's four leads and made him a fascinatingly complex and tragic character who remains unable to impress the one woman he truly loves. Burstein's performance was largely on the fringes during the musical's first act, but the one-two punch of "The Right Girl" and "The God-Why-Don't-You-Love-Me Blues" in Act II was revelatory for both the character and the production. Steve Kazee was perfectly charming (if a bit shout-y) as the lovelorn Guy in Once, but his performance was ultimately a lot less interesting and layered than Burstein's superlative work.


While I've got plenty more beef to pick with the Tony committee, my blood's starting to boil, so perhaps I should take a break for now. As stated in the intro, none of this is meant to imply that the actual winners were bad (although I really do hate The Music Man), just that the mentioned productions and performers were ultimately more deserving of Broadway's highest honor.

My Top 10 Theatre Experiences: Part 2

A few weeks ago, I started to publish a list of my Top 10 theatrical experiences of all time.  This list includes the shows that have had a profound impact on my theatre-going life, and the ones that have remained the most vivid in my memory since initially seeing them.  You can read the first article for a more thorough breakdown of the criteria I've used, but basically for a show to make the list it had to play Broadway and be solid from top to bottom (excellent star turns in mediocre shows have been left off).  And the list is alphabetical, because coming up with a numbered ranking for these 10 shows would just be too hard.

So picking up where I left off:

The Book of Mormon

Andrew Rannells and the original Broadway cast of The Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon holds a distinction that I do not give out lightly; despite my hesitancy to rank the shows on this list, almost 3 years after my first viewing I can safely say that The Book of Mormon is the best night I've ever spent in the theatre.  The energy inside the theatre was palpable during the early March preview I attended back in 2011; though highly anticipated, the show was shrouded in secrecy.  The producers had only released four production stills, there was no video or audio available, and the program purposefully lacked a song list or even a basic scene breakdown.  None of us quite knew what we were getting into, and the experience was all the better for it.

As a huge fan of South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut (easily among my favorite films of all time), I had enormous expectations for this show, and it handily exceeded every one of them.  By the end of the opening number I was grinning from ear to ear, and soon after that I was howling with laughter.  The show was every bit as gleefully offensive as you could imagine, and crossed a couple of boundaries even I wasn't sure they were allowed to.  And yet the show was so hilarious, and more importantly so heartfelt, that it didn't matter.  The show had a soul, and a soul that not only respected but embraced the traditions of the glitzy book musicals of days past.  There are rousing production numbers, comic duets, and second act power ballads that manage to both gently mock the absurdity of such things while at the same time being excellent examples of those troupes.

Simply put, The Book of Mormon is one of the best constructed musicals of the new millennium, as well as one of the funniest.  But what made this experience truly transcendent for me was the absolutely extraordinary original cast.  Everyone, from the principals to the ensemble members, was an extremely talented triple threat with spot-on comic timing and amazing chemistry.  While Josh Gad was rightly praised for his scenery chewing turn as the hopelessly awkward Elder Cunningham, I think Andrew Rannells' supremely smug Elder Price was the show's true revelation.  Rannells managed to play straight man to Gad's comic genius while remaining hilarious in his own right, and turned what could have been a thoroughly off-putting character into a beacon of charisma and old-school showmanship.  (Also, Rannells' pop-tenor is nearly flawless.)  Tony-winner Nikki M. James provided the show's heart and soul as Ugandan tribeswoman Nabalungi, and Rory O'Malley led one of this decade's great production numbers with his showstopping "Turn It Off" (which incidentally includes my favorite sight gag in the entire show, and one that made me audibly gasp in delight when I first saw it).

The Book of Mormon is rightfully one of the hottest tickets in town, commanding upwards of $450 per ticket for the premium seats.  It is the only show running I would even consider paying that much money for, and I will continue to recommend it to any and everyone who will listen.

Follies (2011 Revival)

The "Loveland" sequence from the 2011 revival of Follies

Stephen Sondheim's utter mastery of the musical theatre form is sometimes taken for granted, and I often call him the Shakespeare of the musical stage.  Like the Bard, Sondheim's works have the remarkable ability to reveal new facets of meaning with each subsequent viewing, and have proven able to withstand a wide array of reimaginings and concept-based stagings.  But sometimes, as the breathtaking 2011 revival of Follies proved, all you need is to do the show the way it was written.  Grandly opulent and utterly heartbreaking, this revival took a show I had always found intriguing and skyrocketed it up my personal list to the point where I consider it one of the finest musicals ever created.

The show, centered around the reunion of the last remaining performers of a Ziegfeld Follies-esque spectacle, is simultaneously about nothing and everything.  There is very little plot, and yet over the course of the evening the show manages to make deeply poignant observations about growing older and regret while still celebrating the vast amount of beauty to be found in life.  Sondheim's score is a parade of pastiches that include some of the greatest ballads ever written, including cabaret standards like "I'm Still Here" and "Losing My Mind."  The most expensive musical ever produced at the time of its original premiere, Follies requires an elaborate physical production and enormous cast, and this revival hit both of those elements out of the park.

Bernadette Peters' performance as Sally Durante-Plummer is probably one of the more divisive in recent Broadway history; I personally loved her, and found her character's slow unraveling to be a fascinating portrait of the cost of unmet ambitions.  But nobody could argue with the stunning brilliance of her onstage husband Danny Burstein, who was a revelation as Buddy Plummer and robbed (ROBBED!) of a justly deserved Tony Award.  And Jan Maxwell's pitch-perfect embodiment of the jaded, bitter Phyllis Rogers-Stone was such a masterclass in musical theatre acting that I can still vividly recall her two big numbers ("Could I Leave You?" and "The Story of Lucy and Jessie").  The only reason I am okay with her not winning a long-overdue Tony is because that year's victor was Audra McDonald for Porgy and Bess, which was one step beyond perfection.

Finally, Follies has what may be one of the most thrilling theatrical climaxes of any musical I've ever seen.  Watching the main quartet of characters finally reach their breaking point, triggering the 20-minute long "Loveland" sequence in which each character is deconstructed in an elaborately-staged Follies-style production umber, had me on the edge of my seat in the way few shows ever had.  I can still see that initial reveal, with the downstage drop curtain falling to floor to reveal the dazzling Loveland set, as if it had happened this morning.


That's enough for today.  Hopefully I will be a little more regular on the blog postings, but even if it takes a while I promise the rest of this list is coming!

2012 Tony Predictions - Best Revival

Now that we’ve discussed the creative categories and the acting nominees, all that’s left to predict are the production awards.  These awards are arguably the most prestigious, as theatre is a collaborative medium and a production win is an acknowledgement of excellent in all aspects of a particular show.  As I prepare to predict the season’s best revivals, please keep in mind my two caveats: 1) I have not necessarily seen all of the nominated productions; and 2) I am predicting who will win, which is not necessarily the same as who should win.  Any discrepancies in the two will be discussed in the body of the article.

Best Revival of a Play

Nominees:  Death of a Salesman, The Best Man, Master Class, Wit

Master Class is an extreme long shot in this category, as it opened and closed during the summer of 2011.  Tony voters have notoriously short memories, and given the sheer number of shows that have opened since then, Master Class should consider itself lucky for having been nominated at all.  It is particularly telling that the production’s star, Tyne Daly, failed to receive a Best Actress nomination despite her much ballyhooed turn as opera diva Maria Callas in a piece that is essentially a one woman show with interruptions. 

Wit suffers from a less severe version of the same problem.  Historically, winning a Best Revival trophy has been very difficult when a show isn’t being performed nightly to remind voters how good it is, and Wit has been closed for months.  Cynthia Nixon’s Best Actress nomination proves the show is still present in people’s minds, but despite being highly regarded I don’t think the production as a whole made enough of an impression to secure a Best Revival win.

The Best Man has the distinction of being the only nominated revival that is still running, an invaluable asset in any Tony race.  Unfortunately, it also received the least encouraging reviews of the bunch.  While many critics praised the star-studded cast, they found the show itself a tad slow, indicating that for whatever reason the individual performances aren’t adding up to a satisfying whole.  A show perceived as a disappointment, whether due to unreasonably high expectations or actual shortcomings, rarely wins the big awards.

I think Death of a Salesman will easily win Best Revival tonight.  The play is an acknowledged masterpiece, and you couldn’t ask for much better material.  But rather than rest on their laurels, Mike Nichols and his entire team pushed themselves to deliver the most universally praised revival of the year.  The presence of Oscar-winner Phillip Seymour Hoffman made the show a box office bonanza, and the level of buzz surrounding the production was deafening.  Critical acclaim, a towering central performance by an A-list celebrity, and box office success amount to a Tony-winning trifecta, and I would be shocked to see anything other than Salesman win this award.

Will and Should Win:  Death of a Salesman

Best Revival of a Musical

Nominees:  Evita, Follies, Porgy and Bess, Jesus Christ Superstar

The Tonys have often been accused of being too commercially-minded, favoring box office success over artistic merit.  While there is certainly some truth to this (producers of touring houses make up a large percentage of Tony voters, and they want to be able to book Tony-winning shows that will also make them lots of money), the revival categories seem to be less prone to this phenomenon.  That is why I think despite Evita’s enormous financial success, it has very little chance of winning the big prize.  This current revival has been unfavorably compared to memories of the original 1979 production.  Leading lady Elena Roger has proven to be a divisive Eva, and I would agree with the many audience members who feel her voice simply isn’t up to the challenge of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s demanding score.  Despite a visually stunning physical production and top-notch direction by Michael Grandage, this Evita lacks spark, and has been deemed a disappointment by many of the show’s fans.

The other Lloyd Webber revival of the season, Jesus Christ Superstar, is a much stronger contender.  Though Superstar is far inferior to Evita as a piece of musical theatre writing, director Des McAnuff and his team have polished it to a high gloss.  The end result, which wisely emphasizes the pseudo-love triangle between Jesus, Judas, and Mary, is so good that it managed to win me over despite my deep dislike of Lloyd Webber in general and Superstar in particular.  It helps that McAnuff cast leads that are actually capable of handling the insane vocal demands of the score, but Superstar’s low number of overall nominations indicates it will have a tough time winning against its stiff competition.

The real contenders here are Follies and Porgy and Bess, two fantastic shows which have received first rate productions.  The Stephen Sondheim revival boasted an impeccable cast, a sumptuous physical production and excellent direction, and I truly believe that it will be talked about for years to come as a definitive version of that landmark show.  While there is much to love about Porgy, including an astounding central performance by the incomparable Audra McDonald, purists have been vocally upset about director Diane Paulus’ retooling of a four hour opera into a two-and-a-half hour musical.  Even though Porgy is still running (a major advantage for any Tony-nominated production), I expect the ire over Paulus’ judicious cuts to keep it from taking the big prize, which is as it should be.  Follies was a truly transcendent theatrical experience, and deserves to be recognized as the best revival of the season.

Will and Should Win:  Follies

The only races left to predict are the two biggest, Best Play and Best Musical.  Stay tuned for my thoughts on each, and catch up on the rest of my Tony predictions in the meantime:

Best Actor

Best Actress
Best Featured Actor
Best Featured Actress
Best Book and Score
Best Direction and Choreography

2012 Tony Predictions: Best Actress

Now we arrive at the two most competitive categories of the year:  Best Actress in a Play and Best Actress in a Musical.  With so many sterling performances by Broadway’s leading ladies this year, choosing just one seems criminal, but I will do my best.  Please keep in mind my two caveats:  1) I have not seen all of the nominees (at least in the play categories); and 2) Who will win is not necessarily the same as who should win, a difference I will explain in more detail throughout the body of the article.

Best Actress in a Play

Nominees:  Nina Arianda, Venus in Fur; Tracie Bennett, End of the Rainbow; Stockard Channing, Other Desert Cities; Linda Lavin, The Lyons; Cynthia Nixon, Wit

Where do I even begin?  All five of these women gave critically lauded performances in well-reviewed productions, meaning the eventual winner will be determined as much by buzz as actual merit.  While all of the nominees are Tony-worthy, I think Cynthia Nixon has the least chance of winning.  Yes, critics adored Nixon’s turn as a college professor with terminal cancer, and the same role won actress Kathleen Chalfant every acting prize she was eligible for when Wit premiered Off-Broadway 14 years ago.  But with her show now closed, Nixon doesn’t have the chance to remind Tony voters how well she stacks up against the competition.

Linda Lavin and Nina Arianda have the advantage of being in currently running plays, but they somehow haven’t amassed the same level of buzz as their competition.  Lavin famously passed on the Broadway transfers of both Follies and Other Desert Cities in order to do The Lyons, and despite her tour de force performance the show hasn’t really caught on with critics or audiences.  Nina Arianda is two for two when it comes to Tony nods (she was also nominated for her Broadway debut last year), but Venus in Fur opened so long ago that I fear she’ll be forgotten despite Venus being in the running for Best Play.  She could be a dark horse candidate, but by definition dark horses are not the most likely winners.

The real contenders are Tracie Bennett and Stockard Channing, who are both giving the type of over the top diva performances Tony voters love.  Channing finds every shade imaginable in her domineering mother character from Other Desert Cities, and for much of the season was considered the front runner for this award.  But then Tracie Bennett arrived and became the talk of the town for her performance as a drug-addled, aging Judy Garland in End of the Rainbow.  Convincingly portraying a beloved icon with such ardent fans is no small feat, and since she utterly dominates Rainbow (as opposed to the more ensemble-oriented Other Desert Cities), I think the Best Actress trophy is Bennett’s to lose.  I’ll be rooting for Arianda, who has twice proven she is an extraordinary talent and a superstar in the making, but the smart money is on Bennett.

Will Win:  Tracie Bennett, End of the Rainbow

Should Win:  Nina Arianda, Venus in Fur

Best Actress in a Musical

Nominees:  Jan Maxwell, Follies; Audra McDonald, Porgy and Bess; Cristin Milioti, Once; Kelli O’Hara, Nice Work If You Can Get It; Laura Osnes, Bonnie & Clyde

There is no doubt in my mind Kelli O’Hara, with her versatility and crystal-clear singing voice, will eventually win herself a Tony.  But it won’t be for Nice Work If You Can Get It, an underwhelming musical that is by no means her best work.  Similarly, if Laura Osnes continues to improve the way she has since getting her big break in the last Grease revival, she will someday find herself in possession of the coveted statuette.  But with Bonnie & Clyde unfairly trounced by critics and having shuttered ages ago, Osnes is also effectively out of the running.

The remaining three contenders have each done fantastic work this season, and a convincing argument could be made for any one of them to win Best Actress.  Ultimately, I think being a first-time nominee will keep the sensational Cristin Milioti from winning, with the Tony voters reasoning that she has plenty of time left to win the award.  That is not a knock against her amazing performance in Once; I would argue she is the best thing about that incredibly strong show.

But perennial Tony favorites Audra McDonald and Jan Maxwell have both exceeded all possible expectations this year.  Jan Maxwell was a revelation in Follies, stopping the show twice with her two big numbers.  She made the acerbic Phyllis endlessly compelling, slowly stripping away character’s icy veneer to reveal the damaged soul underneath.  It was a master class in musical theatre acting, and combined with the fact that this four-time nominee has never won, that makes her the one the beat in many people’s eyes.

Meanwhile Audra McDonald, the universally beloved singing actress, has one Tony for each of Maxwell’s nominations.  It would be perfectly logically for the Tony voters to spread the wealth, especially since we all knew McDonald would be excellent in Porgy and Bess, a role she was born to play.  But it is impossible to comprehend just how amazing her Bess is without seeing it, and I suspect even her biggest fans would find themselves surprised by what a masterful portrayal it is.  McDonald conveys more with her posture and body language than most actresses can in an entire song, and some of the most riveting moments in Porgy are the dialogue-free scenes where you watch Bess’ inner struggle to overcome her self-destructive tendencies.  And when McDonald does sing, she achieves such operatic heights of vocal technique and emotion that it is truly transcendent.

I’ve been agonizing over which actress is more deserving for months, and in many ways the race is still too close to call.  But call it I must, and my gut is favoring McDonald, despite her almost unprecedented four previous wins.  Unlike Maxwell, whose show closed in January, McDonald is still performing nightly and therefore reminding the Tony voters of her nearly unmatched talent.  Her Bess is one for the ages, and probably her best work to date, an especially high compliment when those four other Tony Awards are taken into consideration.  But if ever there was a tie for Best Actress, this would be the year.

Will Win:  Audra McDonald, Porgy and Bess

Should Win:  Audra McDonald AND Jan Maxwell (they are both perfection)

Check back soon for my Best Actor predictions.  Until then, catch up on my previous Tony articles:

Best Featured Actor

Best Featured Actress
Best Score and Book
Best Direction and Choreography

Tony Watch: Assessing the Fall Season Part 1

One lady who should really start shopping for her Tony night gown

It’s never too early to talk about the Tony Awards.  Ever.  Hell, sometimes it can be more fun to discuss them months in advance, when almost any prediction is pure speculation.  And while I won’t go so far as discussing productions and performances that have yet to open, I thought this mid-winter lull was the perfect time to reflect on those shows that have already opened.  So read on for my completely biased, 100% speculative opinion on who is and isn’t a contender for a nomination this year.

Let’s start at the very beginning (a very good place to start, I’m told), and run through this year’s Broadway shows in chronological order:

Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark

In a turn of events that positively sickens me, this show is actually in a good position to score some Tony love.  This is not due to any actual merit in the production (it’s terrible, and earned my Worst of 2011 award), but because of Tony politics.  You see, a large number of Tony voters are producers, either for Broadway or touring houses, and they tend to favor shows with wide commercial appeal.  Having awards to brag about helps with advertising, and a Best Musical win has been proven to boast almost any show’s box office.  With an average of $1.5 million in weekly grosses, Spider-Man’s definitely has monetary appeal, and it’s the only new musical still running after this fall’s flops.  Since none of the new musicals this spring are surefire critical or commercial hits, Spider-Man could end up with a Best Musical nod, further signifying that the Mayans were right about the world ending this year.

On the positive side, I can’t imagine it scoring any writing nominations (it is much easier for a short-lived show to get nominated in the Score and Book categories).  And while I found the design aspects of the production disappointing given the amount of money and hype involved with the show, I wouldn’t be offended to see it nominated for Scenic or Costume Design.  And since the Best Supporting Actor in a Musical category is pretty slim pickings thus far, Patrick Page could find himself nominated for being easily the show’s strongest asset.

Master Class

Yes, this show happened.  It even got pretty good reviews.  But it closed so long ago, and there are many more plays opening between now and Tony time.  It may manage to make it onto the Best Play Revival list, and leading lady Tyne Daly could conceivable get a Best Actress nomination.  But with so many plays premiering this season, such recognition seems unlikely.

Follies

Follies will be a major presence at this year’s Tony Awards.  That isn’t mere speculation, it’s fact.  The toast of the fall season and an event musical for the Broadway community, there was such overwhelming love of both the show and this production in particular that I can’t imagine it not getting a bevy of nominations.  It’s a lock for Best Revival, leaving only three slots up for grabs in that category.  It will also end up in one or more design categories (if it only gets one design nod, my money is on the costumes).  For so expertly realizing such a tricky piece, director Eric Schaeffer really deserves a directing nod, and “Who’s That Woman” (the mirror number) should be enough to net Warren Carlyle a Best Choreography nomination on its own.

Oddly enough, the show’s greatest potential of being snubbed comes in the acting categories.  With such a uniformly excellent cast, and many of them competing against one another, someone will surely get overlooked.  Of the four leads, I would say Rob Raines is the weakest, and he was still wonderful.  Although I would never underestimate the Broadway community’s love of Bernadette Peters, her take on Sally has proven oddly divisive and may keep her from being a strong contender in a year when Best Actress in a Musical is likely to be a bloodbath (we’ll see why a bit later).

However, there are two performers who so deserve acting recognition that if either one is omitted, you can expect a lengthy blog entry from me decrying how wrong the Tony voters got it.  Jan Maxwell was utterly sensational as Phyllis, and if her universally praised performance doesn’t warrant one of the five Best Actress slots I don’t know what does.  And Danny Burstein, who was positively revelatory as Buddy Plummer, is not only a shoe-in for a Best Actor nomination, but at this early date is the man to beat.

Man and Boy

Did you remember that this early fall revival even happened?  Probably not, which tells you just about everything you need to know as far as its Tony chances are concerned.  Three-time Tony-winner Frank Langella is so adored by critics that he may end up with a Best Actor nomination, but that is Man and Boy’s only shot at Tony gold.

The Mountaintop

This show disappointed a lot of people, and will pay for it come Tony time.  After receiving a lot of critical accolades during its London run and securing two genuine movie stars for its US premiere, this new drama underwhelmed most critics.  Samuel L. Jackson and Angela Bassett got good but not great reviews, and the entire enterprise seems to have been damned by faint praise.  If the show had opened in the spring it would be more of a contender, but with the amount of competition this year it may be completely shut out.

There’s plenty more Tony chatter where this came from, but given the short attention spans of internet readers, I’ve probably already lost you.  The rest will have to wait for another day, while I spend the rest of this week trying to figure out what the hell a Superbowl is.

Best of 2011 Countdown: #2

Best Shows of 2011

#2 – Follies

Jan Maxwell and the ensemble of Follies

From the first drum roll played by the luscious 27-piece orchestra, it is nearly impossible to not be swept away by the sheer grandeur of the current revival of Stephen Sondheim’s Follies.  NY Times head critic Ben Brantley calls the show “one of the greatest musicals ever written,” and everything about this sumptuous production supports his assertion. 

Follies is a legendary musical, one that rarely receives a full-scale production due to its momentous size and logistical complexity.  The score is widely hailed as a masterpiece, and its pastiche-style songs are heavily featured in various Sondheim reviews and cabaret acts around the country.  But one cannot fully appreciate Follies the score without seeing Follies the show, because hearing the songs in context wildly alters their meaning and reveals a nearly unmatched psychological complexity. 

The pastiche songs, all intended to be part of the fictional Weismann Follies from which the show derives its name, provide an excellent comment on the play’s dramatic action, making apparent some heartbreakingly sad lyrical sentiments that can easily get lost among the songs’ upbeat tempos.  And the book numbers are such superb monologues-in-song that you can literally find something new to appreciate with each listening.  Sondheim really outdid himself on this one, and being able to hear these songs sung on a Broadway stage with such an excellent and full orchestra is a delight.

And then there is the disgusting embarrassment of riches that is the revival’s cast.  Although not quite on the same level as her astounding work in A Little Night Music, Bernadette Peters gives an excellent performance as ex-Follies girl Sally Durant Plummer.  Peters makes Sally into a tragically wounded and complex creature lost in the throes of self-delusion, a quality that is especially apparent during her haunting rendition of “In Buddy’s Eyes.”  But so strong is this cast, and so uniformly excellent are the performances, that Peters is by no means the best actor on the stage.

Danny Burstein, who I found to be overrated in South Pacific and actively bad in Women on the Verge, is an absolute revelation as Buddy.  He takes what is probably the least interesting of the central quartet and makes him an utterly fascinating example of a man who simply cannot admit that the woman he loves is no good.  And during his climatic faux-Follies number, “The God-Why-Don’t-You-Love-Me Blues,” Burstein effortlessly becomes the modern reincarnation of a vaudeville comedian.  Burstein simply slays this song and his performance in general, and will almost certainly be Tony-nominated for his efforts.

And then there’s Jan Maxwell.  The brilliant, chameleon-like actress has played every type of role imaginable, but Phyllis Rogers Stone may just end up as her crowning achievement.  Looking positively stunning in her golden gown, Maxwell is the embodiment of the woman who has everything and nothing at the same time.  Trapped in a loveless marriage, Phyllis has built a wall of self-assurance and nonchalance around herself that steadily crumbles throughout the show.  When she finally tears into her husband with one of the greatest gifts Sondheim ever gave an actress, the sensational “Could I Leave You?,” Maxwell explodes with such ferocity and deep seated rage you don’t know whether to cheer or run for the exit.  And then, just in case you weren’t convinced of her brilliance, she stops the show again with her no holds barred song-and-dance routine for “The Story of Lucy and Jessie.”

This revival is one for the ages.  I guarantee that at least once during the show, you will gasp in awe at its sheer brilliance.  This production literally takes your breath away.  For me, two moments in particular stand out:  watching all of the ladies tap dance during “Who’s That Woman?” (the mirror number) while being mirrored by the ghosts of their younger selves in one of the most dizzying choreographic triumphs currently on Broadway, and the reveal of the climatic Loveland sequence, where the split-second fall of the front drop perfectly illustrates the mental break that has just occurred in the four leads and will propel them to the show’s end.  Then there’s the hauntingly gorgeous duet “One More Kiss,” the majestic brilliance of the foreboding overture, the dreamlike interweaving of the ghosts of the characters’ past….I could go on and on.  But it would be much more effective for you to run down to the Marquis Theatre and see for yourself why Follies is one of the best shows of the year, before it fades into memory on January 22^nd.

Will It Recoup?

Fair warning:  I'm about to get pretty "industry insider" on you guys right now.  Not so much in that I'm going to be using a bunch of pretentious terms you don't know, but because the topic I'm going to discuss doesn't really come up outside of industry newspapers and websites like Playbill.com.

That subject, boys and girls, is when a major Broadway musical manages to recoup its investment costs and therefore start turning a profit.  The reason this topic fascinates me is because it is not a straightforward result of popularity or the length of the run (although those things obviously come into play).  Some shows manage to recoup their investment within the space of a year, and others run for years without making back their initial costs.

For example, The Addams Family, that veritable punching bag of the 2009-2010 Broadway season, will be closing this Christmas.  By the time it's gone, the show will have run for nearly two years.  Furthermore, for the first six months of that run, it did nearly sell-out business and made over $1 million a week.  And yet, the show still won't have turned a profit by the time it closes, due to its high initial capitalization and what must amount to high weekly running costs (something tells me Nathan Lane and Bebe Nueworth did not come cheap).  Meanwhile, there are shows like the 2009 Hair revival that manage to make back their money in as little as 5 months.

I would argue that moreso than the initial cost, the thing that really makes or breaks a show financially is the weekly running cost.  It costs money to pay the actors, musicians, and stagehands, not to mention maintain the props, costumes, and sets while also paying rent on the theatre and the monthly power bill.  And since even the biggest theatres can only cram in about 10,000 people during a typical 8 show week, that means a very finite amount of earning potential for even sell-out shows (and this is assuming everyone pays full price for their tickets, which pretty much never happens).  If the weekly costs aren't kept in check, your show is going to have a tough time turning a profit even if it runs for years, since they amount to additional money being spent on top of the initial capitalization.  It's basically like trying to pay off a credit card while continuing to make charges on it; the more you "charge" in weekly running costs, the longer it will take to pay the balance down to zero.

So in the spirit of this fascinating (to me, anyway) subtopic of the theatrical business, I wanted to play a little guessing game about which of this season's musicals will actually turn a profit and prove financially successful.  I'm going to focus on the musicals because they:  a) cost more; b) are more likely to be commercial runs instead of not-for-profit productions that aren't actually concerned with making money.  So let's take a look at the first 5 musicals opening on Broadway this season, starting with Broadway's other favorite punching bag, Spider-Man.

(Note:  This may or may not be an attempt to salvage an article written for a certain nameless website who decided not to run it at the behest of their marketing department, after I had put in a lot of time and energy to write it.  Just sayin'.)

Spider-Man:  Turn Off the Dark

Yes, it’s been running for almost a year, but Spider-Man is technically part of the current Broadway season due to its mid-June opening.  This famously troubled musical is the most expensive in Broadway history, with a whopping $75 million in initial production costs (for comparison, Wicked cost “only” $14 million).  That hefty price tag, combined with the critical lashing the show received, led many to predict the show’s early demise.  But ticket sales have remained strong throughout the fall, and the show regularly grosses over $1 million a week.

Will It Recoup?  No.  Despite steady box office returns, there’s almost no chance of Spider-Man turning a profit.  In addition to its astronomically high initial capitalization, the technologically advanced show spends almost $1 million a week paying salaries, power bills, and maintaining sets and costumes.  Spider-Man would need to continue its current earning patterns for five to seven years before it begins making money, something that seems incredibly unlikely.  Only 15 musicals in history have run for that long, with recent megahits like The Producers and Hairspray only managing six year runs.

Follies

One of the many attractions of the critically lauded revival of Stephen Sondheim’s groundbreaking 1971 musical Follies is the fact that the show is a fully staged production.  The large-cast, costume-heavy musical is usually performed in scaled down concert versions due to its prohibitively expensive production costs (the original production was at the time the most expensive Broadway show in history, with an $800,000 capitalization).  In this era of bare bones revivals and smaller scale new musicals, the show’s 41-person cast and 27-piece orchestra seems particularly extravagant.

Will It Recoup?  Probably not.  The weekly running costs (including actor and musician salaries) are just too high.  Box office returns have been strong enough to prompt a three week extension of the show’s limited run, but Follies is also one of the few new productions currently open.  The glut of show openings in late October and November will surely steal some of Follies’ box office thunder, but if strong word of mouth continues to drive business there’s a possibility of a second extension which would increase its chances of recouping.

Godspell

This staple of high school and community theatre is prepping for its first Broadway revival, and its financial prospects are particularly up in the air.  The show does have a pre-established brand that’s familiar to the tourists who drive a large percentage of Broadway ticket sales, and being from the same composer as Wicked certainly won’t hurt.  In fact, the revival’s location next door to the Witches of Oz may make it an ideal alternative to those unable to score tickets to the perpetually sold-out hit.

Will It Recoup?  The chances are 50/50 on this one.  Popular regional shows do not necessarily set New York box offices on fire, and people may wonder why they should spend $135 to see something they could view for significantly less back home.  But with a 10-person cast and a small venue like the Circle in the Square Theatre helping to keep running costs down, the show shouldn’t need to sell-out every night to remain financially viable.  With some good reviews and positive word of mouth, it could easily run for a year or more, which is likely all it would need to turn a profit.

Hugh Jackman: Back on Broadway

Although not a musical in the traditional sense, this solo concert featuring one of Hollywood’s A-list stars qualifies as one for our purposes.  Headliner Hugh Jackman has been on Broadway exactly twice, and both times his presence has translated into box office gold.  In fact, Jackman was such a strong draw that both productions couldn’t continue without him, and The Boy from Oz even elected to temporarily shutter for a week during Jackman’s scheduled vacation rather than try to sell tickets without him.

Will It Recoup?  Yes.  Jackman’s Broadway concert already has a reported $6 million in advance ticket sales, cementing the Tony-winner’s status as a proven box office draw.  Even with Jackman’s star salary – which could easily be $100,000 a week or more – and an 18-piece orchestra to pay, running costs for a concert like this are comparatively low, making this one of the surest financial bets of the season.

Bonnie and Clyde

Frank Wildhorn must be a glutton for punishment.  Just six months after the critical and financial disaster that was Wonderland, Wildhorn is back with a new musical based on two of the most notorious outlaws in American history.  Helping this show’s financial viability is an intriguing subject matter that seems ripe for musicalization, and the large number of diehard fans of Wildhorn’s previous works.  Of course, the same could have been said about Wonderland, and that barely lasted a month.

Will It Recoup?  No.  There are just too many factors working against it.  Despite two well-reviewed out-of-town tryouts and two well liked up-and-comers in the lead roles (Laura Osnes and Jeremy Jordan, respectively), chances are Bonnie and Clyde will be ripped to shreds by New York critics, who have historically lambasted Wildhorn’s shows.  And even the composer’s biggest hit, Jekyll & Hyde, failed to turn a profit despite nearly four years on Broadway.  Given the current economic climate, Bonnie and Clyde can hardly count on a run that long, making the show’s financial prospects grim.

That's all for now.  I hope to make this a recurring article, so look for another installment as we get closer to more show opennings.  :-)

How was the Show? (Part 1)

So one of the many joys of living in New York is the ability to go see Broadway theatre on a regular basis.  And after you go, it is a theatregoing tradition to distill everything you've just seen, which includes months of hard work by dozens if not hundreds of generally talented professionals, into a few short sentences so that you can quickly answer the question "How was the show?" when asked by your friends.

It is also theatregoing tradition to offer these overly biased, simplified opinions up without actually being asked for them, which is what I'm about to do. :-)

Now, I should point out that I am actually a big fan of legitimate reviews that take the time to dissect the hard work of the many, many artists and craftsmen involved in mounting a theatrical production.  My plan going forward is to write a full-fledged review of every Broadway show I see, and I would love to go back and write full reviews of all the productions I have already seen.  However, I do not have the time nor the memory to do so, given my two jobs and the fact that I haven't seen some of the long-running shows in years.  So this will have to do.

So let's pretend you've just asked me, "Hey, how was [insert show title]?"  Here's how I would respond:

Anything Goes:  Sutton Foster is fantastic and the production numbers are stellar, especially the 8-minute tap routine that accompanies the title song.  Unfortunately, Joel Grey seems to not know what is going on (or even his lines on occassion), and while the production is very slick, it's not significantly different from past productions of the same show.  Worth it to see Sutton completely earn her 2nd Tony Award, espcially if you can get in for cheap thanks to Roundabout's Hiptix program (one of the greatest deals on Broadway).

Man and Boy:  I haven't seen, so I'll have to get back to you.  From what I've heard Frank Langella is amazing but the show itself is kind of blah.

Billy Elliot:  I found the American production to be overrated, but I am probably biased because I saw the original London cast back in 2005 and they were spectacular (especially their Billy).  The choreography is astounding, but some of the show's heart seems to have been lost during the trans-Atlantic journey (and Elton John's score is pretty ho-hum).  Maybe the show is simply too British for American actors to be able to fully convey the nuance and emotion the Brits displayed.  Whatever the reason, I maintain the show has been over-praised and should have lost the Best Musical race to the far superior Next to Normal.

Chicago:  Needs. To. Close!  At one point it was probably really entertaining, but that was likely about 200 celebrity stunt castings ago.  Aparently if you manage to catch a celebrity-free cast the show is still really good, but I would just as soon rewatch the movie version.  I wish this show would shutter and free up that theatre for (gasp!) a new musical or play.

Chinglish:  Haven't seen.  Sounds mildly interesting, but it isn't at the top of my list of shows to go see.  Let me know what you think if you go.

Follies:  Is amazing!  It's seriously one of the best shows running right now, if not one of the best productions of the past few years.  It features some of the most glorious music and staging I've seen in quite some time (props to the producers for opting for a full orchestra).  Moments like "Who's That Woman?," where the fantastic Terri White leads the entire company of ladies (including Bernadette, Elaine Paige, and Jan Maxwell) in a tap routine where they dance with the ghosts of their former selves, will blow your mind.  I'm also in LOVE with the Loveland sequence, especially the transitions in and out of it.  All of the leads are fantastic, especially Jan Maxwell and Danny Burnstein (who is something of a revelation considering I have not enjoyed his previous Broadway outings).  You need to go see this before it closes in January.

That's about enough for now.  I'll be back later with more mini-reviews and recommendations for your viewing pleasure.

Here's a Little Story That Should Make You Cry

This week, the Tony Awards Administration Committee got together and made their first round of decisions about Tony eligibility, including what performances fall into what categories.  And in the process, they robbed Jan Maxwell of a well-deserved Tony.

Okay, that statement is a bit of hyperbole.  The Tony Awards are a long way away, and it is entirely possible that four time Tony-nominee Maxwell will finally get her moment in the sun for her sensational turn as the embittered Phyllis Rogers Stone in the top-tier revival of Follies currently running on Broadway.  But by classifying her in the Best Leading Actress category, the Tony committee has made that a lot less likely.

Now, in all fairness to the Tony committee, their decision makes sense.  After all, both the original Phyllis and the 2001 revival Phyllis were nominated in the Best Actress in a Musical category (with original  Phyllis Alexis Smith actually winning the award back in 1972).  The role *is* roughly equal in size and importance to Bernadette Peters' Sally.  And Maxwell is listed above the title, which according to Tony rules places her in the Leading Actress category unless the committee decides to demote her to Supporting.  So they were really just doing their job.

No, the people really at "fault" are the producers of Follies, and even then I use the term "fault" loosely.  Had they campaigned to have Maxwell considered in the Supporting Actress category, it could have been viewed as them belittling her work and the size of her part, and we all know that actors can have very delicate egos (although I suspect Maxwell would have handled it all in stride).  But if they had gotten Maxwell moved to the supporting category, I believe she very likely would have finally won a long-overdue Tony.

There is precedent for this.  Back in 2004 the producers of A Raisin in the Sun decided to have Audra McDonald compete in the Supporting Actress category, despite having a part every bit as large and important as Phylicia Rashad's role in the show.  This paid off marvelously, as it allowed both actresses to win awards for the stellar work while avoiding any competition between the two.  I think a similar strategy for Follies would have worked wonders.

Again, I'm not saying that Maxwell won't win the Tony this year.  She still could.  But by being entered into the Leading Actress category, she faces incredibly stiff competition from some of Broadway's top talent.

For one, she's up against Audra, who I'm going to go ahead and name this season's frontrunner without having seen her or most of her competition.  In addition to having already won four Tonys, she's doing Porgy and Bess, a show that she was born to do.  The last time a piece of casting was this obvious was Patti LuPone in Gypsy, and we all know how that turned out.  Even the notoriously hard-to-please Ben Brantley, head critic of the NY Times, gave McDonald's Bess an out and out rave in his review of the show's out of town tryout.  It's one of the biggest love letters I've seen him give any performer, and makes McDonald the one to watch.

Maxwell also faces competition from her esteemed co-star.  Bernadette Peters is Broadway royalty, returning to the Great White Way after a long absence.  I believe had she opened the Night Music revival, she would have completely bulldozed the competition for that year's Tony race.  She is back in her element (re: Sondheim) with Follies, and one should never underestimate voters' love of Ms. Peters.

The one thing that may give Maxwell the edge over those two Tony favorites is the fact that she has never won before, while they both have multiple statuettes to their name.  But even *that* argument works against Maxwell, because Kelli O'Hara is coming back to Broadway this spring!  Poor Kelli has been nominated three times without winning; the only reason she didn't win for South Pacific was the aforementioned LuPone.  Barring a disaster (and since no one knows much about the show O'Hara's starring in, it could be a disaster), O'Hara will likely be nominated again, and will be in the same hard-working-but-still-unawarded category as Maxwell.

The upside to all of this is that we, the audience, will have plenty to debate come Tony season, as a compelling case could be made for any of these women to be nominated and then win.  Can you imagine what kind of blood bath it would be is Sutton Foster was up for Anything Goes this season instead of last????