Threaded Order Chronological Order
| Odd Tony omissions from the 70s | |
| Posted by: bobby2 01:20 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| I was just reading through them online. What stuck out to me was no Stephanie Mills for The Wiz. (seems odd, the category was kind of weak and she was the lead in the Best Musical) and no Sweeney Todd supporting players. Nowadays I bet the entire cast would fill the category. (especially since some of the nominees are from flop shows.) Ken Jennings and Merle Louise won Drama Desk. Was there furor when they weren't even nominated? |
|
| reply to this message |
| One of the biggest omissions | |
| Posted by: PlayWiz 08:16 pm EDT 08/18/17 | |
| In reply to: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s - bobby2 01:20 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| was that Jerry Herman's wonderful score for "Mack and Mabel" wasn't nominated. It's his favorite, and I believe that he still considers it his best. In spite of all the problems with the book of that show, that score is the reason folks always want to see it revived and made to work. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: One of the biggest omissions | |
| Last Edit: WaymanWong 05:43 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 05:40 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| In reply to: One of the biggest omissions - PlayWiz 08:16 pm EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| Definitely one of Jerry Herman's best scores. Charlie Smalls' ''The Wiz'' won for Best Score, and it's easy to see why Gary Geld and Peter Udell's ''Shenandoah'' got nominated. But it's a little mystifying to see what the Tony committee nominated INSTEAD of Jerry Herman's ''Mack & Mabel.'' * ''The Lieutenant'' by Gene Curty, Nitra Scharfman & Chuck Strand: A 1975 rock-opera about the court-martial of Lieutenant Calley during the Vietnam War. Starred Eddie Mekka (later Carmine of "Laverne & Shirley"). And it ran for only 7 previews and 9 performances. * ''A Letter for Queen Victoria'' by Alan Lloyd: Robert Wilson's opera about an autistic boy. It ran for only 3 previews and 18 performances. Admittedly, I've never heard either of these 2 scores, but could they have been that much better than ''Mack & Mabel''? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: One of the biggest omissions | |
| Posted by: CCentero 06:23 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| In reply to: re: One of the biggest omissions - WaymanWong 05:40 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
|
|
|
| People might be forgetting or weren't around to remember that Jerry Herman was one of the most artistically vilified writers in Broadway history. Before everyone than turned their venom toward Andrew Lloyd Webber, he was made into the poster boy for people who viewed his writing as old fashioned, corny and passe. His incredibly emotional speech when he won for La Cage was for me, understandable given that many people had stamped his career as "over." Yes, he deserved a Tony nom for Mack and Mabel. And, yes, we all put too much stock into awards.. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Look what happened to 'Mabel' | |
| Last Edit: WaymanWong 08:26 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 08:19 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| In reply to: re: One of the biggest omissions - CCentero 06:23 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
|
|
|
| I don't know if Jerry Herman was ''one of the most artistically vilified writers in Broadway history,'' but critics seemed NOT to blame his score (which wasn't Tony nominated), but on Michael Stewart's book and Gower Champion's direction (both of which WERE Tony nominated). In Hark Harris' N.Y. Times review (Oct. 7, 1974), he writes: ''We have all seen a musical with book trouble before, but this one has book trouble so bad that it is practically library trouble. ... Mr. Champion throws everything at the audience, including even a bathtub, in which Mack briefly ponders and parades. ... Here is a case where the bath should have gone out with the bathwater. Never have so many props propped up so much show ... ''The burden is carried by [the score]. Mr. Herman is usually underrated by everyone but the public, but he has the common touch, a gift for melodies that seem at once familiar and memorable, and lyrics that are always painless, sometimes neat and occasionally clever. In happy addition, the musical collaborators here—Donald Pippin, Philip J. Lang and John Morris—know how to give a score that authentic Broadway gloss and brassiness.'' For the record, ''Mack & Mabel'' still got 8 Tony nominations, and the Drama Desk DID nominate Herman for Best Score. (When Herman returned a few seasons later, he got a Tony nomination for Best Score for ''The Grand Tour.'') There's always been talk of a major ''Mack & Mabel" revival, but the book and downbeat ending always seem to be the stumbling blocks. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Look what happened to 'Mabel' | |
| Last Edit: CCentero 11:31 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| Posted by: CCentero 11:20 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
| In reply to: Look what happened to 'Mabel' - WaymanWong 08:19 pm EDT 08/19/17 | |
|
|
|
| "Mr. Herman is usually underrated by everyone but the public." Underrated is kind. Vilified is more like it. Steven Suskin's writes in MORE OPENING NIGHTS ON BROADWAY: "Herman has been critically trounced over the years." Suskin is certainly not a huge Herman fan, but his facts are correct. In interviews, Herman has been more than honest that he's been hurt by the hostility hurled at him by many in the theatre community. He's not inventing it. Here are some of Herman's other reviews for M&M: Martin Gottfried in the Post: Herman's music is as frustrating as usual." Gottfried and Douglas Watt in the Daily News both took Herman to task for "When Mabel Comes In the Room" being too much like the title songs of Dolly, Mame and Dear World. Watt: "Everything about Mack and Mabel is designed to please, with the unfortunate exception of the book and the songs." Walter Kerr in the NYT puts blame on Stewart's book--there's nothing particularly complimentary about Herman. The reviews for Herman's work in Dear World are mostly nasty. Kerr and Norman Nadel in the World Journal were dismissive of his work in Mame. I love Mack and Mabel's score. I've never seen a production of the show, so I have no idea if it can be fixed. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 03:55 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
| In reply to: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s - bobby2 01:20 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| Re Jennings and Louise: I don't remember any furor. Perhaps there would have been some if there had been an internet. I certainly was disappointed that they were not nominated. And I was so pleased they won the Drama Desk awards for their performances, which for me have never been equaled in those roles. The Drama Desks were televised that year. I think it was the first time they were televised, and then it was a long time before they were televised again. IIRC, they were on Channel 5 in New York in the early afternoon on a weekday. Of course, the Tony winners in the featured or supporting category in 1979 were really the leads in that show. They were eligible the previous year for the Drama Desks (and placed in the correct category), but they lost to Ken Page and Nell Carter. I think there was some puzzlement over Mills not being nominated for a Tony, but there also was a feeling that even though her singing was terrific, her acting was not very good. She did get a Drama Desk nomination. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s | |
| Posted by: bobby2 04:16 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
| In reply to: re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s - AlanScott 03:55 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed about Louise and Jennings never being equaled. I was thinking that when I saw the Barrow Street production. I don't know if it is due to political correctness but people don't seem to play Toby is the simpleton he is referred to in the script. He's played more as innocent and not impaired as I think he was meant to be. Louise must have been quite a force. I noticed in stuff on youtube she gets the biggest applause of the supporting players (perhaps equal to Jennings but more than the rest) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 04:27 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
| In reply to: re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s - bobby2 04:16 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| Yes, Jennings and Louise pretty consistently got the strongest response of the supporting players. They were also the only two principals who did not wear body mikes. It's really only Mrs. Lovett who says that Tobias is a bit of a simpleton, but I do think it makes sense to play him that way. I don't think she's just making that up to provide an excuse for the Beadle. And Jennings did play it that way, although he played it as being partly as a result of the abuse that Toby had endured. He talked about some of this in an interview during the run. Part of why he was great is because he excels at characters who are off in some way. I don't think I've ever seen him play a normal person. Onstage he's always strange and big. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s | |
| Posted by: bobby2 05:14 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
| In reply to: re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s - AlanScott 04:27 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| that is so interesting about the body mikes. Was that their personal choice? I was just looking over is Broadway credits. I the only thing else I guess I ever saw him in was Urinetown. Funny how he was in Grand Hotel and never played or even understudied the Michael Jeter role. I would have thought that that was something that would have been a good fit for him. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 12:57 am EDT 08/19/17 | |
| In reply to: re: Odd Tony omissions from the 70s - bobby2 05:14 am EDT 08/18/17 | |
|
|
|
| I don't really know about the body mikes. My guess is that it was just felt that neither of them needed body mikes. Truth is that for all I know, it's not true that they didn't wear them. I can't remember who I heard it from decades ago, but I do think it was true. For one thing, as the run went on, I think Ken Jennings could have used one, really just for a few moments here and there. Merle Louise always came through loud and clear, but that is a tiny role (if a demanding one). Without someone special, that character can almost disappear, she has so little stage time. There certainly was never any danger of that with Merle Louise. Jennings was a Kringelein understudy, although not on opening night. I don't know exactly when he became an understudy for the role, but at some point he did. Actually, there was an exception to what I wrote about him, or at least probably it was an exception: I saw that Circle in the Square All God's Chillun Got Wings, and I don't remember him in it. His role was pretty small. Well, actually I think i do have a vague memory of him in it, but I might be just imagining this. :) But after Sweeney, I saw him in Present Laughter, London Assurance, A Christmas Carol, Side Show and Urinetown, and he was always quirky and strange, sometimes to an extreme degree. Which I don't mean as a criticism. I love him. I'd walk the plank for him. He's one of the unsung greats. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.032936 seconds.