733 posts
|
Post by sophie92 on Mar 5, 2019 17:13:46 GMT
The Jungle didn't get a *single* nomination?  Based on the eligible productions list, it wasn’t eligible this year (because it was eligible at the Young Vic last year, though didn’t get any nominations then) |
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on Mar 5, 2019 17:18:09 GMT
The Jungle didn't get a *single* nomination? Based on the eligible productions list, it wasn’t eligible this year (because it was eligible at the Young Vic last year, though didn’t get any nominations then) Thanks for clearing that up. On the one hand, that does excuse the Olivier's for this year's batch. On the other hand though, and whilst I know this is a delayed reaction, I am remain stunned that it didn't get any last year. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 17:25:17 GMT
Not surprised to see Rosalie Craig nominated, but be shocked if she wins, I don’t think switching a characters gender should be award winning, if it was to be award winning it should go to the director instead. However past evidence suggests that all bets are off when it is the Olivier Committee and Stephen Sondheim. I fear she will win for that exact reason, whereas if we are actually judging on performance then Adrienne Warren should win by a landslide. The Actress and Supporting Actress in a Musical categories are ridiculously competitive compared to most of the rest though, which is both exciting and a real shame! |
|
|
|
Post by jaqs on Mar 5, 2019 17:25:43 GMT
Thrilled for Company and Come from away, both more than worth the ticket price. I didn't see many plays in the qualifying period and don't feel like I've missed out from the mish mash of nominations.
Am also totally against the group nominations, other than when it is children sharing a role. Open the category up to more nominations or be brave and pick one, grown ups know not everyone can win.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 17:32:51 GMT
I think the four acting Musical catagories are interesting because the two Actor catagories seem kinda obvious winners in my eye, with Jonathan Bailey and Zubin Varla.
It's the two Actress ones that, I agree, are really exciting races. Because let's look at it.
Best Actress in a Musical
Sharon D. Clarke for Caroline, or Change – Playhouse Theatre
Rosalie Craig for Company – Gielgud Theatre
Kelli O'Hara for The King and I – London Palladium
Adrienne Warren for Tina – Aldwych Theatre
Sharon is the one who isn't winning, and Kelli is playing a role that has been done time and time again, no matter how good she is, and she was amazing. It's Rosalie or Adrienne I imagine.
Best Actress in a Supporting Role in a Musical
The Queens for Six – Arts Theatre
Patti LuPone for Company – Gielgud Theatre
Ruthie Ann Miles for The King and I – London Palladium
Rachel Tucker for Come from Away – Phoenix Theatre
Any of them could win. Literally, any of them. My bet is on Patti, but I could see a strong justification for any of them to walk away with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 17:44:20 GMT
Any of them could win. Literally, any of them. My bet is on Patti, but I could see a strong justification for any of them to walk away with it. There is no justification whatsoever for *any* of them to walk away with it other than Dame Patti of LuPone. And I am unanimous in that. If she loses to any of those also-rans, I shall riot. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 17:46:45 GMT
Just seen these and the complete copouts by lumping actors together is shocking. When it’s children who have to share roles because of labour laws fine but not with adults.
Much of the rest is typically commercial with much of the most innovative work missing in favour of the better known.
|
|
|
|
Post by stagey on Mar 5, 2019 17:49:54 GMT
I’m sorry but I don’t see how Adrienne isn’t expected to win this?! Her performance was by far the best theatrical performance I have ever seen in my entire life! She wasn’t off the stage for more than 5 minutes and challenged the character of Tina soooo well. I have seen Company and found Rosalie to be...good. Like nothing out of the ordinary, I do not have fixed memories of her or Kelli’s performances unlike I do for Adrienne who was a force of nature. The other two were really good in their roles but nothing ground-breaking. I feel like Rosalie gets most of the hype due to the situation about the whole change in Company. Jonathon deserves to win the best supporting actor, I just don’t see how Adrienne isn’t the obvious winner here?! It’s like she has been looked over.
Also, I am yet to see Six but I am interested why the 6 leads are classed as supporting actress rather than lead actress? Aren’t they the only ones in the show?
|
|
639 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by andrew on Mar 5, 2019 17:52:35 GMT
Unpopular opinion, but Six getting nominations instead of Hadestown is the biggest joke of the decade. It makes sense though - it's better publicity to nominate a home-grown show by a new young creative team that has worked its way up from the Fringe and touring to a long run in a West End venue rather than an American show that's been in development for years and took up space in a publicly subsidised UK theatre when it already had the commercial success for a Broadway transfer. The Oliviers will get much better press for nominating SiX and dodge any queries about whether Hadestown was really appropriate to be staged at the National. Thanks for explaining how it works. If the above is true, which I'm not doubting, then it's a really strong reason why the Oliviers are a joke, at least from an artistic perspective. They could've honored Six with one nomination only, for Best supporting Actress, which is the only one that it deserves. I mean... Best Costume Design? I'm surprised that it didn't get nominated for Set Design. Oh wait... Unpopular opinion, but Six getting nominations instead of Hadestown is the biggest joke of the decade. Well, we can be unpopular together then. I loved Hadestown, but don't get the hype around Six at all. It's all just noise to me (showing my age here). It's funny to think Hadestown got no love here but is the front runner for the Tony's in June. Just shows how fickle the Theatre business really is. I really hope that it gets the recognition it deserves from the Tonys, which I think it will, and will prove how messy the Oliviers are. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 18:09:20 GMT
[If the above is true, which I'm not doubting, then it's a really strong reason why the Oliviers are a joke, at least from an artistic perspective. Or maybe those who decide the nominations just didn't think Hadestown was that good? Just because you liked it doesn't mean that everyone did (I detested it and I know I'm not alone in thinking that!), and just because you think Six isn't deserving doesn't mean others think the same. There will never be universal satisfaction at winners or nominees. Whether you like it or not, Hadestown was divisive and not universally loved, so it is very easy to see why it was not nominated! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 18:18:11 GMT
[If the above is true, which I'm not doubting, then it's a really strong reason why the Oliviers are a joke, at least from an artistic perspective. Or maybe those who decide the nominations just didn't think Hadestown was that good? Just because you liked it doesn't mean that everyone did (I detested it and I know I'm not alone in thinking that!), and just because you think Six isn't deserving doesn't mean others think the same. There will never be universal satisfaction at winners or nominees. Whether you like it or not, Hadestown was divisive and not universally loved, so it is very easy to see why it was not nominated! Nominations tend to come from two categories; universally acclaimed or middle of the road and bland. The former tend to win but the latter often make up the numbers. What awards do not do is award the controversial and the divisive, it’s why we can look back to nominations from the past and see ground breaking work completely ignored in favour of something never heard about again. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 18:30:15 GMT
Chillax people, one only needs to run one's eyes down the nomination list to see that for the most part, no-one should take the Oliviers seriously and we shouldn't expect them to actually honour the best of the best. If they get seven nominations right, let's see that as a win. I'm spy Jonny B, Dame Patti, The Fleesh, Miss Kelli O'Hara, Mr Kyle Soller, La Redgrave and Dame Katherine Parkinson. Oooh, there you go. Seven.
|
|
|
|
Post by missthelma on Mar 5, 2019 18:47:27 GMT
I always find the Oliviers are at a funny time, just after all the film award craziness but quite a while after other theatre awards such as the Evening Standard and not near the theatre award season in New York, plus the eligibility of whens and wheres means I struggle to decide if the decisions are 'right'. And really if we're honest all these awards are a bit well. wanky and stupid springs to mind.
I am though very surprised at the lack of supporting actor nominations for The Inheritance as John Benjamin Hickey, Andrew Burnap & Paul Hilton seemed to me certain to be cited. And if the pretty dreadful two I've seen from Best Actor in a Musical are any indication of the quality of the field they should have scrapped that award altogether.
|
|
1,248 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Mar 5, 2019 18:53:55 GMT
Yep, please don't take the Oliviers seriously or get frustrated by them.
They've been dictated from the top down for many years now.
The money rules. First and foremost.
Next, Sonia Friedman has the Power.
As do productions, especially British ones, that they want to head over to New York. This year these are:
The Lehman Trilogy & Company & The Inheritance. All 3 will win major awards.
And it's all about getting the big names in the room on the night and max publicity for the Oliviers and SOLT.
They still use a public panel apparently, despite the fact they routinely ignore their suggestions, having known 4 people who have been on the panels over the years. They were routinely met with: "Yes, that's very nice that you noticed that person, but what about xxxxxxxx?". All 4 have felt redundant and were sad to realise how most of it is very pre-determined.
In this way, for all we slate the whatsonstage awards, at least that organisation can't interfere with the votes. (Or can it?......)
It's only a game show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 18:54:04 GMT
I've only seen two of the Actors in a Musical live: Zubin and Ken. I've heard Kobna is good, but that show is all Adrienne and the rest is just kinda there, and I heard Marc Antolin again was good. But Zubin gets my vote as he was fantastic in Fun Home, and emotionally just so great in a great show, plus it's a way to give Fun Home something. Ken was funny but had a crap singing voice, I struggled to understand what he said most of the time. I wouldn't give it to him at all, although he's playing The King so I guess that may give him an edge?
|
|
5,066 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Mar 5, 2019 18:55:44 GMT
Not surprised to see Rosalie Craig nominated, but be shocked if she wins, I don’t think switching a characters gender should be award winning, if it was to be award winning it should go to the director instead. However past evidence suggests that all bets are off when it is the Olivier Committee and Stephen Sondheim. I fear she will win for that exact reason, whereas if we are actually judging on performance then Adrienne Warren should win by a landslide. The Actress and Supporting Actress in a Musical categories are ridiculously competitive compared to most of the rest though, which is both exciting and a real shame! I agree with you on Rosalie Craig, but disagree with you on Adrienne Warren who was very good and enjoyable, but Kelli O’Hara just edges her out. |
|
1,046 posts
|
Post by jgblunners on Mar 5, 2019 19:02:41 GMT
Thanks for explaining how it works. I’m not suggesting that’s the only reason that Hadestown got snubbed - as @posterj said, it had mixed responses - but given that we’ve all seen how the Olivier Awards sometimes pay more attention to other factors over actual artistic merit, I wouldn’t be surprised if what I mentioned didn’t play a part for the judging panel. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 19:46:55 GMT
I strongly suspect that the absence of Hadestown is SOLT's way of saying that they don't approve of the English National Theatre being used for Broadway tryouts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 19:50:52 GMT
I strongly suspect that the absence of Hadestown is SOLT's way of saying that they don't approve of the English National Theatre being used for Broadway tryouts. Oh that's an interesting thought, I didn't think about that at all, but I guess it makes sense! I suppose too, Hadestown wasn't made for the National was it? It was made in America and brought over, so it's not like Angels in America which was designed specifically for the National Theatre and then transferred. |
|
3,585 posts
|
Post by Rory on Mar 5, 2019 20:04:38 GMT
Any of them could win. Literally, any of them. My bet is on Patti, but I could see a strong justification for any of them to walk away with it. There is no justification whatsoever for *any* of them to walk away with it other than Dame Patti of LuPone. And I am unanimous in that. If she loses to any of those also-rans, I shall riot. Patti rocks, obvs, but La Tucker is marvellous too. I didn't see Ruthie Ann Miles but my admiration for her is infinite. This is the hardest category to call. |
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Mar 5, 2019 20:07:55 GMT
I strongly suspect that the absence of Hadestown is SOLT's way of saying that they don't approve of the English National Theatre being used for Broadway tryouts. Oh that's an interesting thought, I didn't think about that at all, but I guess it makes sense! I suppose too, Hadestown wasn't made for the National was it? It was made in America and brought over, so it's not like Angels in America which was designed specifically for the National Theatre and then transferred.
It would be one thing if it had been developed jointly with a major American theatre - like, for example, the National's production of Downstate was developed jointly with the Steppenwolf Theatre Company in Chicago (it played there last year). That's not what happened with Hadestown; it's a commercial management using the National's resources to get a price break on their pre-Broadway tryout. And while three of them gave very fine performances, it leaves a particularly nasty taste that the production's five principal perfomers were all parachuted in from across the Atlantic and none of the local performers cast in ensemble roles are making the journey in the opposite direction. I liked a lot of things about the show (though not the two leads), and reading between the lines I assume the National had to fill a slot in their performance schedule when something else either fell through or had to be postponed, but it wasn't in any way an appropriate use of the National's taxpayer-funded resources.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 21:36:55 GMT
Any of them could win. Literally, any of them. My bet is on Patti, but I could see a strong justification for any of them to walk away with it. There is no justification whatsoever for *any* of them to walk away with it other than Dame Patti of LuPone. And I am unanimous in that. If she loses to any of those also-rans, I shall riot. Let me know where we’re meeting for the start of the riot. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 21:42:12 GMT
Or maybe those who decide the nominations just didn't think Hadestown was that good? Just because you liked it doesn't mean that everyone did (I detested it and I know I'm not alone in thinking that!), and just because you think Six isn't deserving doesn't mean others think the same. There will never be universal satisfaction at winners or nominees. Whether you like it or not, Hadestown was divisive and not universally loved, so it is very easy to see why it was not nominated! Nominations tend to come from two categories; universally acclaimed or middle of the road and bland. The former tend to win but the latter often make up the numbers. What awards do not do is award the controversial and the divisive, it’s why we can look back to nominations from the past and see ground breaking work completely ignored in favour of something never heard about again. I’m not hugely familiar with Oliviers history and I love learning about this stuff. I’d love any examples you remember of ground breaking and beaten by boring. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 22:25:06 GMT
Nominations tend to come from two categories; universally acclaimed or middle of the road and bland. The former tend to win but the latter often make up the numbers. What awards do not do is award the controversial and the divisive, it’s why we can look back to nominations from the past and see ground breaking work completely ignored in favour of something never heard about again. I’m not hugely familiar with Oliviers history and I love learning about this stuff. I’d love any examples you remember of ground breaking and beaten by boring. Musicals have had a number of these. Kat and the Kings beating out Rent in 1999 (it was quite fun but forgettable), Honk beating The Lion King (parochialism at its worst) the next year. Miss Saigon bested by Return to the Forbidden Planet a decade or so earlier. All shows aiming low beating ones that are commonly seen as doing something more groundbreaking. From the Tony’s, which are generally more ambitious with their musical choices, you get the solid but traditional The Music Man beating West Side Story in 1957 and, the biggest howler of all, a musical version of Two Gentlemen of Verona (it’s not great) beating Follies in 1971. One that some (including myself) would also dispute is Sunday in the Park with George being beaten by La Cage Aux Folles (a breath of fresh air in terms of having a gay central couple but as traditional otherwise as you can imagine). A massive fuss was had over that one at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2019 22:29:41 GMT
I strongly suspect that the absence of Hadestown is SOLT's way of saying that they don't approve of the English National Theatre being used for Broadway tryouts. Yes I would venture that too. And it’s a big difference between that which was made with an eye on - no more like a foot on-Broadway before the start, and “genuine transfers” like Angels, Network hell even War Horse etc none of which were “made” for Broadway. |
|
