. . . . . . . . . . . .

Tboy hangs with

Search Tboy

    tboy web

dc theaterfolk

Crass Commerce


Crass Commerce II

Crass Commerce III


Crass Commerce IV

watch this



« Lard, warmed over | Main | New stuff at theaterboy »

Thursday, 11 March 2004


Stefan Sittig

I was deeply disappointed in some of the selections for HH noms this year.

I think Jane Horwitz of the Wash. Post did a good job at pointing out some major overlooks. But she missed these if you ask me:

Tracy Lynn Olivera delivered 2 brilliant supporting performances in 2 musicals in 2003. She should have been nominated for her stellar work as Young Sally in FOLLIES at Signature and for her energetic turn in CLOSER THAN EVER at MetroStage. In my mind, the 2 best performances of the year by a female in supporting role in a musical.

Also, I was dismayed not to see another Tracy, Tracy McMullen on the list for Outstanding Actress in a Resident Musical for her portrayal of the complex Gertrude Lawrence in NOËL & GERTIE at MetroStage.

theater man

I'm curious if anyone has heard the reasoning behind 1776 at Ford's Theatre being nominated in the non-resident production categories. My understanding is that the show was produced by Ford's specifically for the Ford's run. Although the director and several actors were from out of town (nothing new in DC), it was a Ford's Theatre (and therefore a resident) production. Word is they even saved the set for a possible future re-mount. As a non-res, it wasn't elligible for design award consideration and supporting performers were in a much tighter field. Did someone at HH Awards screw up or did Ford's ask to be put in with the road shows? Get to the bottom of this for us T-boy!


Tboy hears from a reputable source that it wasn't a HH fuckup -- it was a Ford's fuckup. More soon (hopefully from the horse's mouth)...


anyone else find it interesting that david sabin was nominated for the same role that david marks was nominated for just three years ago but sabin's is in the "best lead" category and marks was in "best supporting?"
didn't see the shakespeare theatre production but i don't imagine that they added lines to the text. it seems to stink of the same old big theater favoritism that plagued the hh under the former voting system. glad we had that big shake up, seems to have really helped.


I agree that the Helen Hayes revamp was a dismal failure. If anything the situation worsened. How are small theaters on tiny budgets expected to compete with the huge theaters with Millions? I think the work is often as good, if not better or more thought provoking and evocative and yet a budget of 500 dollars for costumes or set or whatever cannot compete with the spectical of tens of thousands of dollars at larger theaters. More later....

artistic director-boy

to the point made by "confused" about the davids sabin and marks being nominated in different catagories for playing the same role; i have always found helen hayes staff have bent over backwards to make sure that a theatre feels it is being dealt a fair hand. their latest modification to help ensure as level a playing field as possible is a new (for this year) nomination form that each theatre will fill out. the form invites the eligble theatre to suggest under which catagory distinction, leading or supporting, each actor should be considered. but, of course, it isn't an exact science, and there will always be discrepencies, such as the one "confused" points out, which are always interesting to contemplate. i am probably the only one reading this old enough to remember when the oscars began the supporting catagory (1936, nearly ten years into the history of that awards) only to see the lead actress oscar that year go to what was inarugably a supporting performance (luise rainer in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD) and i was myself nominated for a supporting hayes award for a role which i, in my divaness, considered a leading role.

The comments to this entry are closed.