NYTimes.com: At 11:02 p.m. on June 8, at Broadway’s annual Tony Awards ceremony, Rosie O’Donnell announced the winner of the most coveted prize in theater — the Tony for best musical — and a flash flood of men in tuxedos and women in gowns gushed down the right aisle of Radio City Music Hall. None of them were famous, none recognizable. They were the small army of major investors that Broadway increasingly depends on to finance shows, in this case the winning musical, “A Gentleman’s Guide to Love & Murder.” And for many of them, a dream came true when they reached center stage: collecting a Tony on the national CBS broadcast.
4 comments:
The fact that theater is so much about the money and has become so little about the theater is really depressing. Of course you need money to put on shows and every penny that is given is appreciated but maybe the people giving the money do not need as much recognition. Unless they are being incredibly active in the actual production of the show and not just the financing do they really have to be front and center? Personally, I feel the focus should be on the people who are actively putting into the show, acting, designing and directing. These are the people who we should be focusing on. The people who are getting their names above the title are able to donate or invest this money with little or no loss to them and it doesn't mean that they deserve so much credit.
I understand and respect the role of the producer, but I think it is important to acknowledge just like many other terms in current time, the definition has changed from what it once was. Like the article mentioned, in 1981, there only needed to be one producer because the cost of show was about $1 or $2 million dollars. Headlining shows on Broadway now cost upwards of $15 million. I also fear that since there are so many producers now for a show, how many feel like they have a say in show. Respectfully, the producer should have some say in the show if they are backing it entirely, but where do you draw the line?
This article is especially important when you think about the discontinued sound design Tony Award. These producers who once had a actual connection with the production they were producing, now can simply win a Tony because they have some money to donate. Also, it saddens me that all those people who accepted the Tony for "A Gentleman's Guide" seemed so self-congratulatory. Like it was a personal achievement and a validation of their talent that they managed to pick the right musical to donate a couple thousand dollars to.
This upsets me even more when the Tonys decided to discontinue the sound design award simply because people didn't know what sound design was, or how to judge it. It wasn't considered a real art form, while somehow donating a comparably small sum of money to a handful of productions is considered one.
While I understand the opinions of everyone who has commented on this article so far, I could not disagree more. Perhaps I am a bit biased, since I worked first hand with Joey Parnes, Sue Wagner, and John Johnson this summer, and I have spoken with and met many of the other producers and investors discussed and highlighted in this article. With that said, I think the producers in this photo certainly deserve to be rewarded for their work. Yes, I absolutely agree that the discontinuation of the Sound Design Tony Award is the complete wrong call for Tony Award Productions. However, I do not think the discontinuation of one award should make us look critically on the other awards being handed out by the Tony's.
Yes, many of these people wrote big checks to get "Gentleman's Guide" to Broadway. But there is one very important thing to remember here: Every single one of these people BELIEVED in this show, and they gave Joey Parnes, Sue Wagner, and John Johnson what they needed to get this show up on its feet.
Let's look at this in a bit of a different light. Many of us who go to CMU are being funded by our parents in some way to attend college. Our parents, the government, and other organizations are making an INVESTMENT on US. Now let's say one day we become incredibly successful because of the skills we have received at CMU. The first person who should be getting this recognition should definitely be you, as you are the person who worked hard and used your talent to become successful. However, our parents (or the other people who have invested in us) should also be recognized for our achievement, as they are the people who got us there in the first place.
Investing in theatre is an art of its own, and it makes me sad that there is so much negative light on Broadway investors. Without these people, the show would not have happened in the first place. Without lead Producers who fight for their shows and spread their love for their projects to investors, Broadway (as well as many other regional and Off-Broadway shows) would not exist.
I would also like to point out that Gentleman's Guide had a surprisingly low budget for a Broadway musical at only $7.5 Million. There were many people who did not believe in a musical that was not flashy for the Broadway stage. The people showcased in this article are the people that DID believe in this show that was different and unique. Don't you think these people deserve to be recognized in some capacity?)
To read about another, unrelated Broadway Producer's take on the article, read here: https://www.theproducersperspective.com/my_weblog/2014/08/look-at-how-much-ink-broadway-producers-and-investors-got.html
Post a Comment