Monday, April 23, 2007

OCC Noms - bizarre

Now, I normally don't expect much from the OCC. After all, this is mostly a group of older "critics" whose record indicates that they really favor Broadway and they looooove musicals. In fact, many of them don't actually visit too many of the off-Broadway houses, especially those that live in NJ, CT, Westchester, etc. I remember when I was a young press agent I tried to get Marge Gunner, the then president, to one of my shows. I even called her to see if she had received my invite and she just hung up on me. Not a polite no or even a "don't call me"--just a rude sigh and hang up. And this was for a legit off-Broadway house not some fledgling theatre company. She struck me as a cantankerous old lady who couldn't be bothered with a non-Broadway show and I'm glad to see she's no longer their president.

Today's nominations are just plain bizarre. 11 nominations for MARY POPPINS but nary a one for one of the best play of the season, BUSY WORLD IS HUSHED? What about Signature's THREE excellent August Wilson revivals? Surely ONE of them was better than the okay TALK RADIO, which was good only because of its lead actor. I guess any year has omissions but this year, they seem to be more glaring than usual.

What about squeaking in CORAM BOY and RADIO GOLF? The shows might be worthy but CB only began performances on Monday and RG began on FRIDAY. Even if they did the nominations last night and were up last night all night to get them done, did all of the Nominating Committee actually see these shows in its first week - did the whole committe go to RG between Friday night and Sunday afternoon? Or were they both nominated sight unseen? And if they did go en masse to the theatre, is it fair to judge a show in previews? Perhaps both will be completely different shows by the time they open.

I guess the problem with mixing Broadway and off-Broadway awards is that they committee can get star-struck and overpowered by the starrier names and production values of the Broadway shows. It's a real shame to reward Disney's mediocre kiddie show in this way, especially in a year that featured so many other worthy candidates.

No comments: