Have there ever been any Tony situations in which the "best" nominee didn't win because the voting committee decided to vote for another nominee due to other contributing factors such as their past resume, who they are, the content of show, etc?
Many, many times, I'm sure. One example that comes to mind is 1996, when it was widely believed Julie Andrews gave a superior performance to Donna Murphy, but Andrews specifically asked the voters not to vote for her since they didn't vote for anyone else in her production.
"Best" is subjective - varies from person to person. And how do we know the thought process of every Tony voter?
I think the best way to look at it is sometimes the people you liked best didn't win. And that's evident every Tony season based on all the angry and indignant posts. To me, it doesn't make a difference - I like what I like and that works for me. I really don't understand the point of this question.
It doesn't happen often, but for me the most recent examples are NPH beating Jefferson Mays' bravura comic performance in Gentleman's Guide and James Corden beating Phillip Seymour Hoffman(who gave one of the best performances I've ever seen) in Death of a Salesman
In addition to its other inherent frailities, the question is mangled. There is no such thing as the voting committee. There is a nominating committee and there are the voters. Which do you mean?
Of course everyone doesn't agree with the results. If they did there would be no reason for all the words written during the runup.
The person I felt should have won in each category each year is by definition the "best person" and their failure to win is a crime against humanity. I shall build a comprehensive list and return within the fortnight.
Sondheimite said: "The only performance I 100% think should have won over who won is Raul in Company."
This. There a lots of times that I think you can argue about who most deserved an award--I'll always think Tonya Pinkins deserved the Tony for Caroline, or Change over Idina Menzel in Wicked or that Matilda should have beaten Kinky Boots--but Raul Esparza not winning for Company is, to this day, utterly baffling to me.
Mister Matt said: "One example that comes to mind is 1996, when it was widely believed Julie Andrews gave a superior performance to Donna Murphy.
"Widely believed"?!?! I remember seeing both performances and can't recall that being widely believed by anyone other than rabid Andrews fans."
If I remember correctly, it was widely believed that she would win the Tony if it hadn't been for her speech excoriating the nominating committee for not giving the show other nods. Whether she deserved it I won't hazard a guess as I saw Murphy but not Andrews.
"Widely believed" = code for "I like to believe it."
I had a friend on the Nominating Committee that year; they were actually pressured to nominate Victor/Victoria and refused, because they believed it was not worthy.
Widely believed as in almost everyone was predicting her to win and she was the far and away frontrunner that entire season until she came out and said she didn't want it. So whether or not she deserved it is irrelevant--it was still widely believed that she was going to win her first Tony.
It was actually very smart for Julie to rescind her nomination publicly. She NEVER would have won if they voted on the actual performance that year (Donna was giving a career-defining performance). While she's always a good actress, her voice was shot and this was not her best performance by a long stretch. If she had won, it would've been a "lifetime achievement"/honorary win, rather than for that individual performance. There was a big chance she wasn't ever going to win that year, so better for her to sit it out and avoid the embarrassment of losing. I'm convinced this also played a role in her "Tony strategy" that year. To top it off, the PR and drama of the public Tony bashing brought a boatload of attention to the show, which never really found a solid audience or the attention it so wanted. People who didn't even know about theatre all knew about the Tonys, Julie, and Victor/Victoria after that.
"Widely believed as in almost everyone was predicting her to win and she was the far and away frontrunner that entire season until she came out and said she didn't want it. So whether or not she deserved it is irrelevant--it was still widely believed that she was going to win her first Tony."
Again - no. Unless you somehow had magical access to the opinions of a majority of voters and theatregoers.
Personally, I seem to recall Murphy's performance being the Talk of the Town that season.
Broadway61004 said: "Many, many times, I'm sure. One example that comes to mind is 1996, when it was widely believed Julie Andrews gave a superior performance to Donna Murphy, but Andrews specifically asked the voters not to vote for her since they didn't vote for anyone else in her production."
I do agree that JA probably would have won had she not asked to be removed from consideration. That said, JA did not give a superior performance to Donna Murphy, and I certainly do not believe that it was widely believed...what was widely believed was that it was probably the last time to give her a competitive Tony.
PS -- I think this is one of the stupider subjects in a long time. Even though there have not been many responses yet, I am shocked that someone who didn't see either performance hasn't already opined that Streisand was robbed by Hello Dolly momentum (I would have voted for Channing, and I saw both of them). All awards come down to subjective opinions, sometimes made easier by the sheer excellence, audacity, whatever of one of the performances in a category, e.g., Glenda Jackson was easy this year, IMO Ben Platt was easy last year. I actually think that Corden deserved his Tony (and Hoffman deserved one also, if not quite as much IMO).
Widely believed as in almost everyone was predicting her to win and she was the far and away frontrunner that entire season until she came out and said she didn't want it.
Almost everyone where?
Personally, I seem to recall Murphy's performance being the Talk of the Town that season.
It was. King & I opened shortly before nominations were announced and all the buzz was over Murphy's revelatory performance. The tepid V/V reviews were long forgotten and the only publicity the show had at that point was the hubbub over Andrews usage of the word "egregious".
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
I will never, in this lifetime, understand Dear Evan Hansen winning for Best Orchestrations over Dave Malloy's innovative, multi-layered, and vastly captivating orchestrations for Great Comet.
5.25.16 My life was changed by Bright Star
4.12.17 My life was saved by Anastasia
emmettjordan said: "Have there ever been any Tony situations in which the "best" nominee didn't win because the voting committee decided to vote for another nominee due to other contributing factors such as their past resume, who they are, the content of show, etc?"
No.
Since the award determines the best (best is in the TITLE of the award), it is literally impossible for the best not to be best.
joined:9/2/17
joined:
9/2/17
Posted: 6/18/18 at 2:08pm