Tonys 2013 Q&A;: 'Neil Patrick Harris is the god of awards show'

By Charles McNulty

June 10, 2013 12 AM PT

Charles McNulty, The Times theater critic, shared his insights about the 2013 Tony Awards and the upcoming theatrical season in an hourlong chat Monday with readers.

McNulty, who admits to a “dour mood about this Broadway season,” started watching the show Sunday night “without enormous excitement.” But soon Neil Patrick Harris and moving speeches from Judith Light and other winners won him over.

Read more to find out what McNulty’s “honest reaction” -- as one reader requested of him -- was to the winners and televised performances.

Question: Was ‘Kinky Boots’ really the “best” musical, or was it chosen simply to make a point?

Answer: Awards are relative, and the Tonys are hardly a pure meritocracy.

I saw “Kinky Boots” before I saw “Matilda” and there were things I liked about “Kinky Boots” (Billy Porter’s magnetism, Stark Sands’ sensitivity with a somewhat bland role, the gaggle of gorgeous drag queens). But I thought the whole shebang was cloyingly earnest and overdone. Harvey Firestein’s book was the Achilles’ heel. I loved a couple of Cyndi Lauper’s numbers, but there was a lot of music that seemed generically expositional – just marking time.

Notwithstanding all the fun gender bending, the show seem pitched to a touristy mainstream.

But then I saw “Matilda The Musical,” which was touted by one of my colleagues as the greatest musical to come out of England. I didn’t get it. There was certainly much to admire in the show – the scenic imagination in particular of Matthew Warchus’ production. But it’s essentially a kid’s show, cartoonishly drawn. I’m not sure how I would have voted. “Bring It On: The Musical” and “A Christmas Story: The Musical” were the other choices.

I guess it would have been a tossup for me between “Kinky” and “Matilda.” I had no dog in this hunt. But it’s clear that “Kinky Boots” benefited from American producers recognizing that a Tony would do more for this show on the road that it would for the British import “Matilda.”

COMPLETE LIST: Winners and nominees

Q: What was your impression of the Motown performers? Your honest reaction.

A: I think they sold the show to mainstream America. Did the presentation make me want to run out and see it? No.

Q: Do you think the reach for larger audiences has had an impact on the quality of the talent that musicals are finding and showcasing?

A: Absolutely. The economics of Broadway are simultaneously expanding the audience and killing the musical theater art form. If current trends continue artists will be opting for an MBA in marketing rather than an MFA in theater. These productions are assembled by focus groups made up entirely of producers, it sometimes seems.

Q: Any further thought on Bette Midler’s snub? Was it the play which I read was regarded as lightweight? Or was it that Sue Mengers really did not give Bette Midler a stretch beyond the large personaity with which we are familiar?

A: Bette Midler gave a very winning Bette Midler performance in a works that was more a vehicle for her than a play. It’s an enjoyable performance but very ephemeral. I wouldn’t call her not being nominated a snub. It’s not a calculated act. The competition was very stiff in the best actress category. Fiona Shaw, one of the great actresses in the English speaking world, was left off the list. For me, that was the best female performance of the year by far.

Tonys 2013: Red carpet arrivals | Show highlights

Q: The audience looked very white and not apparently very racially or ethnically diverse? Was that the case? Is Broadway concerned?

A: Broadway contines to have a diversity problem in both its artistic and producing ranks and in its audience. The latter problem is partly a function of the fomer and partly a result of outrageous ticket prices. I saw “Matilda” on a Saturday night shortly after opening. Families were there -- paying $1,500 for a night out. Broadway is becoming the playground of the 1 percent set. This can’t continue. It’s choking the art form.

Q: It’s not relevant to this year’s Tonys, but having just seen this Tony-nominated Scottsboro Boys at the Ahmanson, which I thought was great albeit with certain caveats, do you think that would have won the Tony is it were alongside this year’s crop of nominees?

A: “Scottsboro Boys” received a slew of nominations after it closed on Broadway but was beaten in a year that was dominated by that giggling juggernaut, “The Book of Mormon.” I think “Scottsboro Boys” works better off-Broadway and in the regional theater. It’s a show that should not have to carry the burden of Broadway ticket prices – with all their attendance expectations.

Q: What was your overall thought of the Tonys show itself?

A: I was in a dour mood about this Broadway season. I went to the office to watch a live feed of the event without enormous excitement. The opening number completely won me over. Judith Light’s speech brought tears to my eyes. I remembered how much I love the Broadway theater community and that there was indeed good work in what was inarguably an uneven year.

Neil Patrick Harris is the god of awards show. He’s the complete package. The Oscars should take note. I’m not sure that he’d be as effective on that telecast. Part of what makes him so good with the Tonys is that he’s part of the theater community. He loves this world -- and his impish humor only makes that love more enjoyable to watch. There’s nothing smarmy about it at all.

Tonys 2013: Winners & Top nominees | Full Coverage

Q: With several winning productions generating out of the Regional Theatre system, What do you think that says about the American Theatre and Broadway?

A: That they are dependent on the nonprofit theaters to supply them with work. I’ve worked at McCarter Theatre (where Christopher Durang’s Tony winning play got its start), Yale Rep and the Public Theatre. I know the strength of our nonprofit theaters. It makes sense that Broadway would want to align itself with this system. There are hazards, however, of nonprofit theaters getting in bed with commercial producers. It’s very easy for these institutions to stray from their mission.

Q: Is your impact as a theatre critic growing or waning as the at form evolves? What does that mean for consumers like me?

A: I never think in those terms so it’s hard for me to answer. I don’t care about my “impact” -- I only care about the theater as an art form and criticism as an act of writing -- a minor art when practiced by geniuses such as Kenneth Tynan, Stark Young and George Jean Nathan. I feel that I have more contact with readers today than I did when I was writing regularly for the Village Voice. But that’s because of social media and the burgeoning life of the web. I don’t feel ignored. But I’d rather engage readers than dictate my opinion to them. Opinion is so...subjective!

Q: Many like to foretell the death of American theater based on what we see. Creation of theater remains human, even with all the technological advancements and reliance on them for entertainment. Why then does it seem so much we see is said to be weaker that the Golden Age? And is there anything to do about the costs? Even community theatre is asking upwards of $20 per ticket now.

A: I often teach a graduate theater seminar on Greek tragedy in performance. I usually begin by saying that no matter what technological advances occur, the wisdom of these plays will never be obsolete.

Theater for me is about enduring human truth. Special effects can be part of that, but when they obscure what is the reason we come to theater -- to see reflections of our confounded humanity-- the theater has lost its way.

I love the American musical for the simplicity of emotion that gets expressed. We’re reminded again of the basic facts of our nature. The economics of Broadway--tired phrase, I know--are making it extremely difficult for theater artists and audiences alike. Something has to give, but I think it’s a larger cultural conversation. Income disparity is at the heart of it. Broadway is symptomatic -- it’s not leading the way.

MCNULTY’S REVIEW: Incomparable host Neil Patrick Harris sells Broadway

Arts Editor Kelly Scott: I have a question, I’m going to insert myself for a moment..(we’ll get to everyone, I promise). Do you think there’s any chance that the Tony winning production of ‘Virginia Woolf’ will be staged again or tour --- of course I’m wondering if we’d ever get to see it in an L.A. theater. Would its Tony win make this a possibility?

A: The Tony win will certainly make it more desirable for producers such as Michael Ritchie, but it’s a question of getting Tracy Letts and Amy Morton together again with director Pam MacKinnon. Not sure if they’re interested. I hope they are. It’s the best production of that play I’ve seen.

Letts’ performance as George made me rethink my whole understanding of the play. Finally a combatant equal to Martha! I hate to keep touting it if there’s no chance of anyone in LA seeing it . But let’s keep our fingers crossed. Kudos to Chicago, which keeps turning out great work for Broadway.

Q: So what about Broadway’s 2013-2014 season whets your appetite?

A: Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart will return to Broadway together in the fall for Harold Pinter’s “No Man’s Land” and Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot.” And then the magnificent Mark Rylance and the lovably eccentric Stephen Fry will be leading all-male ensembles in a double bill of Shakespeare, “Twelfth Night” and “Richard III.” Catnip for a theater critic-- what can I say?

Kelly Scott: We have time for one more question, and it’s on a subject we often are asked about...

Q: With all of the wonderfully varied and detailed coverage the LA Times/ Culture Monster gave to the Tonys this year, will we here in Los Angeles be seeing more LA Times Theatre coverage locally? Reviews, LA Awards coverage and/or features/insight into LA companies, LA Artists?

A: Coverage of the Tonys doesn’t replace local coverage. It augments our theater coverage.

The Tonys are a unique entity -- the impact they have on the American repertoire is enormous. Just look at Center Theatre Group’s or the Geffen’s seasons. Two of the better offerings I saw at South Coast Rep this year-- “The Mother.. with the Hat” and “Chinglish” (the latter directed by Pam MacKinnon) came from Broadway. The same holds for La Jolla Playhouse and the Old Globe.

We can always do better in terms of local coverage, but that is our mainstay. We’re all here to write and report about the most interesting developments in the performing arts here. But it’s not an either/or phenomenon. This week I have three plays to review -- one at the Matrix, one at the Douglas and one at the Geffen. Each to me is as important as anything I see in New York.