WOS Awards 2013 and U/S's

I went onto the WOS Forum today to read what Terri Paddock had said about the awards this year as I know it seems to have caused a big stir with where people were sat (I was actually sat in the Grand Circle in front of Ben Freeman and I'm guessing his co-stars, Louise Dearman and Gina Beck, were not sat that high up lol) and the popularity voting, amongst other things.

The first post on the topic board was this

Quote by a 'MrBarnaby'

"Anything Sheridan does will win for her.. If she read her shopping list onstage she'd win best actress."

I'm guessing this person didn't go to or see any results from last years awards, or they would know that last year Sheridan was up for best supporting actress and lost out to Catherine Tate http://awards-archive.whatsonstage.com/index.php?pg=1318

Moving on, I have been to the awards the last 3 years and have really enjoyed myself everytime. Although I don't always agree with the results, as seems to be the popular opinion, it is merely more than a popularity contest, but then again it's kind of what the awards are all about, its the people's choice. The critics and professionals get their say in other awards such as Oliviers and Evening Standard Awards. And even when the awards are voted for by people "In the profession" They still get moaned about for not picked the "right" person. If in your opinion the "right" person didn't win, it probably means your favourite didn't win, there for you have a favourite and are there for no better off than people who's favourites did win! No matter the result, someone somewhere is always going to be disappointed, cos we don't all like the same person or have the same views, if we did there would only need to be a handful of shows on the west end with certain people in them and award ceremonies wouldn't be needed as they would just give them straight to the person that is everyones favourite (If that makes sense lol)

A lot of people also seem to be saying that the public are only voting for the production they have seen or names that they know and that may not be the best one, well duh! of course they are going to vote on what you have seen, if you have only seen 1 out of 6 nominees of course you are going to vote that as your favourite. Are you saying that people should only be able to vote in these awards if they have seen every single production up for a nomination? Cos I'm guessing that wouldn't leave many people left to vote.

And as for voting for names that you know, if you were given a list of 6 names and you only knew of one person on there, you are always going to pick that person, regardless of what it is for, because you know of them.

Many actors/actress's have said how much a WOS Award means to them as they are voted for by the fans/public and without the public going to see them perform night after night they wouldn't have a job. So maybe it is a popularity contest and maybe you won't always agree with the outcome, But so what? It's suppose to be a fun night where stagey people near and far can get together and enjoy what theatre has to offer. It's an opportunity for people to see and find out about shows they didn't know about before.

As for showing appreciation for the nominees, I do understand that it must be nice to have your name read out, but lets bare in mind that there were 162 nominations this year and say they read each name out and allow time for an applause for each one, even allowing only 30 seconds for the name to be read and a cheer, you're still looking at over and hour and half just for reading out nominations, that's not including reading out the winner, allowing for that cheer, then the acceptance speech and of course another cheer as they leave the stage. Then add that with the performance's and banter in-between plus interval/s, your looking at an all day event! What's nice may not always be practical.

The hosts are suppose to be there to be funny, hence the reason it is usually hosted by comedians/comedy actors/actress's, so not everyone is going to agree with what they have to say, but that's comedy for you, if we all had the same sense of humor and agree'd on the same things it would be a pretty boring world!

As for the live stream, I haven't seen it either year, as previously stated I was at the actual awards, so I don't really have much of an opinion on it. Although from people I spoke to about last years awards the streaming wasn't that good. But you know, if you wanted to see it, maybe you should have brought a ticket #harshbuttrue

I just think people need to lighten up about the whole thing, after all it's theatre, it's suppose to be fun. It's not as if we are voting for the next Prime Minister or Pope, the results aren't going to effect the world or cure cancer, they are simply a fun event. The actors/actress's get to spend a night out, some of them get to come away with an award, that lets face it is basically just a piece of glass (Or maybe even plastic) with a piece of card inside with their name on. It's not gonna change their lives by much I shouldn't expect, half of them can't even be bothered to show up to the ceremony so it can't be that important to them lol! And I'm pretty sure the people who didn't win simply went to the after party, got drunk, then got up the next day, went into work and once they walked onto the stage in front of that packed theatre, were instantly reminded exactly why they do what they do. And not forgetting that each year the awards help to raise money for a specific charity, this year was InterAct. 

If I could change or add anything to the awards it would probably be to introduce an Understudy award. Understudies are very often overlooked yet do so much. Sometimes understudies have to be ready to go on at the drop of a hat and can sometimes be on for days and occasionally weeks at a time. Most recently the fact that Scarlett Strallen left Singing In The Rain 3 weeks early, meaning her understudy (Sherrie Pennington) had to perform for 3 weeks. Now I've no doubt Sherrie very much enjoyed playing the part for 3 weeks and getting to play Kathy for cast change and her last night in the show. But does she get the same recognition that Scarlett got? Is she up for any awards? And I'm going to very much doubt she got paid the same. But I'm sure (Although I didn't actually get to see her) she did just as good a job and put her all into it and performed a brilliant show night after night.
I think its about time something was done for understudies and they begin to get the recognition they deserved, as sometimes, in a lot of peoples opinions, the understudies actually turn out to be just as good, if not better, than the person who is actually playing the part and people will often go out of their way to see a certain understudy play a part. So if you are one of these people who doesn't go to the theatre on a regular basis, but when you do you moan about having an understudy on before the show has even started, don't judge them before you've even seen them, give them a chance and enjoy the show. You never know, you might actually enjoy them!

And next year, when the WOS Awards come about if you don't like them, don't vote, don't go, don't watch and don't look at the results. Save your time and money, get your ballgown/suit on and head to Oliviers instead, cos that's a proper awards ceremony and afterwards you can come out and moan about that in the same way you would the WOS awards. And after you've finished moaning that all the favourites won (Apart from your favourites of course or you wouldn't be moaning) go home, find that special place in your heart and get a life!