The Olivier really need to split in two the BEST NEW PLAY category. They could have instead: 1. BEST NEW ORIGINAL PLAY. 2. BEST (ADAPTATION) PLAY. Writing a new play from scratch is a whole different thing than adapting a pre-existent material into a play… - ThreadSky

alexistudor.bsky.social • 4 days ago

The Olivier really need to split in two the BEST NEW PLAY category. They could have instead:

1. BEST NEW ORIGINAL PLAY.
2. BEST (ADAPTATION) PLAY.

Writing a new play from scratch is a whole different thing than adapting a pre-existent material into a play…

Comments

mrlukowski.bsky.social•4 days ago

I think this year the ambiguity of what the category is actually rewarding (the text? the performed production? the playwright? the show?) has actually worked quite well for once as think it would be a shame if years got ghettoised into some sub category

alexistudor.bsky.social•4 days ago

Yeah, for me that category it’s just very confusing what’s rewarding. And I have a feeling it’s unclear for those voting too maybe hence we end up with some strange combinations? If I were to take it literally, I would say that category is supposed to reward the text dimension of the play but 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

tommortonsmith.com•4 days ago

I’d really love there to be Oliviers that are equivalent to the ‘Best Original Screenplay’ and ‘Best Adapted Screenplay’ Oscars. Keep ‘Best New Play’ and ‘Best Revival’.

mrlukowski.bsky.social•4 days ago

yeah I agree, it would give plays bit more of a presence at the ceremony (dare I say it to you but the confusing comedy/entertainment award feels ripe for a reciprocal cut)

tommortonsmith.com•4 days ago

I’d agree with that. I’d rather there was an award for the playwright rather than the nebulous idea of the play itself winning. Directors, designers and actors get their names on the statue, but not the writer. Seems a bit odd.

mrlukowski.bsky.social•4 days ago

yeah I honestly think they must like the ambiguity because it allows things that clearly aren’t classic texts in their own right (like idk Harry Potter) to seem reasonably qualified, but then it sort of looks like a playwright award when a ‘regular’ play wins

mrlukowski.bsky.social•4 days ago

yeah I totally agree – I suppose charitably you could say it’s the equivalent of 'best musical’ (where it probably is the production?) but it’s hysterically woolly (although I think good for The Years!). On the flipside you also have Icke’s Oedipus nominated for best revival, which seems quite silly

larapar.bsky.social•3 days ago

Best adaptation would be great. Whether it's from a book, film or from a classic. It would reward dramaturgs directors and devisers more, theatre isn't just plays! Also a revival should be of plays not older than 100 years. Oedipus isn't a revival. It's an adaptation of a classic.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply