Comments on: Emmys Afterglow: First timers, Streakers…and Bucky Gunts! http://tv.blog.imdb.net/2010/08/30/emmys-afterglow-first-timers-streakers-and-bucky-gunts/ The IMDb Television Blog Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:19:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Melanie McFarland http://tv.blog.imdb.net/2010/08/30/emmys-afterglow-first-timers-streakers-and-bucky-gunts/comment-page-1/#comment-5725 Melanie McFarland Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:51:15 +0000 http://tv.blog.imdb.net/?p=1806#comment-5725 Thank you for pointing that out, JC! I have updated the post to include the correct information. Thank you for pointing that out, JC! I have updated the post to include the correct information.

]]> By: JC http://tv.blog.imdb.net/2010/08/30/emmys-afterglow-first-timers-streakers-and-bucky-gunts/comment-page-1/#comment-5724 JC Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:43:02 +0000 http://tv.blog.imdb.net/?p=1806#comment-5724 You say Breaking Bad's Aaron Paul is a first time nominee and winner. Not true. First time winner yes, but he was nominated last year for the same role. You say Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul is a first time nominee and winner. Not true. First time winner yes, but he was nominated last year for the same role.

]]> By: Greg Walrath http://tv.blog.imdb.net/2010/08/30/emmys-afterglow-first-timers-streakers-and-bucky-gunts/comment-page-1/#comment-5716 Greg Walrath Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:36:17 +0000 http://tv.blog.imdb.net/?p=1806#comment-5716 Overall, a great show, just a couple of disappointments: 1. Nathan Fillion did NOT get to hand Christina Hendricks an Emmy. If you don't get the significance of that, well, I just don't even want to know you. 2. I would have loved to see the NBC execs squirm if Conan O'Brien won in the best variety category. C'est la Vie. Overall, a great show, just a couple of disappointments:

1. Nathan Fillion did NOT get to hand Christina Hendricks an Emmy. If you don’t get the significance of that, well, I just don’t even want to know you.

2. I would have loved to see the NBC execs squirm if Conan O’Brien won in the best variety category. C’est la Vie.

]]> By: webdiva http://tv.blog.imdb.net/2010/08/30/emmys-afterglow-first-timers-streakers-and-bucky-gunts/comment-page-1/#comment-5712 webdiva Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:16:11 +0000 http://tv.blog.imdb.net/?p=1806#comment-5712 Clarification: I would've liked a second win for The Good Wife -- I was happy to see Archie Panjabi get a win for best supporting actress in a drama series, because I really like her performance: she adds a needed complexity to the role, and she has good chemistry with Julianna Margulies. We want them to be gal pals, and Alicia certainly needs one, but it still isn't clear whose side Kalinda is on other than her own. How interesting for next season. Clarification: I would’ve liked a second win for The Good Wife — I was happy to see Archie Panjabi get a win for best supporting actress in a drama series, because I really like her performance: she adds a needed complexity to the role, and she has good chemistry with Julianna Margulies. We want them to be gal pals, and Alicia certainly needs one, but it still isn’t clear whose side Kalinda is on other than her own. How interesting for next season.

]]> By: webdiva http://tv.blog.imdb.net/2010/08/30/emmys-afterglow-first-timers-streakers-and-bucky-gunts/comment-page-1/#comment-5711 webdiva Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:07:46 +0000 http://tv.blog.imdb.net/?p=1806#comment-5711 I'll repeat what I've said before: the Emmys and the Oscars are as much or more about popularity as they are about merit. Merit really takes second place: the voters vote for the best series, movies and performances of *people they like* ... which is different than voting for the best performances, series, or movies. I'm not sure how you can stop that, but making sure that the voters actually watch all the relevant performances, etc., would be a start. If you could do that before the nominating process, that would be much better. But it's a big problem, and a 'structural' one. So is the fact that miniseries and movies are lumped into one category re: best actors and best supporting actors; they should be separate categories -- sustaining a role over several episodes is harder than doing it for a two-hour film. The two just aren't comparable. Some obvious examples or error: 1) Jeff Bridges and Ian McKellen never should have been nominated for best actor in a miniseries or movie -- Bridges was coasting on his Oscar win and phoned in that role, whereas McKellen was just being McKellen. Sure, we love him, but it clearly wasn't his best role, and it was in a mediocre remake. However, they're both well loved in Hollywood. Yet had the miniseries and movies not been competing in the same category, the men from The Pacific would have had a chance at a nomination (and, therefore, a win) for best actor. Really: 23 nominations for that miniseries, and NONE of the actors got nominated?? Sorry, that's just ridiculous. The actors were obviously more important to the brilliance of that series than the costume, makeup and sound editing folks were. You don't win best miniseries because of costumes or makeup or sound, yet those folks were nominated for The Pacific. How screwed up is THAT? Another case: nice for them that Connie Britton and January Jones got nominated for best actress in a drama series, but neither of them could hold a candle during any part of their last season to Khandi Alexander and Melissa Leo in Treme. Alexander alone wiped the floor with both Britton and Jones. But you'd have had to actually *seen* Treme to know that. Which makes me wonder: did the voters even bother to watch ANY episodes of Treme, let alone the entire series??? Doesn't look like it. David Simon may be used to having his productions ignored by the Emmys, but that's just plain wrong, given their excellence. The reason he's ignored? Can't think of any other than that he's just not popular in Hollywood. 'Cause he ain't *from* there. Same series, different example: John Goodman gets a nomination for his supporting role in the Kevorkian docudrama, but nothing for his lead in Treme, which was more impressive, and Clarke Peters gets ignored entirely. Next to either of them, Matthew Fox of Lost just didn't belong in the same category, and either Goodman or Peters could have given Bryan Cranston a stiff shock and a run for the money. Again, you have to have actually seen what they did in Treme to know this. And you can't win unless you're nominated. The good news: Temple Grandin cleaned up. I was happy to see that. Ditto that Top Chef got a win (at last !!) and Lost got none (it wasn't Lost's best season, so that's fair). I would have liked a win somewhere for The Good Wife, maybe in the script category, but Mad Men and Breaking Bad have all the momentum and fans, so that wasn't going to happen. All in all, it could have gone better. But that would require some major reforms in the voting process, and I'm not holding my breath for that. I’ll repeat what I’ve said before: the Emmys and the Oscars are as much or more about popularity as they are about merit. Merit really takes second place: the voters vote for the best series, movies and performances of *people they like* … which is different than voting for the best performances, series, or movies. I’m not sure how you can stop that, but making sure that the voters actually watch all the relevant performances, etc., would be a start. If you could do that before the nominating process, that would be much better. But it’s a big problem, and a ‘structural’ one. So is the fact that miniseries and movies are lumped into one category re: best actors and best supporting actors; they should be separate categories — sustaining a role over several episodes is harder than doing it for a two-hour film. The two just aren’t comparable.

Some obvious examples or error: 1) Jeff Bridges and Ian McKellen never should have been nominated for best actor in a miniseries or movie — Bridges was coasting on his Oscar win and phoned in that role, whereas McKellen was just being McKellen. Sure, we love him, but it clearly wasn’t his best role, and it was in a mediocre remake. However, they’re both well loved in Hollywood. Yet had the miniseries and movies not been competing in the same category, the men from The Pacific would have had a chance at a nomination (and, therefore, a win) for best actor. Really: 23 nominations for that miniseries, and NONE of the actors got nominated?? Sorry, that’s just ridiculous. The actors were obviously more important to the brilliance of that series than the costume, makeup and sound editing folks were. You don’t win best miniseries because of costumes or makeup or sound, yet those folks were nominated for The Pacific. How screwed up is THAT?

Another case: nice for them that Connie Britton and January Jones got nominated for best actress in a drama series, but neither of them could hold a candle during any part of their last season to Khandi Alexander and Melissa Leo in Treme. Alexander alone wiped the floor with both Britton and Jones. But you’d have had to actually *seen* Treme to know that. Which makes me wonder: did the voters even bother to watch ANY episodes of Treme, let alone the entire series??? Doesn’t look like it.

David Simon may be used to having his productions ignored by the Emmys, but that’s just plain wrong, given their excellence. The reason he’s ignored? Can’t think of any other than that he’s just not popular in Hollywood. ‘Cause he ain’t *from* there.

Same series, different example: John Goodman gets a nomination for his supporting role in the Kevorkian docudrama, but nothing for his lead in Treme, which was more impressive, and Clarke Peters gets ignored entirely. Next to either of them, Matthew Fox of Lost just didn’t belong in the same category, and either Goodman or Peters could have given Bryan Cranston a stiff shock and a run for the money. Again, you have to have actually seen what they did in Treme to know this. And you can’t win unless you’re nominated.

The good news: Temple Grandin cleaned up. I was happy to see that. Ditto that Top Chef got a win (at last !!) and Lost got none (it wasn’t Lost’s best season, so that’s fair). I would have liked a win somewhere for The Good Wife, maybe in the script category, but Mad Men and Breaking Bad have all the momentum and fans, so that wasn’t going to happen.

All in all, it could have gone better. But that would require some major reforms in the voting process, and I’m not holding my breath for that.

]]>