The Emmys Don't Get It Abysmally Wrong
Published July 17, 2008
The Emmy nominations were announced at 5:40 am this morning, so at 5:41 commenced the bitching and whining. But really, despite the obvious and obvious-only-to-partisans snubs, this year isn’t an embarrassment for the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences like, say, 2006 was.
I’m not one of those people who will complain about the nominations as a way of saying the Emmys aren’t relevant. If they weren’t relevant, we wouldn’t complain about the choices; we’d ignore them like we do the People’s Choice awards. (The only people’s choice that matters: watching a show.)
The Academy will never get it “right” because “right” is subjective, plus there’s so much more than merit that goes into any award selection: politics, insiders versus outsiders, making up for previous snubs, low levels of TV viewership among TV creatorship, etc.
But that said, what’s making me smile, frown, shrug and scratch my head about this morning’s announcement?
Smiling
- Hugh Laurie is nominated in a field so competitive it took six slots to fit in the five worthy nominees and still includes James Spader. Who, let’s face it, will win again. I can’t take anything away from the other nominees, but as the years go on it becomes more incomprehensible that Laurie still hasn’t won for a performance that can tumble from heartbreaking to infuriating to side-splitting in an instant. His lack of a nomination in 2006 was something I'm always fearful will be repeated.
- Michael C. Hall makes a serial killer lovable and witty in Dexter, but was inexplicably omitted for the first season of the show, so I'm thrilled he's included this time.
- House is up for Outstanding Drama, again in a field with six nominees to fit all the worthy contenders in … plus Boston Legal. The latest House season was met with mixed reactions, and the now-ungainly ensemble needs to become more, um, gainly or risk alienating even someone like me who loved the Survivor arc. But it’s a more intelligent and ambitious show than it’s often given credit for because of the “formulaic procedural” stigma.
- Sarah Silverman and Co. get props for "I’m F***ing Matt Damon." Who says the Academy is only full of stodgy old guys?
Frowning
- No Pushing Daisies for Outstanding Comedy? I blame the strike-shortened season: it only got nine episodes to prove itself. It wouldn’t sting so much if a sub-par Entourage hadn’t been included.
- No writing nomination for "House’s Head," one of the Outstanding Drama nominee’s most outstanding episodes ever. Maybe they just didn’t want to read out all those names: Doris Egan, Garrett Lerner & Russel Friend, David Foster, and Peter Blake were all credited.
- They’re fine, but … Boston Legal and James Spader? Really? I haven’t been able to get through an entire episode, though I’ve seen and don’t hate the show. In fact I have residual love for David E. Kelley despite the fact that I got my fill of his incessantly quirky/preachy dramedies somewhere during the run of The Practice. But the slavish Emmy devotion is mystifying to me. Voters and fans see something I really, really don’t.
Diane is a publications manager who's addicted to television, movies, and books and justifies her pop culture obsessions by writing about them for Blogcritics. She also runs the TV, Eh? website, a compilation of news and information about Canadian television series.
- The Emmys Don't Get It Abysmally Wrong
- Published: July 17, 2008
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Video: Awards Shows
- Writer: Diane Kristine
- Diane Kristine's BC Writer page
- Diane Kristine's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
According to Gold Derby "House's Head" was submitted, so that's why I had my fingers crossed.
I think I'd have to write one of my normally verbose posts to fully explain what I mean by The Wire's relative lack of entertainment value, because I don't mean it to detract from the show at all, though I know it can't help but come across as an insult. The short version is it's not an easy show to watch, though.
Well then you had a right to frown.
I do know what you are saying about The Wire. To many people there's an element of escapism they want in their entertainment, and The Wire brings home too many issues people don't want to deal with.
Fine, you just explained in a sentence what I thought was too complicated to express quickly.
heh, sorry. I've had a lot of practice ineffectually pleading the case why people should watch the series.
Diane, HOW could you possibly utter in public that HUGH LAURIE will not win the EMMY?????? HAVE FAITH!!! COLLECT MONEY for bribes. Just DON'T say he won't win.
I BELIEVE that he will win and he deserves to win. He works harder than anyone I know. What with the accent change, the cane, the amount of screen time and dialog..... He works TOO hard as a matter of fact.
He NEEDS to be honored and awarded for that alone. Not to mention what an AMAZING actor he is.
So....ya wanna take what you said back?
Ha, sorry, I don't believe in The Secret ;) Whatever I say or wish for makes no difference, though I do wish for Hugh Laurie to win. Wanna hear something terrible? I actually think Jon Hamm will win this year. Of course I will be very disappointed if Laurie doesn't, but an Emmy isn't his only reward for his hard work.
I believe Hugh Laurie has not won an Emmy because he is British. James Spader does not hold a candle to Hugh as far as acting and creating a memorable character. He has one big speech at the end of the show, and he plods along the same boring character the rest of the episode. Hugh is never the same from one second to the next. He has had stunning reviews, and the show is top ten because of him. I don't think Boston Legal breaks the top 20.
Hugh as a Brit is a threat to American actors. They don't want to reward Brits, for fear that producers and networks will bring in more of them and take their jobs. Hugh was credited with an influx of British actors two years ago. They will work for less money, and they can play Americans as well as Americans can.
If Hugh doesn't win this year, it will clearly show their bias.
Like others here, I cannot understand why Hugh Laurie has not yet won an Emmy for his performance on "House"; he is absolutely overdue. However, even if he never wins one, I think that his performance as Gregory House will continue to be re-broadcast for many years to come, long after "Boston Legal" and James Spader's performance in it have faded from memory.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/79127)
"No writing nomination for 'House's Head,'"
Do you know if it was even submitted? The producers only submit a few episodes for consideration
"The Wire...being possibly the best show I've seen...an intense, complex viewing experience lacking the pure entertainment value of..."
I think we had chatted previously in the comments after you caught an early season. Glad to see you liked it so much as well. However I would agree to disagree with your assessment of its lacking entertainment value compared to those other shows.