These were just announced today and columnists around the country are declaring their picks for "snubs" and "well-chosen" nominations.
As I've stated before, I enjoy a lot of TV and agree that there are a lot of worthy shows and performers who are passed over in the nominations. But, there are only five nominations per category, so everyone can't be chosen.
I also feel that we all have our personal favorites and those who criticize the nominations are usually sticking up for their favorites, wishing to see them singled out. That being said, I'm not going to belittle anyone's nomination (there are some nominations that I just don't "get," but I'll just accept that mine is a minority view), but would like to give a pat on the back for a few actors that I feel were truly worthy and I hope will walk away with an award:
Hugh Laurie in "House." I just started watching this show this spring and am always entertained by this actor and the character he plays.
Kevin Dillon in "Entourage." Jeremy Piven is wonderful as Ari, biting deeply into his role and reveling in how he delivers the lines, but Dillon plays a much wider range with Johnny Drama. I really find him to be the heart of the show.
Neil Patrick Harris in "How I Met Your Mother." Not to knock the other actors on this show, but Harris' Barney commands center stage whenever he's in a scene. Maybe the writers just give him the best lines, but I'm almost guaranteed a laugh when he speaks.
T. R. Knight in "Grey's Anatomy." Am bored with his storyline, but still like his character. Gotta be the actor, right?
Otherwise, I think the Emmys basically get it right. Sometimes, shows seem to just get a nomination through past reputation (like All-Star teams in sports?), but fresh blood is also rewarded quite often ("Heroes" is this year's best example).
The toughest category for me are the writing categories. I'm always on the fence about it when one show dominates these. Certainly, "The Sopranos" has great writing and it wouldn't be fair to limit each show to only one nomination when there are so many good writers on the staff, but I always think there must be some way to "spread the wealth" rather than just see one show take three or more of the five. But, I will admit, every strategy I can think of to remedy this has problems. I'll keep working on it and get back to you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
About television...
What do you think of Gilmore Girls?
When my mother told me "Watch this new telefilm with me!" I honestly thought it was the latest stupid soap-opera ish thing that arrived on tv...But: I saw it, and the first thing I thought then was "Really well-written".
Rhythm, clever dialogues...and balance. Balance is the most impressive thing. There is a woman who had a daughter when she was seventeen: and this daughter remains virgin for a lot of time. And when she actually sleeps with a man...her best friend declares that she wants to wait her wedding to have sex. Rory (the daughter) wanted to go to Harvard: an episode dedicated and settled in that university, merchandising, advertising...and then she understood Yale was best. And she goes to Yale. Politically, socially, everythingly not uncorrect. Not correct.
Simply in balance.
Great writer, I think.
(You see, I am not always mean...)
Post a Comment