I wouldn't hate a rule that acting categories be subject to a two-nomination-per-show limit of some kind. That would help avoid these monocultures where only two shows swept the supporting actor category. It wouldn't completely disrupt the awards--for this year, it would have knocked out 1/3 lead actor noms for Succession, 2/4 supporting actor noms each for Succession and White Lotus, and 2/4 supporting actress noms for White Lotus. I liked the second season of White Lotus; I think it deserved some nominations. I don't think the entire bloody cast should have gotten nominated. I haven't seen Succession (I know, I'll hand in my Episodic Medium badge and gun right after this rant) but I'd be willing to bet it's the same story.
I agree with this and I also favor a one-Emmy-per-character rule -- Jeremy Strong already won once for Succession, he doesn't need to win again until he's in a new show.
Yeah, seconding this. Between this and Emmy voters likely having only so much time to check shows out, you just get the most zeitgeist-y shows sweeping things. I also liked White Lotus season 2, but the number of acting noms is ridiculous - maybe Meghann Fahy, Aubrey Plaza IMO but the rest are strike me as superfluous (although I'm sure many will go to bat for Jennifer Coolidge).
The issue of snubs aside, just really happy that Rhea Seehorn is finally getting some recognition for Better Call Saul! Reading great BCS reviews (here at EM I mean) as the show ended was like 1/2 of the wishlist, the other was that the show would get some Emmy love - I'm sure Succession will steamroll BCS but eh, will take what I can get.
Have no idea what to think of Seehorn's chances - do the White Lotus' domination in noms (nom-dom?) in her category mean better chances for one of the White Lotus actresses, or does it mean potential split votes?
Glad you called out the Survivor nomination! Its maybe not a super important category, but nice to see it getting recognized after getting shut out by Amazing Race throughout its entire early seasons. I wonder how much the pandemic binge effect has renewed interest in the show amongst voters.
Its interesting that even in "Peak TV" era, the Emmy nominees still end up looking like they did in the early 2000s, with a couple of shows dominating most categories (e.g. The West Wing). I guess votes can still only pay attention to so many shows at a time.
I mentioned this in the Chat thread, but while I don't typically get concerned with snubs or people I don't like getting nominated, I get more bothered by someone Brian Cox being nominated for lead actor despite only being in a couple episodes. Just feels very lazy. Would've been cool to see someone like Paddy Considine get that slot.
With Emmys and even moreso with Oscars, me wish there was clearer distinction between lead and supporting. Me always hate when someone who is clearly lead of movie — often young actor like Haley Joel Osment in Sixth Sense or Hallie Steinfeld in True Grit — is put in Supporting because studio think it will be less competitive in that category. Granted that move got Ke Huy Quan his Oscar, so there is silver lining...
There's so much good television these days that one could come up with 2-3 "snubs" for every actual nominee, so in some ways it's almost arbitrary who gets nominated.
Me do "awards show" in Dissole facebook group called Snubbies, for best Oscar-snubbed movies each year (winner gets gold statue of Spike Lee). One year me tried doing Tubbies for TV (statue was gay Teletubby), and me gave up half way through setting it up because there was just way too much. Even if me not see movie, it very clear which movies people thought were overlooked. But it just impossible to keep up with good TV out there, there just too much.
Got a question that I'm hoping Myles or someone else can answer for me.
I thought the Emmys changed their rules this year so that all of a show's episodes had to air in the eligibility period, i.e., by May 31. However, both Top Chef and Vanderpump Rules received nominations in their category and they each had a couple of episodes spill into June. So did the rule change not affect unscripted shows?
That was not a rule change, as far as I know? You simply have to air the majority of your episodes in eligibility. The Other Two also aired four of its episodes in June.
But looking at that article closely, I guess it's just that any performances (or other elements like writing/directing etc...) in episodes that air outside the period are not eligible until next cycle, but that doesn't prevent the whole show from being nominated as long as it meets the main criteria for eligibility?
Weird change. But I guess I just answered my own question.
I wouldn't hate a rule that acting categories be subject to a two-nomination-per-show limit of some kind. That would help avoid these monocultures where only two shows swept the supporting actor category. It wouldn't completely disrupt the awards--for this year, it would have knocked out 1/3 lead actor noms for Succession, 2/4 supporting actor noms each for Succession and White Lotus, and 2/4 supporting actress noms for White Lotus. I liked the second season of White Lotus; I think it deserved some nominations. I don't think the entire bloody cast should have gotten nominated. I haven't seen Succession (I know, I'll hand in my Episodic Medium badge and gun right after this rant) but I'd be willing to bet it's the same story.
I agree with this and I also favor a one-Emmy-per-character rule -- Jeremy Strong already won once for Succession, he doesn't need to win again until he's in a new show.
Yeah, seconding this. Between this and Emmy voters likely having only so much time to check shows out, you just get the most zeitgeist-y shows sweeping things. I also liked White Lotus season 2, but the number of acting noms is ridiculous - maybe Meghann Fahy, Aubrey Plaza IMO but the rest are strike me as superfluous (although I'm sure many will go to bat for Jennifer Coolidge).
The issue of snubs aside, just really happy that Rhea Seehorn is finally getting some recognition for Better Call Saul! Reading great BCS reviews (here at EM I mean) as the show ended was like 1/2 of the wishlist, the other was that the show would get some Emmy love - I'm sure Succession will steamroll BCS but eh, will take what I can get.
Have no idea what to think of Seehorn's chances - do the White Lotus' domination in noms (nom-dom?) in her category mean better chances for one of the White Lotus actresses, or does it mean potential split votes?
Glad you called out the Survivor nomination! Its maybe not a super important category, but nice to see it getting recognized after getting shut out by Amazing Race throughout its entire early seasons. I wonder how much the pandemic binge effect has renewed interest in the show amongst voters.
Its interesting that even in "Peak TV" era, the Emmy nominees still end up looking like they did in the early 2000s, with a couple of shows dominating most categories (e.g. The West Wing). I guess votes can still only pay attention to so many shows at a time.
I mentioned this in the Chat thread, but while I don't typically get concerned with snubs or people I don't like getting nominated, I get more bothered by someone Brian Cox being nominated for lead actor despite only being in a couple episodes. Just feels very lazy. Would've been cool to see someone like Paddy Considine get that slot.
With Emmys and even moreso with Oscars, me wish there was clearer distinction between lead and supporting. Me always hate when someone who is clearly lead of movie — often young actor like Haley Joel Osment in Sixth Sense or Hallie Steinfeld in True Grit — is put in Supporting because studio think it will be less competitive in that category. Granted that move got Ke Huy Quan his Oscar, so there is silver lining...
There's so much good television these days that one could come up with 2-3 "snubs" for every actual nominee, so in some ways it's almost arbitrary who gets nominated.
Me do "awards show" in Dissole facebook group called Snubbies, for best Oscar-snubbed movies each year (winner gets gold statue of Spike Lee). One year me tried doing Tubbies for TV (statue was gay Teletubby), and me gave up half way through setting it up because there was just way too much. Even if me not see movie, it very clear which movies people thought were overlooked. But it just impossible to keep up with good TV out there, there just too much.
Got a question that I'm hoping Myles or someone else can answer for me.
I thought the Emmys changed their rules this year so that all of a show's episodes had to air in the eligibility period, i.e., by May 31. However, both Top Chef and Vanderpump Rules received nominations in their category and they each had a couple of episodes spill into June. So did the rule change not affect unscripted shows?
That was not a rule change, as far as I know? You simply have to air the majority of your episodes in eligibility. The Other Two also aired four of its episodes in June.
I remember hearing that they got rid of the hanging rule last year: https://deadline.com/2022/06/tv-academy-eliminates-hanging-episode-rule-2023-competition-1235036537/
But looking at that article closely, I guess it's just that any performances (or other elements like writing/directing etc...) in episodes that air outside the period are not eligible until next cycle, but that doesn't prevent the whole show from being nominated as long as it meets the main criteria for eligibility?
Weird change. But I guess I just answered my own question.
Correct. This is how Stranger Things Season 4 got nominated in Music Supervision after winning last year.