The nominations for the 2011 Emmy awards have been announced, with "Mildred Pierce," "Mad Men," "Boardwalk Empire" and "Modern Family" leading the pack in nominees.
Well, I'm back! And good God, what a time to be back! "Breaking Bad" is back on air and continues to be brilliant, the NFL lockout finally appears to be almost over, the final "Harry Potter" movie finally gets released to a worldwide audience, and most importantly (for the purposes of this column) the nominations for the 2011 Primetime Emmy Awards were finally announced this past Thursday. This, of course, means that one thing: the return one of my favorite annual columns in which I dedicated some time to analyzing each of the year's notable nominations while also simultaneously giving my rapid reactions (especially considering how the awards show doesn't take place until mid-September).
Now, over the years (and especially since the beginning of the rise of cable TV and the resulting surge in numbers of quality shows, scripted and non-scripted) the Emmy awards have been known for two things: the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences honoring what they believe to be the highlights of the previous TV season (this, of course, being the 2010-2011 TV season) and snubs--glorious, glorious snubs--or shows and individuals that were arguably one of the top in their categories but were instead denied a nomination in favor of someone or something of less quality. In regards to the latter, the Emmys were once again chock full of them, from past examples like "The Wire" getting only two (two!) nominations in their brilliant five-season run and to this year, with great shows like "Community," "Fringe," "and "Treme" getting absolutely zero nominations whatsoever and quality silver screen actors like Nick Offerman and Khandi Alexander not getting recognized for their exquisite vote from those anonymous (at least to the viewing public) Emmy voters. This, mind you, coming in the same year where these same voters also decided that shows like "Harry's Law," "The Killing" and (shivers) "Hot in Cleveland" deserved some sort of notable nomination.
But you know what? Compared to years past, this year's slate of Emmy nominees were more glass half full than glass half-empty. Take the Outstanding Comedy Series category, for instance. Sure, "Glee"and "The Big Bang Theory" got inexplicably nominated this year, but at least the list of nominees also included "Parks and Recreations," arguably the best TV show in 2011, period (at least before "Breaking Bad" returned) while also a show that many believed would only receive a lead actress nomination from Amy Poehler (just like last year). Or how about in the Outstanding Drama Series category, where "Game of Thrones," the best rookie show of the season, and "Friday Night Lights," a highly respected critical darling that had previously been largely ignored, received one nomination each (and also some notable acting recognition like Peter Dinklage for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series and Kyle Chandler for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series). Some might have been ticked off by how "Justified" and "Louie" weren't nominated for Outstanding Drama and Outstanding Comedy respectfully (even though FX shows have had a long history of getting shunned by the voters), but at least they could point to the acting nominations of Timothy Olyphant, Margo Martindale, Walter Goggins and Louis C.K. as four really nice consolations prizes.
Look, the Emmys, as much as you hope it would stop, are never going to be perfect with their nominations. Every year from now until the moment television becomes a deceased medium and/or our American civilization becomes destroyed by a large pack of mutated Chinese fireflies, there will be occasions where you will look at the nominees and find yourself grinding your teeth in frustration and questioning the nominating process or whether these voters know what in fact their doing. But considering the Emmy nominations from year's past and considering the Emmy nominations that were announced by Joshua Jackson and Melissa McCarthy this past Thursday, I'd say that this year's list of nominations was much more tolerable than usual, which is a very good way to look at it all. Also, at least the Emmys aren't the Golden Globes (which I may remind you voted Piper Perabo as one of the six best dramatic actresses a mere seven months ago), and that's something that fans of TV can all be happy about.
Now that I've given the basics of my thoughts on this year's nominations, it's time to get into the specific thoughts, one major category at a time. I have around 35 or so categories listed that I want to get into, so in the spirit of continuing blog tradition, this Emmy predictions column shall be split up into three separate categories: one today, one Saturday, and one the following Monday. The following is part one.
(cracks knuckles)
(puts "A Beautiful Mine" by RJD2 on loop)
Here we go...
OUTSTANDING DRAMA SERIES
Will and Should Win: "Mad Men"
One of these days this 1960s period drama is going to lose Outstanding Drama. One of these days we will see Matthew Weiner & Co. remain in their seats and forced to pay their respects to a show that finally took their crown instead of going up to the podium and pick up the award themselves like they have done every year since 2008. And the thing is, for most of the year, I did actually think that was going to happen, with the freshman drama "Boardwalk Empire" (from Terrence Winter, who like Weiner is also a former writer of "The Sopranos") being hailed as the best new show of the season while picking up both the Golden Globe for Best Drama and the SAG Award for Best Acting Ensemble. So, how did I change my mind? One word: logic.
The way I see it is this: in 2010 "Mad Men" had what was probably its best season to date. There were simply just so many great moments from these past thirteen episodes ranging from the alcoholic demise of main character Don Draper, one of the show's most compelling plotlines ever, and Sally's maturity to Lane Pryce's realization of his love towards the United States and the possible beginning of the end for SCDP. Add to the fact that it had another year of great writing and fantastic acting (featuring the breakout performance of 11 yr. old Kiernan Shipka, whose child acting has reached Fanning-like greatness) as well as the fact that season four featured arguably the show's best episode to date ( that, of course, being "The Suitcase," a tension-filled, "very special" episode in the words of Weiner that had a great payoff to the Don-Peggy relationship four seasons in the making while also featuring fabulous acting by both Jon Hamm and Elisabeth Moss). So, with that in mind, if the show can win the Outstanding Drama Emmy in their first three seasons, why shouldn't it also receive one for this season? And, please, don't tell me that "Boardwalk Empire" season one was better. Quite frankly, it never even came close to matching "Mad Men."
Other Thoughts: So, as you probably assumed from the previous two paragraphs, I believe that this year's Emmys will be a two-horse race between the three-time defending champion "Mad Men" and the dashing newcomer "Boardwalk Empire." Dark horse, if any? Probably "The Good Wife," because of its highly praised (and heavily nominated) cast of actors while also being the runaway choice for best network drama of the year. As for my thoughts on the nominations, I believe that this was a pretty good list in retrospect, with five out of the six shows nominated deserving of the recognition. Sure, you could argue that either "Justified" season two, the only seasons of "Terriers" and "Rubicon," and the second season of "Treme" were all much better than the fifth season of "Dexter" (and you probably would be right), but that's really being too nitpicky, in my opinion. "Dexter," after all, is a show that will probably receive Emmy love from now until they're finally off the air, and (as I mentioned earlier) the three acting nominations of "Justified" is a pretty decent consolation prize for their snub in this category.
OUTSTANDING COMEDY SERIES
Will Win: "Modern Family"
Ugh, this show again. You know, it's funny, despite this show being on the air for only two seasons, it has the feel to me of those veterans comedies like "The Office" that have reached their peak years ago yet are still chugging along because it's one of their network's few remaining cash cows (the network, in this case, being ABC, who only has this, "Desperate Housewives," "Grey's Anatomy," "The Bachelor" franchise and "Dancing with the Stars" as their remaining hit shows). It is completely unoriginal, with plots constructed from typical sitcom cliches like "accidental misunderstandings." Basically, it's like every other traditional family sitcom in the past thirty years, only (as the title states) set in a more modern setting with contemporary pop culture references like the iPad or Justin Bieber. Meanwhile, the writing has once again been average at best and pretty much all of the characters were shrill and one-dimensional. And yet...the show still has one of the best casts in all of television, the episodes have been just good enough to keep its tens of millions of viewers coming back week after week, it has won every major awards show in the past year from the Golden Globes to the Comedy Awards to last year's Emmys, and they have created around a half dozen or so episodes that should be satisfactory enough for the voters to reward it with a repeat win in this category. And for those four reasons alone, I see no scenario in which the show doesn't win.
Should Win: "Parks and Recreations"
Best comedy of the season, plain and simple (and also the best of the six shows nominated, obviously). It produced sixteen episodes in season three instead of the usual 22-episode network TV season (and for that I would just like to give one more reminder to NBC to screw themselves for putting "Outsourced" on the air), yet all 16 have been consistently fantastic ranging from either the really good (the Will Forte episode, "Camping") to the great ("Indianapolis," "Harvest Festival," "Ron and Tammy: Part II") to the down right perfect ("The Flu," "April and Andy's Fancy Dinner Party," "Li'l Sebastian"). The show's acting? Phenomenal. The dialogue? Sharp and wonderfully executed. Ron Swanson's mustache? Tom Selleck-esque legendary. If you want any more explanations, just re-read my weekly reviews of this season's episodes from the NBC Thursday Night Comedies Power Ranking that I ran earlier this year on the blog. Otherwise, I'm just gonna go ahead and order all the bacon and eggs there is in the closest restaurant to mine, and move on.
Other Thoughts:
a. Hey, Emmy voters! Ever heard of "Community" by any chance? You know, that show which aired on NBC Thursday night at 8 p.m./7 p.m. CT this past year? The one that stars Joel McHale and Chevy Chase, to name a few? The one with the second season that was hilarious, featured pantheon-level great episodes like "Cooperative Calligraphy" and "Paradigms of Human Memory," and which featured fantastic writing, top notch directing from the Russo Bros., quality acting and two of the most attractive actresses on the small screen in Alison Brie and Gillian Jacobs (you know, the girls from those jaw dropping photos in this month's GQ with them getting kinky in scandalously-clad lingerie)? Just kidding; of course you haven't! Because if you did, than maybe you would have recognized their brilliance and rewarded them with at least one nomination instead of shunning them this year and giving them none. (sigh)
b. Another bad year to be an FX comedy as "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," "Louie" and "Archer" were not nominated despite being great in their own right. In fact, every year is almost always a bad year for FX programs come Emmy time as none of their scripted programs have been nominated for a single Outstanding Drama or Outstanding Comedy award since its conception in 1994, and that includes shows like "The Shield," "Sons of Anarchy," "Justified," and "Terriers." Makes you wonder what the network heads at FX ever did to piss off the Emmy voters and make them get zero love.
c. Kind of surprising how zero Showtime "comedies" were nominated this year, considering how one has always made it in the past few years.
d. Call me naive, but I can actually see a scenario in which "Parks and Recreations," the biggest underdog of the field, wins this thing. It just all depends on what episodes Michael Shur and the producers decide to submit for consideration. If they submit any of the season's top-rate episodes like "The Flu," episodes that were both a laugh riot and/or pretty light on plots of previous seasons, I think they can be just enough for the voters to realize how much better of a show it is than the rest. But, of course, sometimes I tend to be more optimistic than realistic, and I have a feeling that this is another example of it.
OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTOR IN A DRAMA SERIES
Will and Should Win: Jon Hamm as Don Draper on "Mad Men"
With three-time winner Bryan Cranston ineligible this year to try for the unprecedented four-peat (damn Vince Gilligan and his decision to prolong the show's return last year!), this category (once again the toughest of the bunch) remains the most wide open it's been in a while. Honestly, of these six wonderful actors nominated, I could easily see five of them (sorry, Kyle Chandler) raising the Emmy in triumph two months from now. However, out of these five, the one that I have on the top of my list to win it (and I'm sure the top of many other lists to win it, too) is Jon Hamm. The first obvious reason why I think he will (and should) get the award is because he was presented by Matt Weiner and the writing staff the gift of being able to play a Don Draper that started out the season self-destructive while slowly redeemed himself as it continued, and then proceeded to rewarded them in return with one moving episode after another. The second most obvious reason is his masterful performance in "The Suitcase" (probably the best episode you can possibly submit for yourself if you're ever in contention for an Emmy), one in which he got to portray a vast number of emotions from Don and executing them flawlessly. Unless there's another acting performance as good that I have forgotten that was given by the other five nominees, I doubt that he will be beaten.
Other Thoughts:
a. Reasons why I could see the other nominees (except for Chandler) win the award: Steve Buscemi because he won both the Golden Globe and the SAG award in this very category earlier this year, Timothy Olyphant for his performance in "Reckoning" and for showing both the badassery of Raylan Givens and the man's emotional vulnerability, and either Hugh Laurie or Michael C. Hall for carrying two shows that had one of their overall weaker seasons on their backs.
b. Wouldn't it be hilarious if the trio of Hamm, Hall and Laurie, actors that have been regulars in this category for the past few years yet have always lost to the duo of James Spader and Bryan Cranston, were to lose to a guy in Steve Buscemi that was nominated this year for the first time?
c. Because this category is usually the toughest to win and to get nominated in (because the field is just so deep), it also means that the list of actors that barely missed out on the six man field is a pretty impressive list in its own right. Some notable omissions for this season include Wendell Pierce of "Treme," William H. Macy of "Shameles," Sean Bean of "Game of Thrones," Jeremy Irons of "The Borgias," former winner Gabriel Byrne of "In Treatment," Peter Krause of "Parenthood" Donal Logue of "Terriers," James Badge Dale of "Rubicon" and Simon Baker of "The Mentalist." Now just imagine how tough this category is going to be next year when Bryan Cranston returns and Dustin Hoffman enters the field as the star of David Milch's "Lucky," the upcoming new drama from HBO. Now, grant it, some of these actors mentioned were part of shows that ended this past year. Still, this battle for the crown does have the potential of seeing some "Game of Thrones" level bloodbath!
OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTOR IN A COMEDY SERIES
Will and Should Win: Steve Carell as Michael Scott on "The Office"
This is a moment in Emmys history six years in the making. After missing out on the award five consecutive times despite delivering one fabulous year of acting after another, Carell is now up for this award for the sixth and final time as 2011 was his last time portraying the lovable and childish Dundler-Mifflin Scranton boss, Michael Scott. Considering how the Emmys have already given out trophies to the other favorites, Alec Baldwin (2008, 2009) and Jim Parsons (2010), the possibility that they're probably going to treat Carell's nomination as a cumulative performance rather than a single-season performance (as I'm sure they did with Kyra Sedgwick last year) and Carell's wonderful performance in his farewell episode, "Michael Says Goodbye," the stars have all aligned for one of the best comedic actors of the past half-decade to finally get the recognition that he has so long deserved.
Other Thoughts:
a. Devil's advocate: Sure, Steve Carell deserves to win, but he has deserved to win every year since season two and always lost, so what makes you sure that he's going to finally win now? Also, Baldwin is probably going to submit the "30 Rock" episode "100," in which he played four different versions of Jack Donaghy very well, and I have a feeling that the voting committee will be impressed enough by that to give him his third award in four years.
(UPDATE 07/23: According to Gold Derby, the episode that Baldwin is submitting is not "100," but rather the season finale "Respawn," where he spent most of the time thinking that Jack McBrayer's character Kenneth was his wife. Consider the chances of a Carell Emmy to be even higher than when I first posted this column.)
b. Johnny Galecki over Joel McHale? Really?!?!? Could the voters be any more ignorant of "Community," or are they just too lazy to watch it and instead voted for the other star of "The Big Bang Theory" just because Tony Shaloub is gone and Larry David was ineligible?
c. On the bright side, I was pretty relieved to see Louis C.K. nominated for this category. Not only does this prove that the Emmys at least watched one of my favorite comedies from 2010, but that they also enjoyed the multidimensional performance of this getting-better-every-episode comedian. But then again, when you're basically doing a one-man show every week (in which he also writes, directs, and edits, mind you), I don't see why he shouldn't have been nominated.
OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTRESS IN A DRAMA SERIES
Will Win: Julianna Margulies as Alicia Florrick on "The Good Wife"
With the exception of myself, who thought that it would be Glenn Close to win, almost everyone and their grandmothers thought that Margulies was going to win last year until she ended up losing to Kyra Sedgwick in a stunner. This year, with Close being ineligible and Sedgwick not even getting a nomination, Margulies is now even more of a favorite to win, with only Elisabeth Moss as her only true competitor (more on her after a few more sentences). Also, she has built up quite a great resume in preparation for this awards show. Not only has she won a Golden Globe for her performance on "The Good Wife" last year but she also has won two consecutive SAG awards. Overall, there seems to be nothing stopping Margulies from finally getting the victory in this, her second attempt.
Should Win: Elisabeth Moss as Peggy Olson on "Mad Men"
Two words: The. Suitcase. That is all.
Other Thoughts: While I knew that this was never going to be a possibility, I am a bit disappointed that Anna Torv wasn't nominated for her work on this past season of "Fringe," as she had to play multiple characters including the original Olivia Dunham, the Olivia Dunham of Earth-2 and the Olivia Dunham that was controlled by the soul of William Bell (played by Leonard Nimoy). Also, I'm really surprised that Sedgwick wasn't nominated. While this isn't the first instance of someone or something that won an Emmy one year and then were left out of the nominees list the next, the Emmys do have this tendency to keep nominating actors once they're nominated for the first time. So, seeing that not being the case this year with Sedgwick was kind of unusual.
OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTRESS IN A COMEDY SERIES
Will Win: Laura Linney as Catherine Jamison on "The Big C"
Honestly, since I have never watched "The Big C," I really have no serious justification for picking Linney. I guess it's because the last two actresses to win this series also anchored Showtime comedies (Toni Collete and Edie Falco), and because Linney played a woman that was diagnosed with cancer and had to keep it a secret from others, she will submit an episode (probably the pilot) with a satisfactory enough performance to get the most first place votes. Also, she is currently a perfect 3 for 3 when it comes to the Emmy awards, and I doubt that she will finally lose one for the first time ever this year. But, yeah, that's about it. Sorry for not being well prepared.
Should Win: Amy Poehler as Leslie Knope on "Parks and Recreations"
Well, she is the funny leading lady on this year's best comedy. Also, she does a great job doing whatever the writers want Leslie Knope to be on the show, whether it's a straight woman, a woman in love, a woman drunk and in rage against a best friend, someone who's just plain crazy, or someone who is able to deliver a presentation despite being struck with a flu that fade her not even remember people's names.
Other Thoughts:
a. Now, I know what you're asking youself: "mj15, if you loved Amy Poehler's performance so much, than why didn't you also pick her to win?" Because it's too damn convenient, that's why! Also, the award is not "Funniest Lead Actress in a Comedy Series," but rather "Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series," and I don't think that Poehler's acting was "outstanding" enough that the Emmy voters will choose her over Linney or even the other Showtime actress nominated, defending champion Edie Falco.
b. I wonder how much the movie "Bridesmaids" factored into Melissa McCarthy's nomination in the category...
OUTSTANDING SUPPORTING ACTOR IN A DRAMA SERIES
Will Win: John Slattery as Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Just like in the Outstanding Lead Actor category of the same genre, the award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series also appears to be the most wide open that it has been in years with 2010 winner Aaron Paul ineligible and 2009 winner Michael Emerson not having a job this year because of "Lost" ending and "Persons of Interest" not premiering until the fall. Now, Alan Cummings may have had his name mentioned here and there in his work on "The Good Wife," but come on people! Who in their right mind doesn't love watching Slattery have a fun time playing the role of SCDP co-owner and one-liner extraordinaire Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"? I sure don't, and I assume that neither do the Emmy voters.
Should Win: Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister on "Game of Thrones"
When I first learned that Dinklage was nominated for an Emmy, I was ecstatic. It's honestly right up there with seeing "Parks and Recreations" and Louis C.K. nominated as one of my favorite moment reading the nominees for the first time on Thursday. He was simply grand in his performance on "Game of Thrones," one that I'm sure he had a jolly good time playing Tyrion, the cunning and compelling comic relief of the show (and the only member of the Lannister clan that I found myself actually liking). Unfortunately, because there are other actors of much more higher profile nominated in the same category, it appears that this nomination will have to do. But still, a victory in the category (if it does happen) would definitely be deserved.
Other Thoughts:
a. John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble John Noble JOHN MOTHERF@#$ING NOBLE!
b. Besides John Noble, I was also disappointed to not see any of The Michaels from "Boardwalk Empire" listed among the nominees (which includes the duo of Michael Pitt and Michael Shannon). Pitt was great portraying the ever-changing Jimmy Darmody (sometimes even stealing scenes from some of the show's most notable actors, like Buscemi), while Michael Shannon portrayed the self-righteous madman Nelson Van Alden as best as you would expect from someone who already has the advantage of owning such a sinister-looking face (Michael Stuhlbarg was also good on the show, but I highly doubted that "Boardwalk Empire" would have received three nominations in this category and that the voters would have considered Stuhlbarg to have had a better performance in season one that the two that I just mentioned).But, hey, if that meant that Walton Goggins could get nominated, then so be it.
OUTSTANDING SUPPORTING ACTOR IN A COMEDY SERIES
Will Win: Chris Colfer as Kurt Hummel on "Glee"
This was such a difficult category to pick a winner out of, mostly because there was no one on the nominees list who has really proven themselves to be a truly superior actor this year than the rest, while the actors that I did think were great in this category this TV season were all pretty much left out (more on that in a little while). In the end, I made a conscientious decision to choose Colfer for two reasons:
1) I haven't watched a single episode of "Glee" this season (and considering how many have proclaimed it a "sophmore slump" year for the show, I'm kind of glad that I didn't), but from what I have read from actual fans of the show, none of this season's problems have come from Colfer. Apparently, he knocked it right out of the park with his acting that was both raw and moving at times and did everything he was asked to do by creator Ryan Murphy brilliantly. And consider how the name of this award has the words "Outstanding" in it, not funniest, I actually respect most of these random opinions enough to believe them.
2) He was the winner of this year's Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actor in a TV Series, Miniseries or TV Movie, meaning that he was voted the best supporting actor on any scripted programs that has ever aired new episodes in 2010, not just comedy. Since 2004, the winner of this Golden Globes category has gone on to win an Emmy later on in the year 6 out of 7 times. On the other side of the argument, though, since 2004 only Jeremy Piven won this category as a member of an actual regular comedy series while the rest were either supporting actors in a miniseries/movie, or (in the case of John Lithgow last year) won an Emmy in the Outstanding Guest Actors category, so this argument might be a bit far-fetched. Either way, I'm sticking with this pick.
Should Win: Ty Burrell as Phil Dunphy on "Modern Family"
My enjoyment of "Modern Family" may have rapidly deteriorated over the course of this TV season, but my enjoyment and appreciation for Burrell and his acting have not. Every time that I tuned into the show this past season, his character and (as a result) his acting made me laugh the most consistently. Ed O'Neill probably deserves it the most as a type of lifetime achievement for his fine work in not only this show, but in "Married With Children" as well, but I tend to enjoy the performances of the actors who are most value to their show comedic-wise in this category, and that exactly is what Burrell has been.
Other Thoughts: Oh, good Lord! So much things to not like about these nominees (by far the one that made me the most angry when I read it to myself the day they were first announced) that I don't even know where to begin!
1) For starters, I just don't understand how, in a world where the Emmys recognized "Parks and Recreations" as one of the six best comedies on television and Amy Poehler as one of the six best leading comedic actresses on television, that they couldn't also recognize the one, the only Nick Offerman among the list of the best supporting comedic actors on television. After all, he played Ron F@cking Swanson, a man that belongs on the current Mount Rushmore of best TV characters (with the other three spots going to Don Draper from "Mad Men," Dr. House from "House" and, as strange as it might seem at first, Roger the Alien from "American Dad") That's like the TV equivalent of giving "No Country For Old Men" the Oscar for Best Picture but not even bothering to nominate Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh. In the words of Amy Poehler, it really was "a horseload of bullshit."
2) Second, and this ties back to what I was mentioned under the "Outstanding Comedy Series" category, had the Emmy voters actually payed attention to shows like "Community" and FX comedy staple "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" they would have realized that those two shows had about three actors very much worthy of voting acknowledgement:
a.Donald Glover for his eccentricity, great timing and honorable facial expression playing Troy Barnes.
b. Fellow "Community" co-star Danny Pudi as the compelling Abed Nadir
c. Charlie Day with another hilarious season as Charlie Kelly on 'IASIP'
3) Jon Cryer nominated again?!?! Makes you wonder how much pity the voters had on the man for putting up with the entire Charlie Sheen drama back in March.
4) But my most pressing problem is the fact that 2/3rds of this ballot if filled with the four leading male actors on "Modern Family" (Burrell, Ferguson, Stonestreet, O'Neill). Now, I get it, Emmy voters. You love "Modern Family," obviously much more than I do. And, yes, they do indeed have a splendid cast (so splendid that they at times keep the show away from being even worse). But that doesn't necessarily mean that you should give every single one of the six leading adult cast members recognition, especially since there are way more comedies out there with wonderful performances. At least not Jessee Tyler Ferguson, whose character Mitchell was easily one of the weakest of the season, and probably in the entire series run thus far..
There are moments to dislike the Emmys, and then there are moments to dislike the Emmys. This was one of those moments.
OUTSTANDING SUPPORTING ACTRESS IN A DRAMA SERIES
Will Win: Archie Panjabi as Kalinda Sharma on "The Good Wife"
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. After winning the award in this same category last year (in what was her first nomination), the English actress has had a season that many TV critics and experts believed was as good, if not better, than the year before. With that in mind, a repeat victory seems highly probable at this point. Simple as that.
Should Win: Margo Martindale as Mags Bennett on "Justified"
After reading the rave reviews from TV critics and viewers alike about the second season of "Justified" (especially the episode "Brother's Keeper" which got "the episode that cured cancer" level of praise) I decided to finally see for myself what the buzz was about and watched the show over the course of about three weeks. So in a three week period this past June, I borrowed the DVDs of season one through a friend and then watched season two from re-airings that I DVRed and from (ahem) other methods. Now that I have finally caught up, I can say with great assurance that the hype surrounding this show, particularly season 2 where the focus of the show was more serialized than season 1, was very much amicable. (Bet you thought I was going to say "justified" didn't you?). This especially goes in the case of Martindale's well executed, tour de force performance as the menacing crime boss, one that really was for the ages. If it wasn't the best acting performance of 2011, then it at least belongs in the top five or top ten.
Other Thoughts:
I don't often use the word "travesty" to describe Emmy snubs, but Khandi Alexander not getting nominated for her work this season on "Treme" was just that. Maybe if she was on a David E. Kelley show instead of a David Simon show, she would have received the love he deserves, but oh well. Also, I know that the Emmys don't usually nominated child actors (and since 80%-90% of child actors on TV are awful, I don't blame them), but if they're going to give their beloved "Mad Men" seven acting nominations then they should have at least given an extra one to Kiernan Shipka as well. She really has placed herself in the same category among the show's best actors along with fellow co-stars like Hamm and Moss (a bit of a pleasant surprise, considering how spent her first two seasons saying nothing else but "Hi, daddy!").
OUTSTANDING SUPPORTING ACTRESS IN A COMEDY SERIES
Will Win: Betty White as Elka Ostrovsky on "Hot In Cleveland"
Face it folks: this is still Betty White's world, with us in it only so we can continue to adore her. Unless she decides to permanently retire from acting or until she suffers a death similar to Rasputin, you will continue to see her getting constant love from Hollywood. If she can win the SAG award for best leading comedic actress (and an Emmy last year) than I don't see how she won't win again this September.
Should Win: Sofia Vergara as Gloria Delgado-Pritchett on "Modern Family"
Same reason why I picked Ty Burrell as my Should Win in the supporting actor category earlier. My love of "Modern Family" has diminshed this year, but my love of Vergara has not. She is the only female actress on the show that has consistently made me laugh.
Other Thoughts:
a. Glaring omissions: Alison Brie on "Community" (especially her acting in the episode "Fistfull of Paintballs"), Yvonne Strahowski on "Chuck," Aubrey Plaza on "Parks and Recreations," and Busy Phillips on "Cougar Town."
b. This category is basically a three way race between White, Vergara and defending champion Jane Lynch (who is also hosting this year's festivities), with Jane Krakowski as this year's darkhorse. I was actually thinking about selecting Lynch as my pick to win it over White, but then I remembered the criticisms of Sue Slyvester on "Glee" this season, how I couldn't ever recall an actor or actress ever winning an award in an event they are hosting (see: Neil Patrick Harris in 2009) and how much everyone loves Betty White, so my prediction ended up changing pretty quickly.
Be sure to come back to this site Saturday when I reveal part two of my 2011 Emmy predictions in conjunction with all-new "End of the Week." Now, as reward for sitting through 5,600 or so words of analysis on some shallow awards show, here is my first batch of Random Thoughts in three weeks. Enjoy.
RANDOM THOUGHTS:
-Alright, here is everything that I have to say on the Casey Anthony verdict:
a. As the old saying goes, better to have ten guilty free than to let one innocent suffer. Sure, Anthony did kill her daughter and, yes, she probably did deserve to get convicted. But in the American justice system, the jury have an obligation to find someone guilty only if they believe that there is enough substantial. The prosecution obviously didn't do enough of a good job, and so the jury (who were secluded from the outside world and had to decide whether someone should be killed, mind you) as a result set her free of any death penalty. Yes, the current justice system is pretty flawed at times, but I'm glad that this jury at least did the right thing and made a decision based on evidence presented and not emotion.
b. The bright side: Since the court of public opinion has found her guilty long before the actual verdict, Anthony will forever become a social pariah just like O.J. Simpson following his trial, forced to forever hide herself from the public eye. Who knows, maybe she might even become the next Amy Fischer.
c. So, remember kids: if you wanna get away with murder, make sure to hide the body really well so that the police don't find it for a month and all the evidence is gone.
d. I wonder if this trial would have received the same national attention if Caylee Anthony was a black girl living in West Baltimore, and not a white girl living in suburban Florida.
e. I hope that Veena Sud doesn't make a TV show based on the Casey Anthony trial. She probably wouldn't have aired the verdict episode until season three.
/slowly getting over the ending
- Kobayashi setting an unofficial hot dog eating world record during the same time that the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest (which he couldn't participate in) was being held is one of the greatest "f-you" moments that I have ever seen.
- Why do they call it "Jimmy Kimmel Live" if it is, indeed, not live?
- This should be required viewing for everyone who complained about Netflix raising their prices by over 60%:
- So great to hear that James Spader was hired for "The Office." Best part of that season finale by far was his performance.
- Referencing other movies in movie commercials: apparently the new fad in trailers.
- Bruce Feldman's suspension from ESPN makes absolutely no sense. How can you punish someone for writing a book on Mike Leach if you gave him permission to months prior unless you're just trying to protect Craig James? And this is coming from the same network that is suing Ohio State for not giving them items related to an NCAA investigation! Hypocrisy at its finest.
- The real secret to the success of "Pardon the Interruption": it's the only show on television where you have a white guy and a black guy arguing on a daily basis and not screaming racial profanities at one another.
That's all I have to say for now on this, my first post back from vacation,. I hoped you enjoyed it, and look forward to your return to this blog later in the week.
Sincerely,
Your pal: mj15
If you have any opinions on today's post, or if you just have any suggestions or tips for my next blog entry, e-mail me at: mj1599@aol.com. Your e-mails are greatly appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment