August 10, 2011 at 2:29 pm #222766
Pundits are saying that jane Lynch will win again, not because of her own performance on her series, but because she benefits from her appearance on someone else’s tape from a completely different show!
Now I understand that appearing on someone else’s reel from the same show might help the nominee. And i’m ok with that!! after all, it’s still the nominee’s performance on the same show. However, Jane Lynch, as much as I love her, should not benefit from appearing in a different role on a different show. It’s just not right. This is just one reason why the individual performer category should be restored.
I know that it is not a foregone conclusion that Lynch will win, but if she does, it will be my least favorite win in recent years.August 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm #222768
I don’t see the difference in someone getting seen in a co-star’s reel and getting seen with their guest work on another show. It was NBC or Kristin Wiig’s choice to submit that episode, just as it’s ABC or Vergara’s choice to submit an episode that clearly helps Julie Bowen. And don’t forget, as much as Sue was pretty awful and one-note all season on ‘Glee’, Lynch was really touching and great in ‘Funeral’. She submitted very wisely.
When (and of course, if) Jane Lynch wins, it will be deserved based on what the voters see in the submissions. As much as I think other actresses deserve it more, or even deserve a nomination over certain nominees, the proof we have is in the episode submissions. We can’t assume voters watched full seasons of anything, or else we’d probably have different nominees altogether.August 11, 2011 at 1:13 pm #222769
Slam, it’s fair for somebody to win when appearing on a co-star’s reel because you are nominated for playing a character, not for appearing in an episode.
Jane Lynch is not playing Sue Sylvester on SNL (except that one skit), making her inevitable win very unfair.August 11, 2011 at 1:20 pm #222770
Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree.August 11, 2011 at 1:44 pm #222771
If Lynch does win, we can’t say for sure that it was because of her work on Wiig’s submission. She may be winning on the strength of her own. Also, the whole “you win for playing a character” notion is kind of bunk since the individual performers from shows like SNL are nominated for appearing in whatever sketches they appear in, including Seth Meyers (listed on the ballot but not nominated), who doesn’t play any character at all but rather reads funny news bits.August 11, 2011 at 1:49 pm #222772
If you think about it, it’s a bit silly for a person to be rewarded for a whole season’s work on the basis of a single episode. By that standard it’s unfair for someone like Mariska Harigtay to win for a single baity episode against someone who was probably more consistently excellent throughout the season but lacks a single dynamite reel. I guess it’s also unfair that Sofia Vergara is almost sure to lose just because she’s bad at picking submission episodes (she was great all season). It’s also unfair that Jon Cryer and Chris Colfer have to compete against what amounts to two-hour submissions for the four “Modern Family” actors. You could make any of those arguments, but I think there are much bigger inequities to deal with in Emmy voting.
So I too don’t think Lynch winning on the basis of “SNL,” while technically not fair, is all that big a deal. I suppose it depends on what kinds of judges pick the winner in the race. Will they draw a strict line between a variety performance and Lynch’s work on “Glee,” or will they approach the category as if they’re judging performers and not specifically a single role? I think the latter. I think voters will say, “Jane Lynch is damn funny, and she’s damn touching too,” and not quibble too much over where the performances come from.
Or maybe judges, hearing how much better Lynch is than Wiig in that reel, will just skip the 90-minute “SNL” submission, rule out Wiig, and worry about the other five, in which case that gives an advantage to White or Bowen. Who knows what judges will do? I’m not sure if there’s precedence for an actor appearing in multiple reels from different shows. The judges could surprise us.August 11, 2011 at 3:55 pm #222773
For god’s sakes folks, look at the title of the category: Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series. Series is singular. So Lynch is nominated for her work on Glee.
The category is not “Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series and Appearances on Other Shows.” So the argument that Lynch’s case is the same as Vergara and Bowen is just not true. Bowen and Vergara are nominated for their work on one show. Lynch is benefitting from her work on ANOTHER SHOW!August 11, 2011 at 6:17 pm #222774
Okay, but why shouldn’t she benefit? As I mentioned above, Kristin Wiig could’ve submitted a different episode, and we wouldn’t be having this “conversation”. If that’s truly the best she had (I didn’t watch the full season of SNL this year), then Lynch is lucky and benefits from the wide range voters see from her.
What’s the difference between this and voters nominating Melissa McCarthy based on what they saw from her in ‘Bridesmaids’? Or for that matter, Kristin Wiig for what she did (and wrote) in ‘Bridesmaids’?
Unless they’re a complete unknown, what nominee isn’t benefitting from something else on their resume?
This is just a special and random case of voters getting to see two completely different things (jobs!) from one performer in a specific category.
A question for the experts: Has anything like this happened before?August 13, 2011 at 8:34 am #222775
i’m proud of Kristen Wiig for submitting the episode. She wasn’t trying to be strategic, she submitted an episode she was proud of. I feel the editors are being widley unfair to her. They’re saying Melissa Mccarthy will benefit from the success of Bridesmaids, but not her? It’s wrong.
I don’t think jane lynch should win for Glee. I think she’s very talented, but Glee ruined her character this year in every way shape, and form, and in my opinion that was highlighted in “the funeral.” Also, in my personal opinion Wiig was better in her episode then Lynch, but i guess that’s just my opinion. Honestly i don’t think she will win, i think Betty White will take it, but who knows. It is what it is.August 13, 2011 at 10:04 am #222776
I hope she doesn’t win. After all, her own submission is very disappointing. I think Sofia Vergara is the best of the bunch, easily. I think she could win as she also benefits from other submissions (her co-stars, they watch the men’s episodes too and she’s brilliant on them, too).August 13, 2011 at 11:23 am #222777
I personally didn’t think she deserved another nomination, but we are here. I think the tape system is key in all of the acting races (minus the movie ones I guess) and the way that system is setup, she’s playing a “fair” game and by all means should reap the rewards from it.August 21, 2011 at 1:20 pm #222778
BETTY WHITE WILL WIN IT!!!!! IT WILL BE HER 8th EMMY WIN!!!!!August 21, 2011 at 1:26 pm #222779
BETTY WHITE WILL WIN IT!!!!! IT WILL BE HER 8th EMMY WIN!!!!!
You like Hot in Cleveland too much.August 31, 2011 at 12:22 pm #222780
I’m inclined to agree with the original poster – even though I thought this thread would be about her hosting the show. I think her hosting gig has got to improve her chances, despite the times when nominees have hosted awards shows and still lost anyway. (Hello, James Franco.)
As far as Wiig’s selection of Lynch’s episode, I think that will also boost Lynch’s chances. And I think it’s wrong for voters to take the quality of Lynch’s SNL performance into account at all, whether they loved her performance or hated it. It’s a different show, so it should be irrelevant.
It’s true that there are all sorts of things that voters improperly take into account, and often their reasons for voting for someone (or not voting for them) are far more unfair than this. Voting for someone because you like them personally, or because they’re a big star, or because you think they’ll give a great speech, for example, are far more unfair than a voter being swayed by an actor’s performance on a different series.
But none of that makes it acceptable. In fact, I don’t think it’s right for voters to consider any performances by an acting nominee other than the performance on that nominee’s tape, because of the rules saying that voters are only supposed to take each nominee’s own tape into account. So I’m also not cool with voters being influenced by, say, Bowen’s performance in Vergara’s tape. But I think it’s even more inappropriate to consider Lynch’s SNL performance, because at least Bowen was playing the role she was nominated for, on the show she was nominated for.
I personally didn’t think she deserved another nomination, but we are here. I think the tape system is key in all of the acting races (minus the movie ones I guess) and the way that system is setup, she’s playing a “fair” game and by all means should reap the rewards from it.
I haven’t heard anyone accuse Lynch of playing an unfair game. Unless she carried out an intimidation campaign to scare Wiig into submitting the episode hosted by Lynch (and I’d pay good money to watch her do that), she hasn’t done anything unfair. But the issue isn’t with Lynch’s actions, it’s an issue with what some voters are likely to consider.
And while the “system” makes it easy for this sort of thing to happen, it also prohibits it. Voters who consider Lynch’s performance on another show are violating the rules of the current system.September 7, 2011 at 11:07 am #222781
Well I really think that the thing that people don’t like is Glee, not Lynch. I really think Lynch is very good on both episodes.
I hope that Betty White doesn’t win, because she seriously has very little worthy on her episode, compare with any of the others.
In all fairness, based on their own episodes submissions Julie Bowen should win, but definitely between SNL and Glee Lynch shows a lot of range and comedy skills.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
7 years ago
7 years ago
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)