July 24, 2017 at 3:47 am #1202163082
How the heck did this lady not win an Emmy!? I’m new to “Malcolm”, but her performance on the show was outstanding! What went wrong? Submissions?July 24, 2017 at 7:33 am #1202163239
Kaczmarek’s submissions were a mixed bag for sure. That said, she did ace her tape in 2003 (with “Baby”) and, even with rather ho-hum submissions from her foes, still couldn’t prevail.
For the finest in film reviews and awards analysis, please visit me at The Awards Connection!July 24, 2017 at 8:30 am #1202163284
It’s a crime she never won. She was amazing.July 24, 2017 at 9:45 am #1202163808
I’d submit her in supporting if it was up to me. There was no reason for her being in Lead and Cranston in Supporting given the structure of the show – they should be both on the same level so either Cranston in Lead along with Muniz or both ‘parents’ in supporting.July 24, 2017 at 10:43 am #1202163847
It sucks she never won. She could have definitely gone supporting, Cranston usually had more to do each season. I’m not sure why she went lead and him supporting, or why he only got like 2 or 3 nominations, they were both fantastic on the show and should have each won at least once.July 24, 2017 at 10:53 am #1202163851
She had the best tape a couple years. But I believe she was always hurt by the feeling that she probably belonged in supporting and that the show had a child lead. Plus, a single camera series that cartoonish in nature was very unusual at the time.July 24, 2017 at 11:57 am #1202163893
It’s all Patricia Heaton’s fault.July 24, 2017 at 1:51 pm #1202163996
Jane didn’t win for several reasons:
1. It was a borderline role. The show mostly focused on Muniz and his bros. And at times Cranston who went supporting had more of a role.
2. She played a generally over the top unlikable character. Almost fatal if you are a woman. Most of the biggest female losers on the comedy side also were unlikable women (Kim Cattrall, Julia Duffy, Faith Ford).
3. Besides 2001, 2003, and 2006 she really submitted terribly. But the fact she lost those 3 yrs suggests no matter what episode she submitted she still likely leaves empty handed.
4. The Emmys at the time were still very hesitant to reward non studio audience multi cam comedy shows. They wanted broad comedy with studio audiences laughing hysterically.July 24, 2017 at 2:30 pm #1202164019
You motherfucker. I thought she died for a split second after I saw this thread.
She should have won at least once, I think the fact that the show was so different and niche compared to what was being aired at the time (Friends, Raymond). I think if the show premiered five years later she would have won.
Give Paul Thomas Anderson an Oscar.July 24, 2017 at 2:34 pm #1202164022
She should’ve been Laura linney-ing all the Emmy awards for that showJuly 24, 2017 at 2:57 pm #1202164029
It’s too bad she hasn’t had another big show since then. I hope it still happens some day.