August 20, 2014 at 8:28 pm #328120
I’ve been thinking lately about why Nick Offerman has never even been nominated for his role as Ron Swanson on Parks and Recreation. The Emmy voters are aware of the show, Amy Poehler has been nominated 5 times, the series has been nominated for Outstanding Comedy Series once, Outstanding Writing in a Comedy Series twice, and overall has been nominated for 12 Emmys in the last 5 years.
Parks and Recreation is obviously on the Emmy voter’s radars, so why do they keep on ignoring the breakout character from the show, Ron Swanson? He isn’t unlikeable or anything, so why do they keep snubbing him?
Give Paul Thomas Anderson an Oscar.August 20, 2014 at 8:41 pm #328122
I think voters just didn’t respond to Parks and Rec beyond the most superficial of aspects. Amy is a force of nature all her own, and had already accrued a few noms for SNL, so the consistent nominations for her make sense, especially given how split Comedy Lead Actress could be. The Series nom also came at a point when the acclaim and momentum for it was at its highest point, and they benefited from Curb Your Enthusiasm going on hiatus and Nurse Jackie losing out on its buzz. However, aside from the random 2 writing nods, voters had no passion for it. Modern Family was the gem in their eyes and took up 4 slots per year, and they still held some affection for Jon Cryer.
I’m starting to get the sense that voters just aren’t sure how to treat shows Michael Schur is involved with. Aside from The Office’s Series and writing wins, none of the programs he’s been involved with have done that well. None of the cast members from The Office could win an Emmy, even with the love for Steve Carell (and Jenna Fischer could only score one nom, while John Krasinski was continuously overlooked), Parks and Rec failed to gain traction and couldn’t even get a big guest star like Paul Rudd in, and we just saw Brooklyn Nine Nine lose out on all but 2 nominations (with Andre Braugher only making it due to the Emmys’ love for him), despite winning the Golden Globe.August 20, 2014 at 8:43 pm #328123
I don’t know. The closest thing I can think of is possibly the competition of other more Emmy friendly T.V. shows. Parks and Rec will be having it’s final season next year, and Emmy shows like to give shows one last goodbye hug, and I could totally see Amy finally winning for that final season and even Nick getting a nomination. The only downside is that there are several shows ending next year and they can’t possibly do it to all of them, but here’s hoping!
I also noticed that Michael Schur shows also kind of don’t do well. I was in the minority who thought The Office was just okay, but I really liked Brooklyn Nine-Nine and think it’s one of the funniest shows on television, but it only getting two Emmy noms (and one coming only because Andre Braugher is an Emmy mainstay) shows that they probably don’t like Schur’s style of comedy.August 20, 2014 at 8:48 pm #328124
Very similar situation with John C. McGinley and Scrubs. Something about the character- even though they were a major breakout- didn’t click with Emmy voters. Do people think they are one note antagonists?August 20, 2014 at 8:56 pm #328125
Very similar situation with John C. McGinley and Scrubs. Something about the character- even though they were a major breakout- didn’t click with Emmy voters. Do people think they are one note antagonists?
Well, Ron really isn’t a antagonist
Give Paul Thomas Anderson an Oscar.August 20, 2014 at 9:04 pm #328126
[quote=”BTN”]Very similar situation with John C. McGinley and Scrubs. Something about the character- even though they were a major breakout- didn’t click with Emmy voters. Do people think they are one note antagonists?
Well, Ron really isn’t a antagonist [/quote]
I think being the total opposite of Leslie and someone who just thought she was ridiculous and said so a lot it kind of makes him that.August 20, 2014 at 9:36 pm #328127
I ask myself this every day. Sad that some of the best performances on TV get over shadowed by eh performances year after yearAugust 21, 2014 at 7:54 pm #328128
His also not really a typical emmy bait performance. Most of his humor comes from being extremely stoic and unemotional, which is hilarious and i would have definitely nominated him, but next to broad, physical performances from people like ty burrell, eric stonestreet, jon cryer etc. they probably just don’t think he stands out as much. With a performance like that they probably think its more the writing and what the characters saying than the performance (maybe explains the writing noms)August 21, 2014 at 8:08 pm #328129
Andre Braugher is literally playing the cop version of Ron Swanson though on Brooklyn Nine NineAugust 21, 2014 at 9:02 pm #328130
Their characters are actually very different. But regardless, Andre Braugher has been an Emmy juggernaut for decades and is an iconic presence in TV history, who is now the second-largest role on his show, usually playing a role in all three storylines of a given episode. Nick Offerman was a relative unknown before the show and never had one of the largest roles on it even though he is memorable. Parks and Rec is barely on Emmy radar. They know it as “that Amy Poehler show” and barely recognize it beyond her. Supporting Actor is traditionally the most competitive category, and there are many many many actors on shows the Emmys love in that category for Comedy. Factor in that Chris Pratt and Aziz Ansari were also blowing up as popular semi-celebs during the show’s run to split the vote among the few P&R fans at the Emmys and they’re all doomed. They don’t like the show enough or know enough about Offerman. It’s not all that different from, like, John Krasinski–except this is a show the Emmys like less so only one main cast member is getting nominated.