( +1 hidden )
September 17, 2018 at 11:48 pm #1202635560
"I don't even believe in god, but I'm going to thank her tonight."September 17, 2018 at 11:48 pm #1202635561
My biggest complaint about awards shows is always that they squander their potential as a platform to showcase quality programming and that is kind of the point of them anyway. Television and film viewing is so fractured these days that most who watch the Emmys or Oscars probably have no idea what many of these winners and nominees are, so give the viewers a taste! Clips are enough to make people think that something looks interesting and for them to check it out, which they absolutely should be doing because good stuff gets nominated. I was amazed that we got clips for pretty much every category.
The above was achieved by something so clever and simple. Instead of wasting time on the presenters walking onto the stage (except for Will Ferrell) and presenting the nominees, the clips overlapped with the presenters arriving and when they did, it was pretty much down to business.
Did not clock it, but banter seemed brief this year. Even when it added nothing, it was over a line later. Funny stuff was still funny. I normally cringe at banter between presenters because it is forced and terrible, but cringing was minimal tonight.
The comedy categories were first, then the limited categories, then the drama categories, then the program categories. This is not rocket science.
Atlanta is transcendent, but is Donald Glover’s lead acting as Earn Marks? Bill Hader on the other hand was exceptional in “Loud, Fast, and Keep Going”. Merritt Wever in supporting actress? The Crown getting multiple wins? The Americans getting multiple wins for its finale? Ryan Murphy finally getting his due again for directing? Justice was served.
The Emmys had their finger on the pulse last year and The Handmaid’s Tale won. It lost this year by the same token. This was refreshing because the Emmys are known to just latch on to something and not let it go until everyone is beyond tired of it. Speaking of which, they moved on from The Voice! Claire Foy or Elisabeth Moss last year? Moss was the right choice. Claire Foy or Elisabeth Moss this year? Foy was the right choice. It was not the case at the Creative Arts, but at the main telecast, they justly ditched Saturday Night Live in the supporting categories. Good riddance to This is Us too.
What was the second-best Emmys? This is the only ceremony that I remember in detail.
Records are always being broken. What a time to be alive.
"I don't even believe in god, but I'm going to thank her tonight."September 17, 2018 at 11:54 pm #1202635562
I saw this was a thread and was almost sure Teridax created it. I was very surprised to see that it was actually Riley.September 17, 2018 at 11:55 pm #1202635564
Um, seriously? It was literally one of the worst Emmys ever.September 18, 2018 at 12:00 am #1202635569
I say yes, if not only for the reason that I can’t think of a single winner I genuinely hated, which NEVER happens with the Emmys. I disliked Godless overall but all 3 of its wins are acceptable for me.
The Emmys need to keep this exact same voting system FOREVER please, because this and last year’s winners have shown such a blatantly obvious improvement in the quality of winners chosen since that idiotic “tape system” with the small panels was thankfully abolished. Not a single acting repeat this year, compare that to 2014, the last year of that “tape system” failure where we got 3 acting repeats! Bill Hader, Matthew freaking Rhys, Emmy winner Claire Foy (I love being able to say that), Westworld finally coming home with a major Emmy win, a woman winning Writing and Directing in the same ceremony for the Pilot of her acclaimed show, so much to love!!!September 18, 2018 at 12:03 am #1202635572
I remain always in favour of restoring the tape system.
I saw this was a thread and was almost sure Teridax created it. I was very surprised to see that it was actually Riley.
The length of the main thread is too daunting, so I am sneakily diverging discussion.
"I don't even believe in god, but I'm going to thank her tonight."September 18, 2018 at 12:12 am #1202635584
They should get rid of episode submissions entirely for acting categories. This new system has given us so many more sensible, deserving, and progressive winners. Under the tape system Hall, Laurie, and the entire casts of Mad Men, The Office, and Arrested Development couldn’t win. I think Brosnahan and Borstein would have lost under the old tape system, which was so obviously BS and I think most people would actually agree comparing the Emmy winners this year and for the last couple years even to the winners under that infamous “tape system” with the laughable small panels. I don’t think I can even debate this when this system clearly works so much better for avoiding weird winners of dubious merit and awarding those achievements which contribute something genuinely significant to the world of television at large. Daniels would never have won for The Newsroom under this current voting system, Steve Carell would totally have pulled a Claire Foy / Matthew Rhys and won on sentiment for his final season of The Office. Boardwalk Empire would easily have won Drama Series for Season 1 in spite of its Writing snub and I’m tempted to say 2-time SAG winner Steve Buscemi would have won as well. You can bet that James Gandolfini would have taken home a 4th Emmy for the final season of The Sopranos. NYPD Blue and The Sopranos would definitely have won at their most popular for Season 1 instead of Picket Fences and The Practice respectively. I bet Seinfeld would have ended up with more than 1 Comedy Series win. Alan Taylor would definitely have won Directing for the series premiere of Mad Men instead of that House episode. Forget Modern Family winning Comedy Series past Season 3 at most! This new current voting system chooses winners that are actually relevant, winners that truly represent something of a consensus that even if you didn’t predict it or might not agree, you can still clearly see how they won. THAT is why it is perfect.September 18, 2018 at 12:51 am #1202635614
Acting clips! Upsets! The proposal! Loved the telecast even with the so-so meh hosts.
What was the second-best Emmys? This is the only ceremony that I remember in detail.
No award show will ever top the 2006 Emmys for me.
Gee, I wonder why? 😉
The Office winning its only Comedy Series Emmy that year was cool too.September 18, 2018 at 12:51 am #1202635615
From a production standpoint, yes. I would put this on the level of the 2009 Oscars in terms of production. Loved the minimalist staging and the wide-angle shots of the winners. Very artsy for a live production. I’m not a clip girl like most here, but they found a way to incorporate them that worked. And I love how they mixed things up with the awards presentation. It kept the show on time and no one got played off.
While the show looked pretty, boy was this the pits in terms of content sans that surprise proposal that I cried at and Reparations Emmys. That basic white boy and Ashy Larry were the worst. I tried to look past that smug interview they gave, but boy when someone tells you about themselves, believe them!
My predictions are in shambles and I’m okay with that. The winners were great across the board. I was annoyed with the pre-mature #EmmysSoWhite business. Like the iconic New York said “You should have just sat there and ate your food”. It’s like shut up. They ended up looking stupid per usual with uninformed outsiders, but that is a rant for another day. But I will give them that the Emmys did ask or it. That gross off-key patting themselves on the back musical number was the pits. This is why you can’t have nice things!
Back to the winners, I live. No repeats! The wins for The Americans made my night.September 18, 2018 at 12:53 am #1202635616
2006 remains the opening to beat.
Teridax, it is for the same reason that you prefer the current system that I prefer the old. We got some bad winners under the old system, but you could trace the wins back to tapes (or occasionally, a weak set of tapes that fostered randomness). I could see how they won and that accountability made them okay. The tape system was not perfect for sure, but it did not make a mockery of the Emmys the way that Margo Martindale did twice or Ben Mendelsohn did or the short-form winners low-key have. It gave us inspired winners like “House’s Head” and Bryan Cranston the first time and maybe Arrested Development the first time, while avoiding the likes of Boardwalk Empire and Steve Buscemi.
"I don't even believe in god, but I'm going to thank her tonight."September 18, 2018 at 12:56 am #1202635624
Nope. Not with the hosts being this bad and disaffected, the awards presentation issues, and winners that left a bad aftertaste. I judge the telecast in its totality, so some inspired upsets here and there can’t offset the many other things that sadly went awry.September 18, 2018 at 1:08 am #1202635635
I hear you Riley, though if putting up with 2 lazy Martindale cameos and a Jones makeup win once in a while is what it takes for so much more greatness to be consistently awarded than ever before, I can totally happily accept that.
Plus, under the old “tape system” we saw lesser submissions win from time to time. Jesse Tyler Ferguson’s loss to Ty Burrell for Modern Family Season 5 was an emberrassment in every regard, and Jon Hamm losing for “The Suitcase” to Kyle Chandler for the series finale of Friday Night Lights proves that sentiment was very much a factor even back then, it was just that sentiment didn’t translate nearly as often to consensus-driven wins like with Rhys or Foy this year, due to the nature of small panel voting versus popular voting. “House’s Head” was certainly an inspired choice, but the series premiere of Mad Men I think is seen as more historically significant, and Boardwalk Empire and Buscemi still have their fans to this day. I think Cranston would have won for Season 1 due to passion being such a big part of this new voting system, looking at wins for Maslany, Anderson, and others whose shows haven’t done great with the Emmys overall yet still pulled wins themselves. Mendelsohn winning was hardly an “embarrassment,” he was excellent in Bloodline even though he certainly wouldn’t have been my choice for Season 2.
By all accounts we seemed to get more genuinely bad or puzzling winners under the so-called “tape system,” which ended up doing nothing but leaving a legacy of potentially skewing deserved wins away from those who had the more buzzed and culturally impactful season but simply didn’t submit their best. We will have to agree to respectfully disagree on this one, and that’s okay.September 18, 2018 at 1:09 am #1202635636
I loved the clips (even though some of them were very poor choices). Hated that they played the clips then had the presenters come out. Winners were great, but hated the last win for GOT.
I also hated how you could totally tell that Lorne Michaels hosted this. Like Kenan giving out Best Drama? Really?
Give Paul Thomas Anderson an Oscar.September 18, 2018 at 1:14 am #1202635642
Nope. Not with the hosts being this bad and disaffected, the awards presentation issues, and winners that left a bad aftertaste. I judge the telecast in its totality, so some inspired upsets here and there can’t offset the many other things that sadly went awry.
Even The Americans and The Crown x2? Versace x3? Maisel sweeping triumphantly? The winners for the 2014 Emmys left a bad aftertaste when Matt Bomer, Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Billy Bob Thornton, Allison Tolman, and Fargo in Writing all lost with Modern Family sadly winning a lazy-as-shit 5th Comedy Series prize. THAT was something to understandably be annoyed about. But this, really?! Even people who don’t like Westworld seem to agree Thandie Newton kicks ass. Barry x2, Last Week Tonight and USS Callister for Writing, John Mulaney, so much greatness! A bad aftertaste is your opinion, but I cannot help but state my disagreement of opinion, which I am entitled to as you are yours.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.