Home Forums Television Emmys 2020 Drama Nominations (Part 3)

Emmys 2020 Drama Nominations (Part 3)

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 361 through 375 (of 512 total)
Created
2 months ago
Last Reply
2 months ago
511
replies
32110
views
73
users
Luca
70
wolfali
61
Rachel
37
  • Profile picture
    Anthony 🐜
    Joined:
    Jul 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627281

    Foy dominated every scene she was in and gave a phenomenal performance that’s why she won Colman had nothing to work with in season 3 that’s why she’s not winning.

    That’s your opinion. The week The Crown season 3 was released, you couldn’t even blink without seeing the praise Colman was getting for her turn as Queen Elizabeth II. Yet today her performance and position in the race is apparently close to despised and zero.

    We’ll wait for the envelope. As always

    Profile picture
    Tyler
    Joined:
    Jan 9th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627283

    Ironically, Succession could very much be the When They See Us to Ozark‘s Chernobyl.

    isnt the more apt comparison Succession is Fleabag to Ozark’s Barry?

    Profile picture
    Rachel
    Joined:
    Sep 17th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627296

     Ironically, Succession could very much be the When They See Us to Ozark‘s Chernobyl.

    Ugh, don’t even say that…

     

    Profile picture
    Luca
    Joined:
    Jun 23rd, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627348

    When Ozark gets two (!) cinematography noms over the likes of The Handmaid’s Tale and Stranger Things — two visual masterpieces — then it starts to become interesting. They toned down the blue color this time around, and the cinematography really isn’t flashy at all. Then add nominations like makeup, which, unless that category is panel-based, is a sign that voters saw Ozark and just checked it off because they like it. And even if it’s panel-based, one character gets injured in the submitted episode, and that’s the only obvious makeup I can remember in it. Again, most characters don’t even wear makeup on this show. Three writing noms wouldn’t have happened had Succession submitted multiple eps, but again, writers saw it on their ballots and honestly decided to check off all three! There is strong support for this, whether people want to recognize it or not. Its two acting snubs sting, but that doesn’t automatically mean actors aren’t going to vote for it in series. I have Succession out in front for obvious reasons, but this a two-horse race, at least.

    Oscar FYC -- Give Viola Davis her second Oscar!

    Profile picture
    Anthony 🐜
    Joined:
    Jul 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627351

    isnt the more apt comparison Succession is Fleabag to Ozark’s Barry?

    Correct. And that would mean Succession wins. And right now that is not what people want to hear or believe on Gold Derby.

    Profile picture
    Riley Chow
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627370

    I don’t know that I necessarily agree that Succession could be the When They See Us to Ozark‘s Chernobyl. For one, it’s not that Succession simply has strong acting support but it also has good odds at actually winning drama writing and possibly even directing as well because they chose to limit the amount of episodes they submitted in those categories on purpose.

    Like how When They See Us had good writing and directing odds?

    It’s mentioned that Ozark got 3(!) episodes in for writing, but when you actually compare it to Succession head-to-head, Succession only submitted the single episode in the first place, so it’s honestly unclear to say that Ozark has much superior writing support.

    Yes, Ozark got three, but it does not have superior writing support.

    I don’t think it’s particularly close this year with Succession almost certainly winning writing and the other true frontrunner for directing being the Crown for its Aberfan episode, not Ozark.

    If you want to underestimate the incumbent winner for directing that beat Adam McKay’s DGA-winning pilot last year, that is on you.

    isnt the more apt comparison Succession is Fleabag to Ozark’s Barry?

    That comparison is tempting, but perhaps the crux itself of the dismissal of Ozark right now is its under-performance in acting with only three nominations; Barry maxed out there.

    Otherwise, other crafts snubs you mention for Succession don’t alarm me too much because I don’t think they make that much of a difference. A cinematography snub is not surprising considering the much more showy nominees with greater set pieces who made it in (Westworld, The Crown, Ozark and its ~dark blue~, Maisel, etc.). Unlike When They See Us missing Editing completely, Succession still got the Editing nom (for 2 episodes). Succession missed Sound (unsurprisingly imo), but both Chernobyl and When They See Us got sound noms last year, so again, the comparison to those two applying to Ozark vs. Succession doesn’t make much sense to me.

    They might not make a difference, but I think that going point by point misses the point, which is that there was a surplus of support for Ozark below the line and there was not for Succession. Nobody is saying that Succession needs cinematography or title design nominations to win, but Ozark maxing out in cinematography after missing last year and getting makeup was unexpected. It could just be like Barry versus Fleabag last year where Barry randomly got into score and Fleabag still won or it could be illustrative like the Chernobyl win over Game of Thrones for production design that this is a train that cannot be stopped.

    Then add nominations like makeup, which, unless that category is panel-based, is a sign that voters saw Ozark and just checked it off because they like it.

    It is not panel-based. Ozark‘s listing on the makeup ballot says that what they are doing is “correcting some flaws and enhancing features [so] as not to distract from the characters.”

    And that would mean Succession wins. And right now that is not what people want to hear or believe on Gold Derby.

    That is all that people want to hear and believe on Gold Derby.

    Profile picture
    Luca
    Joined:
    Jun 23rd, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627378

    It is not panel-based. Ozark‘s listing on the makeup ballot says that what they are doing is “correcting some flaws and enhancing features [so] as not to distract from the characters.”

    Which only reinforces my point. Some of these below-the-line people are just checking it off because they love it and want to reward it (not to diminish the work of the makeup artists, of course). We have to watch out for this. Let’s see how it does at Creative Arts though first.

    Oscar FYC -- Give Viola Davis her second Oscar!

    Profile picture
    AayaanUpadhyaya
    Joined:
    Dec 15th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627399

    So what is everyone’s take on Supporting Actor? With Pelphery snubbed, I am kind of trying to figure out which way to go.

    Right now, I’m going with the SAG nominee Billy Crudip, especially since Succession is definitely splitting the vote here. But I am wondering if Esposito or Wright can pull an upset here. I unfortunately don’t see a path for Whitford or Duplass here.

    Profile picture
    NevadaR
    Joined:
    Jan 13th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627403

    Lol the trashing of her performance is OTT on this forum but I guess that’s GD for you. Almost hilarious how incensed some are on here whenever her name is mentioned when she herself appears completely unbothered by this Emmy season and is instead busy raising money with PWB to disburse to UK theater folks who are out of work I can see neutrals voting for her.

    So not believing she can win it’s trashing now.

    Profile picture
    Riley Chow
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627413

    So what is everyone’s take on Supporting Actor?

    Either Crudup wins obviously or Macfadyen overcomes the vote-split.  Was going to say that Esposito and Wright would be pretty unprecedented in terms of material worthiness, but actually the majority of wins that we have gotten in this category under the popular vote have been bad.

    Profile picture
    Anthony 🐜
    Joined:
    Jul 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627424

    They might not make a difference, but I think that going point by point misses the point, which is that there was a surplus of support for Ozark below the line and there was not for Succession. Nobody is saying that Succession needs cinematography or title design nominations to win, but Ozark maxing out in cinematography after missing last year and getting makeup was unexpected. It could just be like Barry versus Fleabag last year where Barry randomly got into score and Fleabag still won or it could be illustrative like the Chernobyl win over Game of Thrones for production design that this is a train that cannot be stopped.

    Taking one point to try and make a point while dismissing other relevant points is what is actually pointless.

    If we’re now gonna jump to below the line support being a factor, shouldn’t we look at them objectively? As in, Succession didn’t submit any episodes to Contemporary Make-up, because why would they?

    And comparing the Sound Mixing nominations for Ozark’s “All In” vs Succession’s non-nomination for “This Is Not For Tears” is crazy, considering we can clearly see (and hear) why an episode like “All In” would get a Sound Mixing nomination. And why “This Is Not For Tears” didn’t and probably would not get a nomination.

    It’s like asking why a show like Fleabag didn’t get a Comedy Half Hour Sound Mixing nomination last year. It’s ridiculous, because what Sound Mixing heavy work could possibly be nominated for a show like Fleabag? What lack of support could a miss in Sound Mixing possibly prove for Fleabag?

    Looking at the nominations for Cinematography, and how well we know what type of work usually gets nominated for awards like that, is anyone surprised that Succession’s “Hunting” and “This Is Not For Tears” didn’t get Cinematography nominations???? ANYONE? I mean like SERIOUSLY? Was the cinematographers chapter/branch just supposed to check off those two episodes to show support for the Succession overall? Compared to the DP work of The Crown, Marvelous Mrs Maisel and Westworld?

    Or are we going to nitpick about Costume Design or Hairstyling nominations that certain shows didn’t get?

    Succession maximized in acting, attaining a surplus of support for its cast with 9 acting nominations. Which Ozark couldn’t do. Maybe Fleabag, Game of Thrones, Chernobyl doing the same on their way to Series wins is illustrative of support for Series winners? Maybe that’s a train on its way.

    I would say jumping from 5 nominations to 18 above and below the line is indicative of broad enough support for the show.

    Profile picture
    AayaanUpadhyaya
    Joined:
    Dec 15th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627440

    Was going to say that Esposito and Wright would be pretty unprecedented in terms of material worthiness, but actually the majority of wins that we have gotten in this category under the popular vote have been bad.

    Now that I think about it, a Wright/Esposito win would be just like Mendelson winning in 2016 due to a vote-split.

    Profile picture
    boss
    Joined:
    Aug 14th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627442

    While there will be vote split between Succession actors, I would assume Nicholas Braun would get almost no votes right? This is just wishful thinking.

    Profile picture
    Anthony 🐜
    Joined:
    Jul 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627470

    Jeffrey Wright getting nominations for Supporting, then Lead, now Supporting again just proves the guy is highly respected and has a huge fan base within the Television Academy. And with everyone and their momma complaining that he either didn’t do anything this season to he got that nomination for that “one scene”, and yet still grabbed a coveted nomination, tells me he’s getting votes. A lot of votes.

    With a category that doesn’t have a clear front-runner and possible vote splitting playing a role, I believe he could be the beneficiary.

    Repeat winners being the prevailing theme of Drama Supporting Emmys (Maggie Smith, Anna Gunn, Peter Dinklage and Aaron Paul literally owning the category for years) leads me to believe we’re getting a repeat winner in Supporting Actress.

    Julie Garner vs Thandie Newton. Maybe even Samira Wiley, cause Lord knows there must be a reason why she got a nomination over her two bigger costars.

    All recognizable previous winners, they are the only returning previous winners for their respective roles. Very dangerous kind of nominees for this category. Familiar names to just check off on the ballot. As usual.

    Profile picture
    hopelesstar
    Joined:
    Mar 10th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203627475

    Anna Gunn has only won 2 times, and for the final parts of Breaking Bad, how was she owning her category?

    I know Maggie Smith traumatized Lena Headey’s stans, but she has only won 3 times and not even consecutively. Let’s not rewrite history and pretend she kept repeating for years. Same thing for Aaron, only 3 non consecutive wins. Furthermore, they (and Anna Gunn) won under the previous system.

    The only one that fits what you are saying is Dinklage.

Viewing 15 posts - 361 through 375 (of 512 total)

The topic ‘Emmys 2020 Drama Nominations (Part 3)’ is closed to new replies.

Similar Topics
puck05 - Sep 25, 2020
Television
DaKardii - Sep 24, 2020
Television
marty - Sep 24, 2020
Television