Home Forums Television How did the "experts" get Chernobyl vs When They See Us so wrong?

How did the "experts" get Chernobyl vs When They See Us so wrong?

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 61 total)
Created
7 months ago
Last Reply
6 months ago
60
( +1 hidden )
replies
4735
views
34
users
Pulp
7
mafro987
5
Riley Chow
4
  • Couverture
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099159

    I don’t understand why you guys are being personally offended by the experts for going with When They See Us. Chernobyl won, move on. The person who predicted Anthony Carrigan over Tony Shalhoub is going to come after someone for not predicting Chernobyl? Lmao.

    These forums have been wrong on various occasions as well. Julia Garner was almost entirely dismissed by these forums. Majority of experts predicted her and she won. Why not talk about that? The narcissism is jumping out.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Pulp
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099170

    Okay, can you rephrase then? I do not understand what “It wasn’t like Riley is putting it because” means.

    Well I guess the best way to rephrase that would be to say “Riley is wrong because”… Although nothing you say is necessarily wrong, just that I think you’re kind of missing a key point of the discussion, that it isn’t just them being wrong but the weird dismissal of chernobyl from so many experts. Of course everyone had it number 2 but it seemed like it was looked at as the obvious runner-up not really a big threat to actually win.

    #FreeTheBannedFour

    ReplyCopy URL
    RRaw
    Participant
    Joined:
    Apr 23rd, 2015
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099215

    No one was anticipating a Chernobly win because “Visionary Director” Ava Duvernay was in the mix (she is a media darling after all)

    ReplyCopy URL
    Djoko
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 14th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099229

    I never read any of the “experts” on here, but you should know by now that the “experts” on here aren’t really “experts.” They get it wrong more times than they get it right so you really shouldn’t read what they have to say.

    ReplyCopy URL
    AayaanUpadhyaya
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 15th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099322

    The premise of this thread verges on ludicrous. First of all, this lapse in judgment was not limited to the so-called Experts. When They See Us was favoured to win by every group: Experts, Editors, Top 24, All-Stars and yes, even Users. Hundreds more of them predicted When They See Us. And it is not like there is some conspiracy among the pundits to propel When They See Us when many of them theoretically voted Chernobyl over it to win TCA. That is great that Scott Feinberg is a moron, but almost every Expert ultimately ranked it second or first. Chernobyl had a better ranking than Fleabag and that show did even better at TCA, so where is the outrage about them not predicting it for the Emmys?

    When They See Us had better critical reviews than Chernobyl, it was a Program of the Year nominee at TCA, tons of people apparently watched it, it had a 9.0 on IMDb despite all of the racist trolls there, it was politically topical, it had the most aggressive campaigner behind it in Netflix and it was clearly the favourite of the audience in the Microsoft Theater, which theoretically had tons of Emmy voters. It was nominated for writing, directing, cinematography, sound and so on. It won casting and the last seven winners of that won either movie or limited series. I reckon that it is the first ever limited series to have eight acting nominations and lose limited series.

    Like if you predicted The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, you were wrong, but I am not going to drag you through the mud and tell you how stupid you were. It had the most nominations, it won a record number of guild awards for the same season and it has now set records for how well it did in spite of losing comedy series. It won four acting Emmys, tied the all-time record that it set last year in terms of wins by a single season of a comedy and it is now the first comedy ever to win six Creative Arts Emmys and lose series.

    The arguments for predicting When They See Us and The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel were ultimately wrong, but they were sound. You act like all that When They See Us had was narrative, but it had statistics too. It was not Veep.

    Preach.

    Also I don’t understand how it was wrong to predict WTSU. I mean I came third in the predictions and I had WTSU in directing and series, so EVERYONE, not just experts, were predicting WTSU.

    The ‘conspiracy theory’ is laughable. Why would I want to sabotage my own score? And I don’t even regret making those two predictions because – a) this was a very close race, and b) the passionate support was there. The stats were there.

    Also, many people weren’t discounting Chernobyl, they were just against the blatant racism that was being used in the limited thread to bring down WTSU. I remember making a long post on this, so I won’t repeat myself. Both Chernobyl and WTSU were equally deserving of winning the main prize, and BOTH had passionate support to take it. But some people here were actually bringing WTSU down for obviously racist reasons, and that is what was being called out by most.

    Let’s not pretend that some of you all weren’t attacking WSTU and making it seem like it was Bohemian Rhapsody when it had everything going for it to win.

    ReplyCopy URL
    JanisEye
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 1st, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099350

    Almost everyone including people who are discussing now why most awards pundits downplayed Chernobyl (intentionally or not) cheered when Jerome and Porter won. Guess they weren’t racists then. I think the experts assumed that WTSU would win on political narrative alone.

    ReplyCopy URL
    mafro987
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 23rd, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099355

    Almost everyone including people who are discussing now why most awards pundits downplayed Chernobyl (intentionally or not) cheered when Jerome and Porter won. Guess they weren’t racists then. I think the experts assumed that WTSU would win on political narrative alone.

    This is wrong, I’ve seen Chernobyl fans list Jerome among the worst wins of the night for beating Harris, claiming that he was ‘robbed’. They have made it very obvious that had WTSU won, they would be in uproar. This thread is a perfect example of that. Not satisfied with their preferred show winning, they’re now convincing themselves of an editorial conspiracy.

    For Your Consideration:

    Best International Feature: Instinct (The Netherlands)
    Best Actress: Carice van Houten (Instinct)

    ReplyCopy URL
    JanisEye
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 1st, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099357

    This is wrong, I’ve seen Chernobyl fans list Jerome among the worst wins of the night for beating Harris, claiming that he was ‘robbed’. They have made it very obvious that had WTSU won, they would be in uproar. This thread is a perfect example of that. Not satisfied with their preferred show winning, they’re now convincing themselves of an editorial conspiracy.

    I’ve seen many people cheering for both Jerome and Chernobyl. Few people said Harris should have won and it’s their right to like one performance over the other. And everyone was happy for Porter and considered him the best in the category.

    ReplyCopy URL
    AayaanUpadhyaya
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 15th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099365

    This is wrong, I’ve seen Chernobyl fans list Jerome among the worst wins of the night for beating Harris, claiming that he was ‘robbed’. They have made it very obvious that had WTSU won, they would be in uproar. This thread is a perfect example of that. Not satisfied with their preferred show winning, they’re now convincing themselves of an editorial conspiracy.

    Exactly

    ReplyCopy URL
    Pulp
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099367

    Lol, this is getting laughable. I was rooting for Jerome but also would have hated to see WTSU beat such a far superior show. It’s so annoying that people are trying to twist a legitimate discussion about issues with pundits and “experts” and turn into something about race. But I’m not surprised WTSU stans continue to use that card.

    #FreeTheBannedFour

    ReplyCopy URL
    lorelei lor
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 20th, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099376

    This is wrong, I’ve seen Chernobyl fans list Jerome among the worst wins of the night for beating Harris, claiming that he was ‘robbed’. They have made it very obvious that had WTSU won, they would be in uproar. This thread is a perfect example of that. Not satisfied with their preferred show winning, they’re now convincing themselves of an editorial conspiracy.

    Like WTSU stans aren’t acting out right now everywhere and blaming the ‘white vote’.

    ReplyCopy URL
    ginnala
    Spectator
    Joined:
    Dec 1st, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099383

    This thread is so salty, for nothing.

    ReplyCopy URL
    mafro987
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 23rd, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099388

    Lol, this is getting laughable. I was rooting for Jerome but also would have hated to see WTSU beat such a far superior show. It’s so annoying that people are trying to twist a legitimate discussion about issues with pundits and “experts” and turn into something about race. But I’m not surprised WTSU stans continue to use that card.

    You’re one of my favourite posters but come on. As Riley said, why are the experts that didn’t predict Fleabag not getting criticism for that? This could’ve been a healthy conversation but posters alluding to some conspiracy to promote WTSU through ‘manipulation’ etc is just way off the mark and has uncomfortable undertones. And obviously I didn’t mean every single Chernobyl fan was disappointed with Jerome’s win, but that was a trend I observed.

    Like WTSU stans aren’t acting out right now everywhere and blaming the ‘white vote’.

    That definitely hasn’t happened on this forum but I can’t speak for anywhere else. Obviously that shouldn’t be condoned though.

    For Your Consideration:

    Best International Feature: Instinct (The Netherlands)
    Best Actress: Carice van Houten (Instinct)

    ReplyCopy URL
    fvg627
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 23rd, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099409

    I don’t think the premise for this thread is entirely unreasonable. I remember hearing wild talk on this site of Emmy voters who “preferred Chernobyl but were voting for When They See Us because of its importance” or who “weren’t going to allow the Central Park 5 come to the ceremony just to lose.”

    Granted, there were legitimate arguments for picking WTSU as well, arguments that I think most of the experts were clinging to. It is true that Ava is the bigger name, and WTSU was Netflix’s only real vehicle for a series win this year. Even the creative arts didn’t bode all bad, with WTSU beating Chernobyl head to head in casting (even though this wasn’t hard to predict, even outside the GD bubble)

    But ultimately, I do think Chernobyl was pretty obvious after creative arts. It won editing and cinematography, losing casting was obvious, and it beat GOT in their head to head production design race. The latter is what ultimately gave me the confidence to keep Chernobyl for series. Although this same “beating GOT” logic caused me to keep Maisel, so what do I know.

    Also I agree with everyone who said there were far more egregious predictions than WTSU

    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley Chow
    Keymaster
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203099819

    Of course everyone had it number 2 but it seemed like it was looked at as the obvious runner-up not really a big threat to actually win.

    There are obvious runners-up and there are two-horse races. Predictions on Gold Derby:

    71%: Julia Louis-Dreyfus
    14%: Phoebe Waller-Bridge

    86%: The Assassination of Gianni Versace
    7% Godless

    53%: When They See Us
    40%: Chernobyl

    There was certainly more of a discrepancy among the Experts, but more of them predicted Chernobyl than fellow second-ranked Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Patricia Arquette, Claire Foy or Bill Hader over Donald Glover, so I do not see what is so exceptional about the Chernobyl miss that it warrants this outrage. And hey, at least the Experts got one of Chernobyl‘s three big wins with Writing and recognized that it was top-two in Series and Directing because it does not match up to how they missed Fleabag, which won four big awards. Not only did they not predict it for Lead Actress, but they did not even have it in their top two for Series and Directing. And this despite the love for this British co-production on the Internet over a politically-relevant-in-America show about a female president. Talk about a “weird dismissal”!

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 61 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
thatner... - Apr 4, 2020
Television
Guest 2018 - Apr 3, 2020
Television
Guest 2018 - Apr 2, 2020
Television