August 20, 2012 at 6:03 pm #256898
This is surely one of the shortest nominated performances in Emmy history, but I’m trying to figure out how short. In her submitted episode, “Return of Avery Jessup,” she’s only in about 30 seconds, but I’m trying to figure out her total screentime over the course of the season.
IMDb lists her only in “Return” and the season finale. Are those the only two, or was she uncredited in other episodes?August 20, 2012 at 6:52 pm #256900
was she even in the finale??
I honestly forgot that she was in this season, she was a waste of a nomination.
Kathryn Hahn or even Mary Steenburgen could have benefitted from her slot.
August 20, 2012 at 7:18 pm #256901
I don’t regularly watch 30 Rock, but was Margaret Cho’s role as Kim Jong-il any bigger in the episode “Everything Sunny All the Time Always” in Season 5? Perhaps buzz from that episode (while skipped over for a nomination last year) grew, and carried on to the next season enough to get her a nomination? Just a theory.August 20, 2012 at 7:28 pm #256902
Yeah, it was definitely buzz from last season that carried over. I know people are pissed because that’s more the case of a gag being nominated than an actual performance. And while I think it’s valid to say she shouldn’t have been nominated, godammit, Kim Jong-il is a fantastic recurring gag/character/joke that I love, and I find it weird that people suddenly despise it because of an unfair nomination. It works on the show, it’s just not the kidn of thing Emmys should be nominating.August 20, 2012 at 7:32 pm #256903
I just rewatched the season finale and paid close attention for Cho. She has 77 seconds worth of screentime. She should have submitted that instead of “Return of Avery Jessup,” for what it’s worth, because at the end of the episode she actually has 39 full seconds of just her talking to the camera.August 20, 2012 at 7:50 pm #256904
I just rewatched the season finale and paid close attention for Cho. She has 77 seconds worth of screentime. She should have submitted that instead of “Return of Avery Jessup,” for what it’s worth, because at the end of the episode she actually has 39 full seconds of just her talking to the camera.
I agree with that. Those last 40 seconds of the season are among the funniest. I cracked up.
I think there are other actresses from the show that probably deserved the nom more than her but…I don’t know. I think she was hilarious on the show. And, I think she’s just a funny person in general. And she seemed (from various twitter.blog posts) genuinely surprised and grateful over her nomination so…I dunno…I don’t find her nomination that bad. I think between last season and this season, she’s provided plenty of laughs IMO.
It’s so weird how it seems like Emmy voters are liking 30 Rock less and less, and yet they still nominated two incredibly short performances from the show (Cho and Hamm). That probably wouldn’t happen anywhere else…August 20, 2012 at 7:58 pm #256905
That happens because Cho is very memorable. “30 Rock” always has tons of guest stars, and by the end of the season, I almost forget how many they were, and what exactly they did. But Kim Jong-il has been one of the best recurring gags/jokes the show had these past 2 seasons. It’s weird to see her nominated, but she really is hilarious in these very brief cameos she does.August 20, 2012 at 8:05 pm #256906
I’m not really outraged over Cho’s nomination either, though I can think of probably a dozen I would sooner have nominated.
What makes this different from, say, Ellen Burstyn’s notorious nomination for “Mrs. Harris” is that in Burstyn’s case it was clear voters simply had a Pavlovian response to her name on the ballot. It made them look bad because they clearly voted for her reputation and weren’t concerned with the performance they were nominating.
But with Cho, this is her first nomination, she actually is quite funny despite her blink-and-you-miss-it appearances, and she’s not the kind of name Emmy voters would just tick off by rote, so I don’t feel as much that she stole someone’s spot.August 20, 2012 at 8:27 pm #256908
I really have no personal angst against Margaret Cho. Her reaction to her Emmy nod is very sincere, and I’m happy for her. But like what Daniel said, there’s a lot that I would have nominated before her.
I guess she’s one of those who fits more from the old pattern of Guest Acting judging where in you’re judged for the whole season instead of individual episodes since she always has less than 2 minutes of screentime (despite those minimal screentime being really hilarious).Riley (the normal one, not the one who won the predictions contest)ParticipantAugust 21, 2012 at 1:13 am #256909
I clocked Margaret Cho’s screen time in “The Return of Avery Jessup” in another thread a couple of days ago. She has literally a combined twenty seconds across her three scenes.August 21, 2012 at 6:26 am #256911
It’s not “outrage” on my part, but Cho shouldn’t have been nodded when there were better entries to consider from her own series, particularly Steenburgen and Stritch. It’s baffling that she was on anyone’s radar to begin with. I guess I can go with the theory of buzz from her work last season carrying over to this year, but then why wasn’t she nodded last year? If it’s about Kim Jong Il’s death, again, why not last year? Maybe voters thought it would have been in poor taste then, and now they’re okay with it.August 21, 2012 at 7:40 am #256912
I honestly don’t feel Stritch was anything that special this season. And Steenburgen was pretty good, I give you that. But at the same time, aren’t people somewhat interested in how this shows they actually watch at least some of those shows they are nominating? This isn’t rubberstamping, because Cho isn’t a big name. She was actually just so memorable and vivid a presence for them, that inspite of extreme lack of screentime and name recognition, she was still nominated. That’s why I can’t get mad at this. Not only is she extremely funny, but there’s something quite astonishing about how she did it. I mean, voters knew of these factors, but they probably didn’t care enough to stop them nominating a character and performance they liked that much.August 21, 2012 at 8:19 am #256913
Last year her nomination would have been justified. IMO over Elizabeth Banks, who never did anything special and award-worthy on 30 Rock. This year however, I have to agree this nod is off. I like that she’s recognized and don’t have a problem with the nomination personally, but there are indeed other performances that should have been nominated before her.
@tye: that clips just doesn’t get old, even after watching it 20 times.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.