Home Forums Television Jon Cryer should be banned from voting at the Emmys

Jon Cryer should be banned from voting at the Emmys

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 61 total)
Created
4 years ago
Last Reply
4 years ago
67
( +8 hidden )
replies
5571
views
19
users
Riley Chow
10
CanadianFan
9
TomHardys
5
  • 24Emmy
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359758

    I think that you are underestimating Gaby Hoffmann, so let me take down the five people that you have ahead of her.  The Emmy voters do not watch Mom, but they do watch Transparent.  They watch Veep too, but I think that that show is old news.  Modern Family might win series and it might win supporting actor, but no way that it wins those and supporting actress because it is not 2011. Niecy Nash and Jane Krakowski are in this category because of the tie, so they are not winning a popular vote.

    Any chance you’re overestimating her? You have her winning twice. How many actors have won 2 acting awards in the same year? Very few and the ones that do tend to be big names like Stockard Channing and Allison Janney.

    ReplyCopy URL
    eastwest
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 6th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359759

    Molehill to mountain

    ReplyCopy URL
    Atypical
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 1st, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359760

    What do we know of Jon Cryer’s viewings of the submissions prior to this Twitter exchange in the other categories he’s voting for? Are these affadavits signed after each category, or in one place for all the nominees? It’s the honor system for series only, correct? What was actually posted on his Twitter feed (don’t feel like sifting through that nonsense). I didn’t realize he was such a “Mad Men” fan. Yay for that, I guess. Another vote for Jon Hamm! I’ll take that. People are going to vote for their subjective reasons in any capacity or system in place, so that’s something I’ve accepted a long time ago.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Gabriel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 10th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359761

    We have no way of knowing anything but the nominees and winners and yet, we have an entire website for speculation based on the information that we do have.

    Speculation is one thing, but you keep wording your theories as though they were facts!

    ReplyCopy URL
    CanadianFan
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 23rd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359762

    Molehill to mountain

    Yes, because the decline of the only prestigious and credible awards show should be taken lightly, and without protest.

    [insert sarcastic GIF] 

    If we make noise, maybe they’ll make some reforms. There are some easy solutions that can be put into place for the coming years that could accommodate the expansion of voters without nullifying the actual work being submitted and judged. That is what I’m working towards. Until then, pointing out how bad this system is will have to suffice. 

    Right now, a voter can vote before even opening any of the submissions! What makes this particularly damaging is that the Emmy system uses a ranked ballot, so Cryer is actually hurting many of the supporting actress nominees. If this were the Oscars, and he were going to give his vote to Hendricks anyway, then it wouldn’t really matter, but he has to assign the others a rank of 2 – 6, and if it is somewhat random, then he is really hurting the others.

    What is so bad about holding people accountable when they break the rules of an AFFIDAVIT?  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley
    Keymaster
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359763

    You didn’t respond to my question. How are you so sure in claiming that Jane Krakowski and Niecy Nash are only in the category because of the tie?

    I wrote an entire post about Krakowski on the last page; it is one up from the bottom.  You do not need me to spell it out about Nash.

    [quote=”thedemonhog”]I think that you are underestimating Gaby Hoffmann,
    so let me take down the five people that you have ahead of
    her.

    Any chance you’re overestimating her? You have her winning
    twice. How many actors have won 2 acting awards in the same year? Very
    few and the ones that do tend to be big names like Stockard Channing and
    Allison Janney.[/quote]Oh, for sure.  I have been wrestling with that,
    especially since I lack confidence in either of my predictions for her,
    but I am not sure which prediction is more unlikely.

    [quote=”thedemonhog”]We have no way of knowing anything
    but the nominees and winners and yet, we have an entire website for
    speculation based on the information that we do have.

    Speculation
    is one thing, but you keep wording your theories as though they were
    facts![/quote]I will try to watch out for my wording, but I would think
    that it would be obvious what is a fact (who was nominated and who won)
    and what is speculation (everything else).  I do not want to start every
    sentence with “I think”.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359764

    Very few voters were allowed to vote before.[quote=”Natasha”]This new voting system is gonna be a huge failure. You know what, for the first time ever I want to win in Prediction Center. Tell me guys who do you think is the most popular choice in each category. Fuck the tapes, those sheep clearly don’t give a shit about them so why should we? Definitely Hamm is winning and so is Hendricks but should I go for Viola or Taraji? In comedy I will go with Amy Schumer cause she’s the newest flavor of the month. But tell me what should I do in other categories? For real, my predictions this time are gonna be 100% accurate.Ugh, I really should predict Hamm, Taraji and Schumer, eh?  My best tip for you is to predict the variety and reality categories.  I see that you have not filled those out and you need to vote in every category to be eligible to win.  It will be a dark day if your guest actor predictions for Mel Brooks and F. Murray Abraham are correct.

    I think that you are underestimating Gaby Hoffmann, so let me take down the five people that you have ahead of her.  The Emmy voters do not watch Mom, but they do watch Transparent.  They watch Veep too, but I think that that show is old news.  Modern Family might win series and it might win supporting actor, but no way that it wins those and supporting actress because it is not 2011.  Niecy Nash and Jane Krakowski are in this category because of the tie, so they are not winning a popular vote.

    I am really confused about Tituss Burgess versus Ty Burrell.  Any thoughts there?  You do not think that voters are tired of Modern Family?  It went from two SAG wins last year to zero this year.

    [/quote]
    Thanks for the advice. The thing with Hoffman is she doesn’t have a name recognition to win. I’d love that but that ain’t gonna happen. And Burrell is so winning it. He’s liked, he’s already won and well, he’s liked. The same with Modern Family. It’s gonna break a record. This year’s ceremony is gonna be fucked up from start to finish.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Gabriel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 10th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359765

    I will try to watch out for my wording, but I would think
    that it would be obvious what is a fact (who was nominated and who won)
    and what is speculation (everything else).  I do not want to start every
    sentence with “I think”.

    No, you’re right. I don’t mean to sound like that judge on the Good Wife who always demands that everyone state “In my opinion,..”, but that comment about Nash and Krakowski seemed overly sure of itself is all.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley
    Keymaster
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359767

    As I have said.

    ReplyCopy URL
    eastwest
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 6th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359768

    [quote=”eastwest”]

    Molehill to mountain

    Yes, because the decline of the only prestigious and credible awards show should be taken lightly, and without protest.

    [insert sarcastic GIF] 

    If we make noise, maybe they’ll make some reforms. There are some easy solutions that can be put into place for the coming years that could accommodate the expansion of voters without nullifying the actual work being submitted and judged. That is what I’m working towards. Until then, pointing out how bad this system is will have to suffice. 

    Right now, a voter can vote before even opening any of the submissions! What makes this particularly damaging is that the Emmy system uses a ranked ballot, so Cryer is actually hurting many of the supporting actress nominees. If this were the Oscars, and he were going to give his vote to Hendricks anyway, then it wouldn’t really matter, but he has to assign the others a rank of 2 – 6, and if it is somewhat random, then he is really hurting the others.

    What is so bad about holding people accountable when they break the rules of an AFFIDAVIT?  
    [/quote]

    It’s not that big of a deal when the heads made it known that they wanted to change things up with the voting. I’m sure they knew that this would be a possibility. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    JOHN
    Member
    Joined:
    Jun 24th, 2015
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359769

    The Emmys are turning into the People’s Choice Awards.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Deniz Sisman
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 19th, 2015
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359770

    ^More like the Oscars where everyone gets to vote for whoever they want for arbitrary reasons. It’s still an industry organization, so we can’t say it’s similar to People’s Choice.

    Here’s Christina Hendricks’ explanation about why no Mad Men actor has never won an Emmy with the tape system.
    “Obviously it’s easy to say, when someone comes running out of a burning building screaming for their life and the tears are streaming down their face, “Oh, my God, that person’s acting their butt off!” We don’t have scenes like that. It’s not as showy, it’s a very, very complicated show.”

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359771

    ^ Someone’s bitter. lol

    You know many times I have been mad about tape system because my favorite didn’t win but at least I knew those morons actually watched the nominees work. This time I expect it to look like SAG/GG/BFCA/Oscars.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Rooney Moore
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 2nd, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359772

    ^^They had no choice other than this, after last years travesty.(Martin Freeman’s win over Matt Bomer)
    It became clear that those 70 judges neither represent the whole Academy’s choices perfectly nor did they actually watch the submitted material. Otherwise, believe me, those old-minded Chairmen wouldn’t have changed a system which had been on the air more than 5 decades and have become the pivotal part of the Emmys.
    How on earth one person who have watched both Sherlock: His Last Vow and The Normal Heart can think Freeman gave a better performance than Bomer? It’s utter bullshit. It’s like giving the Oscar to Mark Ruffalo instead of J.K Simmons or Felicity Jones instead of Julianne Moore. And tell me, wouldn’t media have rioted by that? Just because Emmys are less important than Oscars, you can’t ignore something stupid like that if you claim to recognize the best in your industry. And it’s not even the first situation which we doubt about tapes importance.
    There are always at least 3 or 4 actors lose to their co-nominees who have an inferior submission every year. But posters in here always find a way to justify the winners, even the weirdest ones, saying ”Wever is more likable in her episode that’s why she won” or ”Freeman also appears in Hanks’ tape with a different role, that was his advantage”; ”Sarah Paulson was robbed, but she wasn’t a supporting performer in Asylum, Ellen Burstyn was.” and something like that.
    Just because you want one or two underdogs like Zeljko Ivanek or Margo Martindale to be awarded every once in a while, you can’t throw all credibility of your award show out of the window.
    They should have given up to this system after Stockard Channing’s awkward win for The West Wing. Yeah, I can already hear some of you saying ”She was so deserving!” yeah, whatever…

    At least this way, Academy can have a legitimate argument and can claim ”Well that person is more popular than the other that’s why she/he won, or their show is a bigger hit, or the character they play is a bigger hit” and at least this would satisfy people and we Derbyites would know who to blame at the end.

    ReplyCopy URL
    DominicCobb
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 12th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #359773

    Sorry if this has been brought up, I haven’t read the last five pages. Are we to assume that Cryer is only now voting for his favorites? What was there to stop him in past years?

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 61 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
Tyler - Aug 17, 2019
Television
Sam K - Aug 16, 2019
Television
Emmyfan - Aug 16, 2019
Television