Home Forums Television Killing Eve Season 3 (Renewed for Season 4)

Killing Eve Season 3 (Renewed for Season 4)

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 411 total)
Created
11 months ago
Last Reply
3 months ago
410
replies
49686
views
80
users
Gabarnes43
31
Jus
23
Riley Chow
20
  • Profile picture
    Synthadora
    Joined:
    Apr 5th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203416664

    Only her killing eve career is brought up because it’s relevant now. My bias is I thought the only standouts I saw from her was the dinner table scene and the ending of ep 3. My personal opinion is I hate overdue narrative, as they always cost the best person that year.  You mention Casey Affleck, well that’s why I mentioned Foy (emmy) and Rusell (tca) as I thought was the right decision for them to be awarded ,when comparing subtle performances. I assume you disagree with statement. Public did too as they thought Sandra should have.  Mosses torture for me didn’t land as well as Claire’s did.

    Hollywood is racist for not giving her the Emmy against her costar, Season 2 and 3 was hers. I don’t know nothing about huff so I’ll refrain to comment on that. Is Jodie winning include systematic racism ? Maybe. I also think the Emmys are slowly backing away from narratives. WTUS loss, Bateman winning and jvd cancer comeback show that.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Aereos
    Joined:
    Apr 8th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203416718

    Lol losing against Claire and Russel is not racist cause you find theirs performance better, yet losing against Comer who many voters found her performance better (after getting nothing for S1) it is infact racist??. Even some are comparing Heigl win to comer naah that’s reaching

     

     

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Aereos.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Aereos.
    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Emmyfan
    Joined:
    Nov 26th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203416859

    And what about situations where Sandra was clearly the best in her category? She could have taken Emmy at least twice for Grey’s Anatomy, and she had an Emmy-worthy material from start to finish in that show. A few people only seem to highlight that many were better than her in the last two years. So what about the occasions when the far weaker contenders won over her? Then why can’t Sandra win against the “strong”? The truth here is that Hollywood, in general, is very racist towards Asian performers. And they would rather reward Sandra’s white co-stars (Heigl, Comer), even if she is the front-runner to win. I mean it’s pretty subjective to judge performances, but it’s a very weird thing to think that Sandra Oh didn’t deserve an Emmy during her career.

    Sandra Oh should have won in 2006 and 2007 for Grey’s Anatomy

    2006 Drama Supporting Actress

    Blythe Danner Huff – WINNER
    Candice Bergen Boston Legal
    Sandra Oh Grey’s Anatomy
    Jean Smart 24
    Chandra Wilson Grey’s Anatomy

    I thought Sandra Oh would have won with competition from Jean Smart and Candice Bergen.

    2007 SUPPORTING ACTRESS DRAMA

    Katherine Heigl Grey’s Anatomy – WINNER
    Lorraine Bracco The Sopranos
    Rachel Griffiths Brothers & Sisters
    Sandra Oh Grey’s Anatomy
    Aida Turturro The Sopranos
    Chandra Wilson Grey’s Anatomy

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    keybored
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417178

    Sandra sweeped the winter awards for first season of ke, making this her second golden globes in her career and fourth SAG. She has won more awards for ke then her newcomer colead. This narrative that she is somehow specifically targeted instead of just losing in a competitive category the past two years is baffling to me.

    And imo this applies in general for all actors. The solution isn’t to compound on past mistakes and create more future honorary winners. Anyone robbed of their rightful award for a deserved consensus performance should be awarded when they deserve it the most as per consensus.

    Lol losing against Claire and Russel is not racist cause you find theirs performance better, yet losing against Comer who many voters found her performance better (after getting nothing for S1) it is infact racist??. Even some are comparing Heigl win to comer naah that’s reaching

    Imo, its just super fans with bias reaching hard because their favorite didn’t win the Emmy the past two years over  more competitive performances BOTH years. I didn’t see grey’s anatomy so I can’t comment there except that it’s seems to be consensus everywhere, not just with super fans, that she should have won an Emmy for cristina  yang. But some super fans now make it sound like that the only reason she will ever lose is because  they don’t want to give her an award and not because voters found other performances better, or they ignore the fact that she has in fact been recognized for her work as yang and eve by SAG (thrice) and golden globes (twice)

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Piper Halliwell
    Joined:
    Oct 20th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417182

    Lol losing against Claire and Russel is not racist cause you find theirs performance better, yet losing against Comer who many voters found her performance better (after getting nothing for S1) it is infact racist??. Even some are comparing Heigl win to comer naah that’s reaching

    The problem is not that you have an opinion, but that you don’t understand what we’re talking about. It’s not about who deserves the award and who doesn’t. Because that’s subjective. It’s about Sandra being in front-runner status several times and losing the award to her white colleagues. This shows that an Asian actress can’t win even if she’s a front-runner. Or should I mention Constance Wu (Fresh Off the Boat) and Yunjin Kim (Lost) who have never been nominated? Or lack of roles for Asian women?

    It’s only natural to you that voters found Jodie Comer to be better (with her three times juicier material) after Sandra won all the existing awards possible, but explain to me why Katherine Heigl deserved the award better than Sandra? Why is it that in addition to Shondaland’s diverse and pioneering casting, Heigl was able to win against Oh and Chandra Wilson, when the consensus was that they were both much better in the show?! Don’t get me wrong, I loved Heigl and I would have given an Emmy for the fifth season, but it’s still a bit transparent that the young, blonde, pretty white woman was chosen to be the sole winner from the main cast.

    Here, someone mentioned opportunities as well. Yes, Sandra has far fewer chances to break through than many, and unfortunately, since Killing Eve’s writing team also gives her white colleague all the good scenes, she has almost no chance of finally winning an Emmy. I mean, no one should tell me that Sandra isn’t as good an actress as Jodie and she couldn’t just play as marvelously as her if she got scenes like Jodie. The problem is that she doesn’t get those juicy scenes because they are trying to serve the mainstream audience where a middle-aged Asian actress isn’t as interesting as a beautiful, young, blonde, mysterious, accent-flashing assassin.

    So let’s face it, Sandra’s loss to the Emmy was as sad as it would have been if Viola Davis had lost the Emmy against a white contender. And it’s incredibly ignorant to say that it was just about Comer being found better by voters because it’s not that simple. No matter how ambivalent this opinion may seem: Jodie is a great talent and deserved the Emmy, but that particular prize really belonged to Sandra.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    keybored
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417189

    The problem is not that you have an opinion, but that you don’t understand what we’re talking about. It’s not about who deserves the award and who doesn’t. Because that’s subjective. It’s about Sandra being in front-runner status several times and losing the award to her white colleagues. This shows that an Asian actress can’t win even if she’s a front-runner. Or should I mention Constance Wu (Fresh Off the Boat) and Yunjin Kim (Lost) who have never been nominated? Or lack of roles for Asian women? It’s only natural to you that voters found Jodie Comer to be better (with her three times juicier material) after Sandra won all the existing awards possible, but explain to me why Katherine Heigl deserved the award better than Sandra? Why is it that in addition to Shondaland’s diverse and pioneering casting, Heigl was able to win against Oh and Chandra Wilson, when the consensus was that they were both much better in the show?! Don’t get me wrong, I loved Heigl and I would have given an Emmy for the fifth season, but it’s still a bit transparent that the young, blonde, pretty white woman was chosen to be the sole winner from the main cast. Here, someone mentioned opportunities as well. Yes, Sandra has far fewer chances to break through than many, and unfortunately, since Killing Eve’s writing team also gives her white colleague all the good scenes, she has almost no chance of finally winning an Emmy. I mean, no one should tell me that Sandra isn’t as good an actress as Jodie and she couldn’t just play as marvelously as her if she got scenes like Jodie. The problem is that she doesn’t get those juicy scenes because they are trying to serve the mainstream audience where a middle-aged Asian actress isn’t as interesting as a beautiful, young, blonde, mysterious, accent-flashing assassin. So let’s face it, Sandra’s loss to the Emmy was as sad as it would have been if Viola Davis had lost the Emmy against a white contender. And it’s incredibly ignorant to say that it was just about Comer being found better by voters because it’s not that simple. No matter how ambivalent this opinion may seem: Jodie is a great talent and deserved the Emmy, but that particular prize really belonged to Sandra.

     

    Did claire foy’s emmy win also belong to sandra since Sandra swept the winter awards later that year and had a better performance in a stronger Ke season where she had more juicer material than s2? This  is just getting into subjective territory of who you think should have won the most. Other performers shouldn’t be punished for Sandra not winning an emmy for Cristina Yang

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by keybored.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by keybored.
    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Piper Halliwell
    Joined:
    Oct 20th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417201

    You act like Sandra is terrible in Killing Eve. She was just as deserving and the others, and yes, she definitely deserved to win over Claire Foy. Satisfied?

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Synthadora
    Joined:
    Apr 5th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417209

    Lol losing against Claire and Russel is not racist cause you find theirs performance better, yet losing against Comer who many voters found her performance better (after getting nothing for S1) it is infact racist??. Even some are comparing Heigl win to comer naah that’s reaching

    Read what I said again. In my first comment I said Jodie was the better performer in both seasons for me. She’s one of my top winners this decade so comparing her win to Heigl is plain stupid. (referring to the person who said that) However, when talking about the situation Oh faced, you can bring up the issue with racism. Sandra a 20 year veteran losing to her up coming white star, again, within 2 seasons on the Hollywood scene. With the roles Hollywood offers and Sandra herself saying she experienced racism herself in the industry. I would not be overlooking that point.

    Once again, my initial point is Sandra can live without one, post killing eve.  Seems contradictory but I’m just seeing both sides of the argument when someone brought it up.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Piper Halliwell
    Joined:
    Oct 20th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417213

    Read what I said again. In my first comment I said Jodie was the better performer in both seasons for me. She’s one of my top winners this decade so comparing her win to Heigl is plain stupid. (referring to the person who said that) However, when talking about the situation Oh faced, you can bring up the issue with racism. Sandra a 20 year veteran losing to her up coming white star, again, within 2 seasons on the Hollywood scene. With the roles Hollywood offers and Sandra herself saying she experienced racism herself in the industry. I would not be overlooking that point. Once again, my initial point is Sandra can live without one, post killing eve. Seems contradictory but I’m just seeing both sides of the argument when someone brought it up.

    It’s pure logic. Sandra was the front-runner both times. Comer and Heigl were both her white co-stars who won over her. How is this stupid? I didn’t talk about the quality of their performances (Comer is better of course).

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Synthadora
    Joined:
    Apr 5th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417215

    I was talking about this comment.

    “The backlash to the Katherine Heigl robbery sequel”

    Yours answered my question on why Sandra’s Emmy is a birthright. Last part was in jest btw, if you think I’m being sarcastic.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    keybored
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417219

    You act like Sandra is terrible in Killing Eve. She was just as deserving and the others, and yes, she definitely deserved to win over Claire Foy. Satisfied?

    No, I am pointing out how you as a Sandra fan thinks she deserves to win over everyone else always, and how that has nothing to do with what material she gets . Your whole post claimed that the only reason she didn’t win in s2 is because she got weak material than her co star. But in s1 she got rlly strong material in a strong season, that nabbed her three industry awards, (while her ” blonde white,  co star” wasn’t nominated for anything), but  lost the Emmy in a highly competitive category. So I think that while it’s natural  for a super fan to always want their fav to win and think all awards belong to them, it has nothing to do with consensus winners.

    Read what I said again. In my first comment I said Jodie was the better performer in both seasons for me. She’s one of my top winners this decade so comparing her win to Heigl is plain stupid. (referring to the person who said that) However, when talking about the situation Oh faced, you can bring up the issue with racism. Sandra a 20 year veteran losing to her up coming white star, again, within 2 seasons on the Hollywood scene. With the roles Hollywood offers and Sandra herself saying she experienced racism herself in the industry. I would not be overlooking that point.  Once again, my initial point is Sandra can live without one, post killing eve. Seems contradictory but I’m just seeing both sides of the argument when someone brought it up.

    Again, if you think one performer was better for you, then what you  seem to be saying in the bolded is  that one of the main reasons Sandra shouldn’t lose to an unknown is just because she is a 20 year old veteran in Hollywood. Critics have been shouting about Kerry Russel being robbed of an Emmy for The Americans every year of its existence and she still didn’t get anything in her last year because of how competitive  her category was. Claire Foy was also another unknown, in America at least,  who broke out with Crown and won based on her performance over 20 year old veterans and other highly critical acclaimed performances. There is a conversation to be had about systemic racism in context of opportunities non-white actors get but acclaimed white performers with strong performances are also losing to undeniable performances from newcomers to the scene. There it’s just about whose performance voters preferred the most.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Jus
    Joined:
    Oct 10th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417272

    The truth is, Emerald Fennel premiered s.2 in different reality, basking in PWG glory, meanwhile Suzanne Heathcote has to clean up the mess and damage done by Fennel.

    One of the things that is constant here, is that the show doesn’t seem to know how to stick the landing. I liked s.1 finale, but I know damn well that a lot of people didn’t like it. I think the season looks very promissing, and I have a hard time to believe that it is somehow worse than s. 2. But the final three episodes will be cruciall to see the full picture.

    One thing that I got from some of those reviews and Riley post is that Heathcote is probably the first KE showrunner who cares about the plot and sees the need for making some improvments on that front. Phoebe didn’t care for it, which she admitted, Emerald clearly didn’t care for it, because season 2 had zero sense and no proper structure (even if some episodes were very good). Worse – KE producer Sally W. Gentle many times said they don’t care about it. You can’t say that if your TV show was created with five seasons in mind.

    So to me it’s clear that Heathcote realized that the show needs a proper clean up in storyline departament, even if this means taking two steps back. And here probably lies the biggest problem for a lot of people: her intentions are good, but now it’s clear more than ever that season 2 wasted everyone’s time. Because the story that Heathcote is telling now, and probably with better writing (praying cricle), should happen in s.2.

    All of this is only my prediction, from reading various reviews and cast interviews. For now I ignore the news about that Villanelle-centric episode because at the moment it is the only idea I hate. Excited for the rest.

    Emmy noms chances? No idea. Two or three noms should happen, but in what categories? I don’t know. It is still a very pretty show, that is easy to love. Very well made, with effortless acting. So I don’t think it will disappear completely from Emmys’ radar.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Jus.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Jus.
    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    supermalt
    Joined:
    Sep 30th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417275

    Gold derby saw two options, and two options only. Emilia win due to vote splitting or Sandra via well overdue. Passion votes trumped all.

    Katherine Heigl’s should have went to Sandra Oh
    Claire Foy’s should have went to Keri Russel
    Jodie Comer’s should of went to Jodie Comer
    It is a shame Sandra’s writing gone down the drain, Comer deserves nevertheless.

    Let’s talk killing eve. My favourite show of 2018, on every occasion I will have the urge to defend it.

    Why won’t GD accept it’s good? “Garbage” “a fad” “fluke” “overrated”. Deemed a flop dead on arrival in the Drama thread. Regulars were quick to denounce that. I know it’s not happening and we are here to talk about critically acclaimed shows but a show doesn’t need to be excellent to get in. Whenever it’s brought up I see people dismiss it chances like its piss in the wind.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    forwardswill
    Joined:
    Apr 9th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417279

    I’m always surprised that people think the problems of season two didn’t exist in season one. To me, the first five episodes of the first season are the pinnacle – it was always fresh, it was always thrilling, it was always tightly plotted, it was always fun. Then you have episodes like “Take Me to the Hole” and “I Don’t Want to Be Free” where the plotting started going off a bit and were much more tonally messy – very much like season two. They were still entertaining but flawed. The finale pulled it back thanks mostly to being written by Waller-Bridge and I’d argue that the first two episodes of season two – the only ones critics got when they reviewed – matched it, hence the high metascore. But from there it went back to the entertaining mess of 1.06 and 1.07, equalling that good but slightly lesser quality until the IMO great finale.

    I think the big problem the show has is not the change of showrunners (although it of course would have been better had PWB held on) but the constant change of writer. On most shows, this method is fine but because tone is so so so important on Killing Eve it stands out when new writers are hopping on and off, creating both a whiplash effect and also confusing which stories we’re supposed to be taking seriously and which are just a bit of fun.

    This is obviously all just my opinion and I could be wrong – Susannah Heathcote could be truly crap – but personally I think we all just need to stop viewing the first season through rose-tinted glasses and accept that most of the problems have always existed and without the return of PWB as sole writer they aren’t ever going away.

    It’s never been a show I expected critics to like so the reviews don’t really faze me (especially after that aforementioned boost S2 got by giving them fewer episodes to start with) and I fully expect this to just be same old Killing Eve. Roll on Sunday.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Jus
    Joined:
    Oct 10th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203417287

    It’s never been a show I expected critics to like so the reviews don’t really faze me (especially after that aforementioned boost S2 got by giving them fewer episodes to start with) and I fully expect this to just be same old Killing Eve. Roll on Sunday.

    It’s funny that you mention this, but I feel the same way. This show always struck me as…I don’t know if this would be the right term, but “anti-prestige”? Do you know what I mean? Even if it was always very stylish, it was also preposterous, sapphic and out of whack.

    I’m not saying that success of it is an accident, but I loved it from the first episode and each week I thought the show will remain a niche miracle, rather than small, but nontheless global phenomenon.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 411 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
Chris B... - Nov 25, 2020
Television
wolfali - Nov 23, 2020
Television
Keri Ru... - Nov 23, 2020
Television