September 20, 2015 at 9:37 pm #361829
It’s hard to tell if winners were more of a popular vote, vote by tape submission, or a combination (I think the latter), but do you guys think there will be more of repeat winners again next year? I seriously do not see what can challenge Veep, for example, and JLD just doesn’t seem to have any competition in the voters’ minds. Falco, Poehler, and Kudrow will be gone, leaving room for three new nominees in her category. Similarly, Janney’s style of comedy on her show seems to be what voters prefer (although she’s great at it).
In addition, Game of Thrones will be back to defend its title and seems to always be in the zeitgeist. With the way votes are done now, we have to look at the different ways the votes can go, which means that in some categories, “rubber stamping” can still occur.September 20, 2015 at 9:45 pm #361831
I was wondering the same thing the other day. Especially after tonight, I really do wonder who is going to beat either Julia Louis-Dreyfus or Allison Janney. Especially Dreyfus, as her performance is so heads and toes far above everyone else in her category, I cannot see anyone beating her next year. And Janney really does give a unique, tour-de-force performance that perfectly straddles the line between comedic and dramatic, which no other suporting actress is giving these days.
I would not be shocked at all if a year from now we are asking the same thing and looking at the two of them as sevena nd eight time Emmy winners, repectively.September 20, 2015 at 10:10 pm #361832
I am worried about how many years Peter Dinklage, Allison Janney, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Uzo Aduba will be rubber-stamped under the new system. I can see a new drama coming in and taking out Game of Thrones or a new comedy taking out Veep, but those particular performances seem pretty immune to changing tides.
"I don't even believe in god, but I'm going to thank her tonight."September 20, 2015 at 10:22 pm #361833
What’s surprising about Dinklage’s second win is that is came four years after his first one (2011). All of the other repeat winners in the category had either consecutive wins (Stuart Margolin (1979-1980), Michael Conrad (1981-1982), Larry Drake (1988-1989), and Ray Walston (1995-1996)) or won every other year (Aaron Paul (2010, 2012, 2014)). Basically, no one else had to wait this long for another win. That Dinklage won after such a long period I think proves how popular he is among the voters.September 20, 2015 at 10:25 pm #361834
I don’t know if I’d put Dinklage or even Janney in the same category as Louis-Dreyfus.
The only way JLD is going down is if Sarah Jessica Parker comes out guns blazing in Divorce.September 20, 2015 at 10:29 pm #361835
Louis-Dreyfus has a popular show and a strong tape to back her up. Dinklage should not have been nominated and Janney is on a show that the Emmys hate. That is how popular they are.
"I don't even believe in god, but I'm going to thank her tonight."September 21, 2015 at 5:26 am #361836
If Veep manages to maintain the same quality that they have for the past four seasons, I think Louis-Dreyfus and the series could win again next year; however, who knows what will happen with David Mandel at the helm instead of Armando Iannucci? I’m thrilled that they won for his final season, especially his own win in Writing, because sight unseen who knows how the transition of showrunners will be?
Formerly known in the forums as PianoMann.September 21, 2015 at 5:55 am #361837
The biggest surprise is definitely Dinklage, who I hadn’t even considered as a possibility against Banks or Mendelsohn. Considering he was such a nothing this season, if he has anything at all to do in the next one, then he’ll clean up. I feel the same about Hale. Did anyone actually watch that season and think he was the best of the year? He wasn’t even in the top 3 supporting males on the show. The name-checking is reaching new levels of ridiculousness.September 21, 2015 at 6:01 am #361838
Both Veep and Thrones are vulnerable as series. These shows weren’t even sure things for reasons already discussed, enough people were ready for repeats from Modern Family or Mad Men. Veep specially doesn’t look like a repeat winner….it doesn’t even look like a one time winner. I hope it is a repeat winner, but it doesn’t look like it. Modern Family fatigue had to help a lot. Next year, both of these shows’ thunder might be easily stolen.
Inside Amy Schumer will win again easily next year, her show has to really suck in season 4 for it not to win again. This is a show where she’s the only favorite with any type of buzz. The others are there because the category exists and needs to fill up.
Dreyfuss and Janney could keep winning. Janney specially. Dreyfuss might have strong competition thanks to it being her 5th win in a row and that’s when things start to get tricky.September 21, 2015 at 6:38 am #361839
JLD has already beaten superior performances, so it doesn’t matter if someone else better comes along. She is Julia Louis-Dreyfus™, and they will keep rubberstamping her. Same goes for Allison Janney.September 21, 2015 at 7:04 am #361840
I really think Dreyfus is more deserving of her billions wins than Doris Roberts, Jim Parsons, Hellen Hunt….
Emmys love to repeat and we know that, so let it be with a deserving person.September 21, 2015 at 7:57 am #361841
thx.September 21, 2015 at 7:59 am #361842
I think the only way Julia Louis-Dreyfus loses for “Veep” is if she takes her name out of contention like Candice Bergen did, and she’s absolutely never, ever doing that. She loves winning Emmys too much. It’s funny that this is the solitary time I think JLD actually deserved a win for “Veep.” “Election Night” was a killer submission, and none of her other nominees came to play ball with their middling to poor tapes (except Edie Falco; I’ll give credit where it is due). So many repeat winners this year were dull and uninspired, but it goes to show you that there are some actors who are simply lose-proof. They win Emmys under virtually any system or categorization. Maybe that means something to people. There was absolutely no need to reward Tony Hale or Peter Dinklage again with Tituss Burgess and Jonathan Banks in those categories, respectively. They were swept up in their show’s sweeps. Allison Janney is so not done yet winning for “Mom.” And Uzo Aduba is the new Ed Asner, after all.September 21, 2015 at 8:07 am #361843
Louis-Dreyfus and Janney are the biggest risk. I don’t see Aduba as someone they feel they need to constantly give a win–particularly for seasons that happened in the distant past–and Henson at least will always threaten Davis.
I’d throw Tambor in there too as a possibility of repeating a couple more times. That has more to do with a weak field though.
Not that worried about Dinklage, though. Firstly, I doubt he’ll have a year as dull as S5 for awhile, so it’ll be less egregious. But also, even though this category has had some dead weight lately, it’s a category where someone’s story of the year can supercede other things if people love it enough. If enough people love someone, especially on a new and buzzy show, someone like Ed Harris, Anthony Hopkins, or Paul Giamatti could supercede him. It’s basically impossible for any other male on Game of Thrones to ever win though, even if nominated.September 21, 2015 at 8:08 am #361844
You can combine Jonathan Banks performance in 8 of the 10 episodes of Better Call Saul and it would have less to do than Dinklage in a single one. Banks shouldn’t have been nominate for a glorify guest performance. Dinklage won The Aaron Paul Award For Doing the Least Acting in a Drama Series. On the other hand, Michael Kelly and Ben Mehndelson were robbed.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.