January 22, 2016 at 1:03 pm #367202
Beginning later this year, each new memberâ€™s voting status will last 10 years, and will be renewed if that new member has been active in motion pictures during that decade. In addition, members will receive lifetime voting rights after three ten-year terms; or if they have won or been nominated for an Academy Award. We will apply these same standards retroactively to current members. In other words, if a current member has not been active in the last 10 years they can still qualify by meeting the other criteria. Those who do not qualify for active status will be moved to emeritus status. Emeritus members do not pay dues but enjoy all the privileges of membership, except voting. This will not affect voting for this yearâ€™s Oscars
Should the Emmys try this also? As a way of possibly reducing the repetitive nominees/winners?January 22, 2016 at 1:07 pm #367204This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 22, 2016 at 1:11 pm #367205
Yes! Yes! Yes! Anything to stop these repetitive wins.
If Dreyfus wins again, I say we all boycott the Emmys.January 22, 2016 at 4:28 pm #367206
Dreyfus deserves every award she gets and I hope she breaks the record for most comedy actress wins and continues her winning streakJanuary 22, 2016 at 4:34 pm #367207
Why change the rules? Because of multiple repeats? Everyone is jumping for joy over these new academy rules, but it doesn’t really kick a lot of voters out.January 22, 2016 at 4:44 pm #367208
Yes, the Emmys should change their rules and go back to the tape system with a small group of voters.
January 22, 2016 at 5:50 pm #367209
Emmys could easily nomiate only Woman of colour the best actress drama next year they dont have opportunities and lots for t.v shows with people from all backrounds, all best hollywood actors are going to tv now.
10 films can get best picture nod, there two or three, if that, this year, were not mainly white cast.January 22, 2016 at 11:55 pm #367210
The idea of someone being the best of the year when there are so many diversity and wealth on TV is already ridiculous enough and now people want same people to win 4,5 or 6 times for playing the SAME role…
Why there isn’t a rule that prevents these repetitive wins anyway? They are the most irritating and petty thing about the Emmys. I don’t care about ”awarding the best on TV that year” or ”A person/show must keep winning if they continue to be the best” And voters don’t care, either. Repetitive wins are just a result of them being lazy and rubber stamping the same names under the lack of a better alternative.(in their eyes.) If the rulebook somehow prevents the previous winners to submit their names for consideration; it would force voters to look up for different alternatives, actors, shows. They could even make last years winners present the corresponding opposite gender category like the Oscars.
I was rooting for GoT and Veep to win their series awards last year, but I definitely don’t want them to win again this year. Why would I? They’ve made their shine, now it’s others time to make theirs. Award shows should be about encouragement. And they will be remembered as the Emmy-winning shows in the history. What more could you want? Win four more times to satisfy your egos and break some lame record?
What purpose is being served when you declare the person that has been previously honored as the best, again and again, and send the same 5 losers (who have worked so hard to get there and just as deserving for the award) to their home with sore faces year after year? Is there a big difference between an Emmy-winner JLD and a four-time Emmy winner JLD?
I honestly wouldn’t mind if ALL of last years winners withdraw their names from the race and make a room for others. What a lovely thing that would be. Especially those acting winners. Dreyfus, Tambor, Janney, Hale, Davis, Aduba, Dinklage. Yawn. NONE of them deserve to win again, let alone be nominated, none.January 23, 2016 at 11:04 am #367211
Dreyfus only deserved to win for season 3, if that. She did definitely didn’t deserve 4. I’m expecting to get her 5th one this year.January 23, 2016 at 11:12 am #367212
If Davis wasn’t nominated, I think Danes would’ve won her 3rd Drama Actress Emmy for Homeland. Of course she would have.January 23, 2016 at 7:22 pm #367213
This is not a problem for the Emmys.January 23, 2016 at 9:41 pm #367214
I don’t know maybe clearing out some of the older voters who haven’t worked in the industry in years could produce some interesting results.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.