-
-
I disagree, I think actors more than anybody else saw that Arquette is very superior to Adams. And I think that it is a voters friendly performance since it is a complete transformation. Julia Roberts iself told that to Patty, it is incredible how brave she is, how versatile she is and how far is able and willing to go for a role.
Sure, but I doubt that a ton of voters even saw “Dannemora” before they voted. SAG-AFTRA voters are always way behind everyone else. And the fact that Arquette was able to get nominated at all is quite the miracle since we’re talking about a smaller (not flashy) Showtime series that aired from November to December, so practically right when voting was happening. Had Adams won the Globe, believe me she would have won SAG as well. That’s just how this works. The nominations are always vastly different since they announce them just a few days apart and can’t really copy each other, but the wins are pretty similar most of the time. There are only very few instances where the two really differ.
Also, I really don’t agree with this whole “Adams didn’t give a win-worthy performance.” I saw more actors praising her work than Patty’s at the time tbh. Sharp Objects had also been much more widely seen. Once the HFPA decided to let her go home empty handed, her chances of winning anything died.
ReplyCopy URLThat’s anecdotal and doesn’t mean anything. 2 nominations indicate limited support. 2 < 12.
Only your branch votes for you at Emmys. The support from the acting branch was there. Joey got in and Patty won. It’s true that the other branches didn’t care for The Act but the acting branch did and that’s what matters.
ReplyCopy URLFYC Emmys: Helena Bonham Carter (Drama Supporting Actress), Olivia Colman (Drama Actress), Jodie Comer and Sandra Oh (Drama Actress), Fiona Shaw (Drama Supporting Actress), Zendaya (Drama Actress), Alexis Bledel (Drama Guest Actress)
Only your branch votes for you at Emmys. The support from the acting branch was there. Joey got in and Patty won. It’s true that the other branches didn’t care for The Act but the acting branch did and that’s what matters.
Which I said in my original post. I’m talking generalized support.
ReplyCopy URLWhich I said in my original post. I’m talking generalized support.
No, you said that you believe that they did not seen it, which does not make sense. Joey King’s nomination was not anecdotal. The Act had two nominations from the acting branch, only actors can vote for actors, and again, actors were praising both actresses openly, so actors watched it and Arquette did not needed anyone else to watch it. Of course, you are right about the Academy as a whole, but this does not matter here. The Academy was crazy about GoT, but this never helped them with the acting branch, with the exception of Dinklage.
Had Adams won the Globe, believe me she would have won SAG as well. That’s just how this works. The nominations are always vastly different since they announce them just a few days apart and can’t really copy each other, but the wins are pretty similar most of the time. There are only very few instances where the two really differ.
Also, I really don’t agree with this whole “Adams didn’t give a win-worthy performance.” I saw more actors praising her work than Patty’s at the time tbh. Sharp Objects had also been much more widely seen. Once the HFPA decided to let her go home empty handed, her chances of winning anything died.
What you are saying makes sense as a whole, but I do not see why 100 000 actors would copy the 90 persons from the Foreign Press, it is more complicated than that. And I never said that Adams was unworthy, she was deserving too, but not as much as Arquette.
ReplyCopy URLThe anecdotal part is what people thought of King on the red carpet, which means absolutely nothing. I’ve said multiple times that I know actors vote for actors. I’m talking about generalized support. We know the viewership for “Dannemora,” not for “The Act.” There’s no way to know who, if any, watched the latter. I’m not convinced voters watched it much at all.
ReplyCopy URL
This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.I think the Academy agreed with me. So the show did have the support it needed. People just obsess a lot on other noms like tech and directing/writing. The Act had visibility, especially by the acting branch. Every actor was at least intrigued to watch it when the 2 leads were probably the baitiest duo of the season. The show was neither top 5 miniseries for me nor a tech achievement. Maybe hairstyling and makeup, but it doesn’t matter when it comes to acting winners.
Exactly, I agree with you, however, I think that it could have had several more noms, especially Calum Worthy. I hope he is recognized by the Globes, SAG or Critics Choice in the upcoming months, he was mesmerizing, I would have nominated him instead of John Leguizamo.
ReplyCopy URLI thought “The Act” deserved a bit more than King and Arquette. Of course, if I had to choose what the show’s strongest aspect was, then I would absolutely point to those two, but yes, Calum Worthy was terrific and just as deserving as everyone who ended up in the supporting actor lineup. Talk about a seamless transformation. I also think that cinematography, production design, editing and sound editing should have been in the mix. Episodes 4 & 5, as well as the finale, were stunning technical achievements that didn’t get the recognition they deserved.
ReplyCopy URL
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
