July 7, 2011 at 6:01 pm #222342
I’ve been thinking about this for a while. We all know that Emmy voters don’t generally like sci-fi or fantasy. But every once in a while a show will strike their fancy and get nominated in top races. “Quantum Leap” did it for a while. Then “The X-Files” did it. “Alias” got a lot of nominations, though not for Best Drama.
“Lost” made it in and actually won, but now with that show off the air, does that mean there are sci-fi fantasy friendly votes up for grabs? Or did the same anti-sci-fi voters nominate “Lost” just because it was popular and cool?
If there are voters for genre fare, that could be good news for the high profile shows currently looking for nominations. Unfortunately, though, having so many of them could cause them to cancel each other out. A few votes go to “Fringe,” a few to “Game of Thrones,” a few to “The Walking Dead,” and none of them gets nominated.
Maybe a few votes go to “True Blood,” but “Lost” seemed like more of a draw for male viewers and “True Blood” feels more female-driven. Not sure what the exact numbers are on that.July 7, 2011 at 8:38 pm #222344
I’m guessing all of the people who voted for True Blood last year will now vote for Game of Thrones instead. Blood’s third season was pretty weak, and Thrones came out of the gate very strong.July 18, 2011 at 1:16 pm #222345
This is a great idea for a discussion. I’m sorry I was gone so long and only just now saw it.
I love the chain of inspiration that seems to take place with film and television. One show from the ’80s influences and informs a show in the ’90s. For Damon Lindelof, it seems like his fondest television memories growing up included watching Twin Peaks with his father. I think it goes without saying, having that sort of an attachment with a show, it can have a profound effect on someone, at least creatively. It also goes without saying that, without David Lynch’s show, Damon Lindelof’s would not have been the same. For that matter, ABC might’ve never even had the guts to take on a show of that caliber, of that scope. Lost, despite all of its flaws, inspired the generation to come. Plain and simple.
But it is interesting, to think about what will fill the void for the show now that it is gone. Fringe certainly has viewers bending their minds week after week. Game of Thrones has an epic scope, a large cast, and a high production value. And while I cannot stand True Blood to save my life, I do think that The Walking Dead‘s structure — of a party of characters fending off the elements of a life-or-death situation — certainly mirrors Lost‘s to a certain extent.
I thought that voters would go gah-gah for The Walking Dead, at least enough to get it a Series nomination (which, for the record, it did not deserve). It looks like they’ll need more than awesome make-up to win over the Emmy votes. I see how much trouble Fringe has at getting its lead actress and supporting actor nominations, even after all the buzz they’ve accrued, at it makes me think that a Series nomination is not in the cards anytime soon, no matter how well-deserved.
Then you have Game of Thrones, the only Series nominee that I’ve mentioned in this post. Epic scope, enormous cast, Supporting actor nomination, directing nomination and writing nomination, only thing like it on TV… I could be describing GoT or Lost with that last sentence. I say the HBO doesn’t realize that Thrones is, maybe, just maybe, the contender they need to be pouring more money into.July 18, 2011 at 7:08 pm #222346
I wasn’t surprised that “Game of Thrones” got into Best Drama, but I am surprised at its strong showing elsewhere. I didn’t expect the Peter Dinklage nod, and I didn’t expect it to score in both the writing and the directing categories. That’s where I think we see how much support there really is for the show. “True Blood” was nominated for Best Drama last year, but even still we could all tell how ambivalent voters were about the show in general, given its lack of acting, writing, and directing mentions. It seems like “Game of Thrones” could become a perennial nominee barring a creative collapse.
Something else to worry about: like the first season of “Lost,” the first season of “Game of Thrones” is light on actual fantasy elements. If those fantasy elements start to become a big part of the show (we saw our first dragons in the season finale), voters might start to become ambivalent about the show the way they did with “Lost,” which didn’t even get nominated for its second or third seasons despite winning for its first.July 23, 2011 at 11:58 pm #222347
Good point, drawing the similarities between the first seasons of Lost and Game of Thrones. I’m led to understand that there is more mysticism to come in GoT, but one thing I would say is that, even in its pilot, it was more fantasy-based than the entire first season of Lost at all.
From the first scene on, HBO’s series has allowed its audience to realize that it is more than a period drama set in (something similar to) the Dark Ages. Lost planted small seeds at first (sounds in the trees, a polar bear) and gradually became more of a sci-fi show; smart move if you ask me, pulling non-sci-fi fans along for the ride slowly, so that they don’t recognize the change in genre until they’re already hooked.
But your prediction about the future seasons of Thrones could prove true. Depending on how hard D.B. Weiss and David Benioff pushes headlong into the magical developments of the plot, the voters might respond to Season 2 less enthusiastically.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.