-
-
I just finished reading Daisy Jones and it was quite fun but the format bothered me… there’s nothing special about the book tbh but the tv show won’t have any trouble at the field if it gets a lot of buzz
The audiobook works really well (and feels like a more appropriate format for it) so I feel like it will do pretty well on screen.
Eisenberg turns 40 this year, he’s only a year younger than Caplan.
And yet he looks like 25, how lucky.
FYC:
The HBO darlings everywhere (The Last of Us, Succession, The White Lotus, Perry Mason, Somebody Somewhere, White House Plumbers, Love & Death);
The Apple gang (Bad Sisters, Slow Horses, Shrinking, Ted Lasso, Black Bird);
Poker Face, The Great, The Bear, Evil (especially Katja Herbers) and The Good Fight.Please! These gays, they're trying to murder me!
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I had to comment on the whole Evan Peters/Dahmer thing. (although I will preface my comment by saying I have not watched the Dahmer limited series as I do not like true crime shows and find the program in extremely poor taste).
From reading this thread and judging some of the support being thrown his way by the industry, it would appear Evan Peters stands a good chance at being nominated and even winning for Dahmer.
While the performance may warrant a win, I cannot help but see the irony in Peters potentially winning for portraying a real-life serial killer when the Emmys refused to reward someone (Michael C. Hall) for portraying a fake vigilante serial Killer.
If I remember correctly, 15 years ago many of us, including myself, believed Michael C. Hall would never win for Dexter because rewarding him would be condoning vigilantism. As great as his performance was, they simply were not going to reward him for a role like that. Fair or not, I consider that an accurate statement to make.
This might be an apples to oranges comparison, although I don’t think it is too far off. Maybe times and our culture have changed, but it seems pretty ironic to me someone could win for playing a real-life killer when they refused to reward someone for playing a fake serial killer.
And if it was in poor taste to reward a fake serial killer role, then what would it be to reward a real-life serial killer role? Especially when numerous family members of their victims have been so open and public about their disdain, disgust, and raw emotions over the show.
This might be an apples to oranges comparison, although I don’t think it is too far off. Maybe times and our culture have changed, but it seems pretty ironic to me someone could win for playing a real-life killer when they refused to reward someone for playing a fake serial killer. And if it was in poor taste to reward a fake serial killer role, then what would it be to reward a real-life serial killer role? Especially when numerous family members of their victims have been so open and public about their disdain, disgust, and raw emotions over the show.
I think the culture has changed, unfortunately, and not positively. True crime is a national (if not international) obsession that people have, in reality, very limited boundaries around or ethical concerns in portraying. (mass shooting vs serial killer, but Caleb Landry-Jones won best actor at Cannes for playing someone who perpetrated a 35 person mass shooting in front of hundreds of people, most of whom have PTSD).
Maybe times and our culture have changed, but it seems pretty ironic to me someone could win for playing a real-life killer when they refused to reward someone for playing a fake serial killer.
If we’re going to have this conversation, It’s worthwhile to point out that Darren Criss won an Emmy for his portrayal of Andrew Cunacan.
We don’t need to see the weight of the crimes through Evan Peters, the excuse that it’s “spreading awareness” is bullshit. Ryan Murphy glorifies and sexualises killers in his other productions (AHS: Hotel and ACS: The Assassination of Gianni Versace), there is no way he suddenly turns a new leaf for Dahmer.
The portrayal of Dahmer & other famous killers was much worse & certainly more disrespectful, but people turned a blind eye to it. I don’t know why is Dahmer getting all these noms and awards. Murphy and Netflix deserves to go to hell and beyond for exploiting that monster’s victims and their families. Imagine going thourgh a dramatization of the worst moments of your life and people watching it as etertainment. It’s sick.
And yet he looks like 25, how lucky.
I don’t think he does. He does look a bit younger than he is, but it might just be his mannerisms (which to be fair, is a performance thing). I’m not sure if I missed something or it’s in the book, but is he supposed to be playing the same age as Danes? She’s mid 40s, so that might be why it’s jarring.
While the performance may warrant a win, I cannot help but see the irony in Peters potentially winning for portraying a real-life serial killer when the Emmys refused to reward someone (Michael C. Hall) for portraying a fake vigilante serial Killer.
If I remember correctly, 15 years ago many of us, including myself, believed Michael C. Hall would never win for Dexter because rewarding him would be condoning vigilantism. As great as his performance was, they simply were not going to reward him for a role like that. Fair or not, I consider that an accurate statement to make.
This might be an apples to oranges comparison, although I don’t think it is too far off. Maybe times and our culture have changed, but it seems pretty ironic to me someone could win for playing a real-life killer when they refused to reward someone for playing a fake serial killer.
And if it was in poor taste to reward a fake serial killer role, then what would it be to reward a real-life serial killer role? Especially when numerous family members of their victims have been so open and public about their disdain, disgust, and raw emotions over the show.
I have never seen anyone suggest that that hindered Hall. He never won because, among other things, the prime of that showed overlapped with Cranston’s reign. It was not because he played a serial killer. People win awards for playing serial killers and other criminals all the time.
Yeah, Jodie Comer also won recently for portraying a fictional serial killer.
FYC:
The HBO darlings everywhere (The Last of Us, Succession, The White Lotus, Perry Mason, Somebody Somewhere, White House Plumbers, Love & Death);
The Apple gang (Bad Sisters, Slow Horses, Shrinking, Ted Lasso, Black Bird);
Poker Face, The Great, The Bear, Evil (especially Katja Herbers) and The Good Fight.Please! These gays, they're trying to murder me!
^Thanks for the above info, as I do not watch “Killing Eve” and forgot about Jodie Comer winning a couple years ago. I cannot also attest to the degree of violence depicted in that program, or if they only mention her crimes vs. graphically depicting them on a regular basis (like in Dexter).
I also forgot about Darren Criss and his show “The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story” as I tried to watch it but really did not like it. I only watched a couple of episodes before I had enough. I also had a hard time enjoying it knowing several of the real-life people/families depicted in the show took issue with it as well.
Evan Peters winning would not be as crazy as I thought it might be, but I still think it is fair to say the TV Academy shies away from awarding and glorifying these kinds of roles. While Peters winning would not be unprecedented for a role like this, it does not happen all the time either. The two wins mentioned above are rather recent, and maybe attest to our cultures changing values and near obsession with true crime programming.
For now, it appears both Peters and Nash are likely to be nominated. I have not seen the show and will not be watching it, so I do not want to further predict which awards it may be nominated for.
Jodie Comer played a murderer but she didn’t play a serial killer. Villanelle was more of a psychopathic assassin than anything else. Likewise Killing Eve never really glamourised or defined itself by any of the murders that occurred on the shoe (at least in the first two seasons). It was a show about obsession.
I don’t think the serial killer angle will stop Peters from being win competitive (it hasn’t at this point already and, unless you’re playing a “cold” and “unlikable” woman, I don’t think actore really care about the characters people are nominates for as much as the prognosticating world thinks). But at the same time there does feel like something that is so default about his performance so far. It could be because of Dahmer‘s dismal reviews or its mediocre guild performance in spite of the barren nature of the field but even as he has been winning at the winter awards the chatter around his performance itself has felt a bit muted. And I don’t think it’s because of apathy towards the show or true crime because Seyfried and Nash generated a lot of buzz and chatter when they won at the Globes and Critics Choice. It kind of remind me when Brian Cox won the Globe and everyone thought he was going to take the Emmy too even though Strong had a more talked about performance.
Of course it could just be that the field continues to be barren at the Emmys and he steamrolls but I think Eisenberg is already looking like a plausible alternative if Fleishman is in Trouble ends up being a contender in the end.
FYC: Better Call Saul, The English and The Good Fight in all categories including Emily Blunt, Bob Odenkirk, Christine Baranski and Rhea Seehorn.
^Thanks for the above info about Killing Eve. I may watch it someday as it has been such a large part of our pop-culture landscape these past couple of years.
I do have to agree with the majority of posters the entire limited/Anthology/TV Movie category seems awfully barren at this point. I know that will certainly change in the coming months, but maybe Peters glides to a win on the simple fact there may not be much buzzed about competition in Lead Actor this year.
I also agree with others here it is becoming really exhausting having so many of the limited series all dumped at the same time and trying to keep up with them. At times it almost feels more like a chore to try and watch them than an actual pleasure. I too wish they would space these programs out a bit, instead of clumping them all together in a poorly hidden push for awards.
. But at the same time there does feel like something that is so default about his performance so far. It could be because of Dahmer‘s dismal reviews or its mediocre guild performance in spite of the barren nature of the field but even as he has been winning at the winter awards the chatter around his performance itself has felt a bit muted.
There’s a bit of data logic around that – Dahmer whilst a massive hit is not a long tail one (I’d say it’s been quite poor compared to other commercial hits this cycle). There’s probably a bunch of reasons around that (lack of pre-release promo, running concurrent to HoTD, lack of peripheral media or capacity to do a “fun” campaign, Peters doesn’t have anything else he’s doing to chat about and doesn’t have social media etc). Nash at least benefits from concurrently being a network lead which generally means she’s going to be more out-and-about generally (and ABC have proven really good at that lately).
I know it’s Marvel so it’s unlikely (but the field is depleted), but is Secret Invasion going to be out by cut off? I’m sure that was what was said at Comic Con but Disney are prone to changing things.
Struggling real time with these. Wow. Did not realize it was so barren.
It will probably look different in 5 months, but…
Struggling real time with these. Wow. Did not realize it was so barren.
It will probably look different in 5 months, but…
I literally just picked whatever had 100/1 odds and Dahmer 💀
FYC:
The HBO darlings everywhere (The Last of Us, Succession, The White Lotus, Perry Mason, Somebody Somewhere, White House Plumbers, Love & Death);
The Apple gang (Bad Sisters, Slow Horses, Shrinking, Ted Lasso, Black Bird);
Poker Face, The Great, The Bear, Evil (especially Katja Herbers) and The Good Fight.Please! These gays, they're trying to murder me!
The topic ‘2023 Emmy Predictions: Limited/Movie Categories (Part 2)’ is closed to new replies.
