Home Forums Television SAG Awards 2022 TV Nominations Reactions

SAG Awards 2022 TV Nominations Reactions

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 506 total)
Created
5 months ago
Last Reply
3 months ago
505
replies
41551
views
77
users
kat_ebbs
65
Manav
61
wolfali
53
  • Profile picture
    aahoto
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204730793

    I’ll be going for some days so before that I’ll just post what I’ll vote for and why when the voting opens.

    Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Comedy Series

    Elle Fanning (“The Great”)

    Sandra Oh (“The Chair”)

    Jean Smart (“Hacks”)

    Juno Temple (“Ted Lasso”)

    Hannah Waddingham (“Ted Lasso”)

    I have not watched The Chair and neither do I intend to do so. Elle fanning was very good but this season of the great paled in comparison to season 1. Hannah had much less in this season (in the first season,she was the best part of the show and brought real depth to her role). Jean gave a masterclass in Hacks and I will be shocked if she loses. But I thought Juno temple was so charming in this season of Ted lasso and did so much with limited screentime, I think she is the best in the category.

    My Vote will be: Juno Temple (“Ted Lasso”)

    Thanks for demonstrating that you’re part of the problem.

    Profile picture
    aahoto
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204730801

    Absolutely thrilled for the Squid Game nominations. I had Ensemble and Lee in my predictions, but didn’t predict Jung as she wasn’t really showing up anywhere else.

    I hope it wins something but I don’t think it will with Succession in the mix. Succession is an amazing show as well and I won’t be mad if it sweeps.

    Profile picture
    kat_ebbs
    Joined:
    Jun 10th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204730839

    Thanks for demonstrating that you’re part of the problem.

    I actually appreciate Joe being candid here. I don’t know why people think in a votership as big and diverse as SAG and particuarly AFTRA people are watching full seasons of everything. Missing one show on the list is not the same as only watching and voting for The Big Bang Theory for twelve seasons straight.

    Profile picture
    aahoto
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204730980

    I actually appreciate Joe being candid here. I don’t know why people think in a votership as big and diverse as SAG people are watching full seasons of everything. Missing one show on the list is not the same as only watching and voting for The Big Bang Theory for twelve seasons straight.

    Then one should abstain from voting in the category. It’s not complicated.

    Profile picture
    kat_ebbs
    Joined:
    Jun 10th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731018

    Then one should abstain from voting in the category. It’s not complicated.

    It’s realistic, not idealistic. Even if you assume someone has caught up on all shows that were previous SAG or Emmy nominees, that’s over 100 hours of TV to watch in addition to your job in six weeks if you account for all the limited series, Squid Game, and the entirety of Yellowstone, which is forty hours alone. And this is a year where, for instance, comedy could have been predicted.

    That might be fine for some people, but that’s a lot.  That membership is going to include people earning huge incomes and working minimally as people on very ordinary incomes with commutes and families and long hours.

    If the Emmy/SAG bodies want people to watch everything you can’t expect people to watch that much TV in six weeks. At least on the film side you’re probably limiting people to 25 hours or so across categories.

    Profile picture
    aahoto
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731117

    It’s realistic, not idealistic. Even if you assume someone has caught up on all shows that were previous SAG or Emmy nominees, that’s over 100 hours of TV to watch in addition to your job in six weeks if you account for all the limited series, Squid Game, and the entirety of Yellowstone, which is forty hours alone. And this is a year where, for instance, comedy could have been predicted.

    That might be fine for some people, but that’s a lot. That membership is going to include people earning huge incomes and working minimally as people on very ordinary incomes with commutes and families and long hours.

    If the Emmy/SAG bodies want people to watch everything you can’t expect people to watch that much TV in six weeks. At least on the film side you’re probably limiting people to 25 hours or so across categories.

    Who is suggesting that the voters need to watch the entirety of a show? You only need to watch the season that’s nominated.

    With Sandra Oh and The Chair, he admitted to not even trying to watch.

    This voter also admitted to not watching The Tender Bar over on the film side. What’s the excuse for that?

    Profile picture
    kat_ebbs
    Joined:
    Jun 10th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731179

    What’s the excuse for that?

    No idea! You’d have to ask Joe. My curiosity level is higher than my need to judge, I guess.

    No one is suggesting you need to watch every season but not doing so also divorces it from it’s overriding narrative.

    Profile picture
    Joe Langer
    Joined:
    Dec 5th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731242

    I think I need to explain.

    First of all, I would like to thank the user kat_ebbs for clearly articulating some of the reasons and understanding.

    I think you all should know that we do not only watch the films and shows in awards consideration. We also watch general common films like Single all the way or The night house and other films because we like art. It’s highly unlikely any award voter would have watched all films in consideration and I’m sure most people here must also not have watched all films. I personally watch films if someone recommends it to me or it has a good word of mouth or I like the plot/people involved in the project. I started the good fight because I admired the people involved in it. I did not watch the Tender bar because I’ve heard it’s not worth the time (although Ben is good in it) and The chair because I did not have the time when it released and now I don’t find the premise appealing. I think that’s where word of mouth is important. I don’t watch films/tv/theatre because I HAVE to but because I WANT to. Sometimes you are rewarded on watching art and sometimes you are not. It’s easier to watch most of the film nominees because there are 10-15 contenders but it’s difficult to watch all television shows because it requires a commitment. Watching fewer things with full attention is better than watching something with half attention or just because of the heck of it. I prefer completing things and not turning off shows or films. Another thing is that in television shows, I often watch the show from the start if it is appealing because watching just one season in most shows creates a vaccum in your understanding of the characters. Imagine watching just Ted lasso s2 and not s1. Members who vote are also consumers just like you all,who watch what appeals to them. We also have our personal lives and duties. We don’t always chat about films. I watched Spencer because I was intrigued by it despite knowing I might not like it. I stumbled across Sex education on netflix and watched all seasons of it. We don’t watch only English content but also shows from other countries like South korea, France, Sweden, India, Japan. I remember watching a film called Andhadhun from India and it was probably the best film I watched that year. Alive was a film that was well made. I have not missed a single Michael Haneke film. I hope you all understand.

    Member of the Screen Actors Guild. Inducted in 1999.

    Profile picture
    kat_ebbs
    Joined:
    Jun 10th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731264

    I think I need to explain. First of all, I would like to thank the user kat_ebbs for clearly articulating some of the reasons and understanding.

    That’s OK. I appreciate you explaining, and in terms of understanding how people vote, it’s really helpful.

    I’ve worked in places that have had to make decisions on vast quantities of content before  before (completely different context, in this case written content) and I know in most cases people generally try and do their best but at the end of the day a lot of it comes down to word of mouth and/or judgement calls.

    Profile picture
    forwardswill
    Joined:
    Apr 9th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731266

    Joe, you don’t have to explain yourself. Quite clearly you watch a lot of content and that is enough. After all, this isn’t even the Emmys where there are at least episode submissions. Anyone expecting voters to have seen every show nominated (bearing in mind that they will have watched a lot that wasn’t nominated) is absolutely crazy in my view. These people have lives.

    Plus, as Joe kind of said above, whether or not something appeals to people is kind of a necessary factor in determining if it should win. There’s no point in people sitting through hours of content that they haven’t heard good things about and pretty much know they won’t enjoy.

    I’m rambling but what I’m ultimately saying is that as long as a voter has watched a good spread of content then they have done their job.

    Profile picture
    The Queen
    Joined:
    Jan 12th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731284

    I have to laugh about someone being dragged for not watching every TV show and movie that exists. Welcome to reality. Joe is a human being, he can’t watch absolutely everything that’s out there. Awards aren’t and cannot be fair. It is what it is.

    Profile picture
    aahoto
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731419

    I’m not suggesting that everyone watches everything. But you can’t proclaim that (x) is the “best in the category” whilst admitting that you haven’t seen all of the performances in the category. Just don’t vote in those particular categories.

    I can’t believe this is controversial.

    Profile picture
    Gajo
    Joined:
    Jun 29th, 2021
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731502

    It’s realistic, not idealistic. Even if you assume someone has caught up on all shows that were previous SAG or Emmy nominees, that’s over 100 hours of TV to watch in addition to your job in six weeks if you account for all the limited series, Squid Game, and the entirety of Yellowstone, which is forty hours alone. And this is a year where, for instance, comedy could have been predicted. That might be fine for some people, but that’s a lot. That membership is going to include people earning huge incomes and working minimally as people on very ordinary incomes with commutes and families and long hours. If the Emmy/SAG bodies want people to watch everything you can’t expect people to watch that much TV in six weeks. At least on the film side you’re probably limiting people to 25 hours or so across categories.

    My granduncle who is a part of the editing branch of the Television Academy always said that voting is both a right and a privilege. The long voting period is supposed to be the period where you remove your blindspots as much as possible. And if someone is too far away removed from the TV landscape that it’d be impossible for them to catch up on all the nominated stuff (which again leans heavily to the populist side so shouldn’t be a problem) then maybe they shouldn’t be taking part in something that is supposed to recognise the best of them.

    Having juries/panels who actually watch the stuff is better because it has become a popularity contest at this point. No one is expecting Joe or any other voter to watch every single show. Just the ones that are actually nominated. Some people are willingly misconstruing things for whatever purpose but anyway.

    The argument that skipping nominated shows because they don’t appeal to you is somehow acceptable is also inherently problematic to me as well because at the end of the day, this is a voting body that is still predominantly white and male leaning and will put women and poc led work at a disadvantage if they aren’t wildly palpable to the taste of that white male audience (like Squid Game for example). Am I surprised Pose or Insecure have never been nominated here? The people very loudly condoning the exclusion of the only person of color in the only show solely created by women from even consideration on a voter’s ballot are fucking insane. And then you all will go on twitter and complain about these awards being so white. That’s some fucked up shit right there.

    Profile picture
    Couverture
    Joined:
    Jun 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731529

    The argument that skipping nominated shows because they don’t appeal to you is somehow acceptable is also inherently problematic to me as well because at the end of the day, this is a voting body that is still predominantly white and male leaning and will put women and poc led work at a disadvantage if they aren’t wildly palpable to the taste of that white male audience (like Squid Game for example). Am I surprised Pose or Insecure have never been nominated here? The people very loudly condoning the exclusion of the only person of color in the only show solely created by women from even consideration on a voter’s ballot are fucking insane. And then you all will go on twitter and complain about these awards being so white. That’s some fucked up shit right there.

    Say it louder for the people in the back.

    Profile picture
    Josh Webb
    Joined:
    Jan 16th, 2022
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1204731565

    SAG and Emmy voter here!

    Here is my ballot

    Ensemble in a Comedy: Ted Lasso

    Ensemble in a Drama: The Handmaids Tale

    Male Actor in a Drama: Billy Crudup

    Female Actor in a Drama: Elisabeth Moss

    Male Actor in a Comedy: Jason Sudeikis

    Female Actor in a Comedy: Hannah Waddingham

    Male Actor in a Limited: Murray Bartlett

    Female Actor in a Limited: Kate Winslet

    The only categories I had to consider were Female Limited, Kate hands down gave the best performance, but Coolidge deserves something, and Female Comedy. That was between Smart, Oh and Waddingham

    Why are you reporting this post? (optional):
    Not now
Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 506 total)

The topic ‘SAG Awards 2022 TV Nominations Reactions’ is closed to new replies.

Similar Topics
Atypical - May 26, 2022
Television
Screami... - May 24, 2022
Television
Chris B... - May 24, 2022
Television