Forum Replies Created
February 12, 2020 at 3:13 am #1203343917
This is easy to say now, but before season 3 airing everyone was saying that S3 will be the best one yet. Also, Olivia Colman has many incredible roles, Claire Foy, unfortunately, has nothing even remotely close to what she did in The Crown, si it was logical to think that Colman would have delivered the same level of acting, unfortunately, she couldn’t. You are right about HBC.
And I hope that you will be right about Westworld, I was one of the few who loved the second season more than the first, so I am genuinely excited.February 12, 2020 at 2:13 am #1203343879
Then we shall see how it performs this year. Keep dismissing Westworld and its actors, you’re the one who’s gonna end up surprised, not me.
He is not dismissing them, he like every sense person wants to wait and see the season first. This forum already made the mistake to believe that The Crown S3 will be the next Breaking Bad before its airing and we saw that it was not the case. Westworld 3 is still a question mark, it can be our winner if it is excellent and it can be completely snub (it has happened before).
Justo stop declaring theories as facts, same goes for Succession, declaring this show as a lock for the win is absurd, the show has receive ZERO nomination from the actors voting body, if this continues, it will not win.February 11, 2020 at 6:41 am #1203342748
But then what will win? It’s not going to be Watchmen. It may be critically acclaimed and so on, but in no way is it going to win the top prize. Handmaid’s, BLL, Stranger Things and Ozark aren’t happening. Westworld, too, seems waaay too polarizing to ever win. So will it be Better Call Saul or what?
I have zero idea right now, it is still way too early and the big question – will they finally nominate the actors from Succession will remain open until the announce of the nominations, if they snub them for second consecutive year like SAG did they will have zero chance to win.
Also, Ozark, Killin Eve, Westworld, Homeland and Better Call Saul have to air first, maybe one of them will receive as big acclaim as Fleabag had.February 11, 2020 at 4:49 am #1203342622
I just have this feeling it’ll be Succession-Schitt’s Creek-Mrs. America, but it’s February and I could be so wrong. SO much can still happen. If “Run” explodes, watch out for that! But I think Succession has this. Passion trumps everything atm.
I think that we all saw that the mania for Parasite and Fleabag was possible in both scenarios only with the help and the push of the actors branch. At the moment, the actors have actively ignored the show and it will not win without them. And SAG do matter hugely. We still do not know if actors ignore the show because they do not like it or because they have not watch it yet. It remains to be seen, but actors need to be at least nominated in order to win, even GoT was always nominated and very often rewarded through Dinklage. If actors do not embrace it, it will never win.February 11, 2020 at 4:19 am #1203342603
Ivo Stoyanov wrote:
Not at all, it is one of the shows that defined this decade and it will be remembered as one of the wins that validated the Emmys as really prestigious show.
Specifically how did it define the decade?
10 reasons that come to mine immediately:
1. Reinvented storytelling since it told a more complex and nuanced story in just 12 episodes of 25 minutes than many shows with two season of 13 episodes 1 hour long each.
2. It managed a perfect balance between drama and comedy just like Parasite did (different kind of comedy and drama of course), but the balance between them was equally amazing.
3. Used the breaking of the fourth wall in a completely original and never used before way that not only felt fresh and funny, but also helped its story.
4. All characters felt complex and important, even characters with a few minutes of screentime like the banker.
5. Spoke about modern feminism and about about the difficulty to connect with people better than any other show with the exception of Mad Men (best portrayal of feminism in the 60s and 70s).
6. Spoke about sex without tabues and with a lot of authenticity, spoke about the fact how many people (mostly gay bottoms and women) enjoy sex predominantly for reasons others than the physical pleasure. Girls tried it before and sometimes it was successful in it, but it felt more sensational than Fleabag.
7. It showed the best depiction of passive-aggressive behaviour that I have ever seen through the brilliant performance of Olivia Colman.
8. It showed that a sitcom can be character driven and not plot driven without losing its funny part. Here I want to underline how brilliant was Sian Clifford at portraying Claire’s contradictions. More roles for Sian Clifford please!
9. It destroyed the prejudice that gay men cannot play heterosexual men once and for all and in an exquisite and undeniable way thanks to the magic of Andrew Scott.
10. Phoebe Waller-Bridge acting was as unique as the show itself, felt calculated and completely natural at the same time, no other performer have achieved that.
Bonus: Ben Aldridge did an amazing depiction of those painfully beautiful people that are conscious about it and know how to use it, even if they behave like fools sometimes. And he remained incredibly funny and likeable with a character that was supposed to be annoying and unlikeable. More roles for Ben Aldridge please!February 9, 2020 at 8:53 pm #1203340401
I predicted Parasite correctly, bitches!!! I am so happy!!! The best film actually won! And only a year after the ridiculous win of Green Book! Waw!February 7, 2020 at 5:04 am #1203333620
Fleabag is very overrated and in years to come its sweep will be looked at as one of the strangest Emmy results ever
Not at all, it is one of the shows that defined this decade and it will be remembered as one of the wins that validated the Emmys as really prestigious show.February 7, 2020 at 12:28 am #1203333544
2. Little Women
4. Mariage Story
5. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
6. Ford v Ferrari
7. The Irishman
8. Jojo Rabbit
9. 1917February 6, 2020 at 2:24 am #1203332464
I’m not sure you’re the right person to accuse others of not being objective…
Like you like to say about your good score predicting nominees Luca, I have a credibility of being objective by predicting correctly 10 out of 12 acting winners last year (and my two mistakes were in the Comedy field which I do not watch).
And about directing, you are not only not objective, but also you turn the narrative like it suits you. For example, saying that DGA and Emmy are like oranges and apples, but exactly 5 seconds after that you use DGA for your narrative of the Bateman win… If Watchmen can win with a another nominated episode, so can Game of Thrones. If Bateman and Daldry can win based on prestige, so could have been the situation with previous Emmy winners Sapochnik and Nutter that for sure have more prestige in that branch that Bateman. The last thing that I am going to say about Thrones is that the Academy (and the guilds) clearly did not saw it as a the best technical achievement during the last two seasons (and they were right about it) and I already proved it with actual facts.February 6, 2020 at 2:08 am #1203332431
The biggest question that no one can answer is: will Better Call Saul win an Emmy some day or not?February 5, 2020 at 2:11 am #1203330618
It lost directing because of vote-splitting. It was as simple as that. I know you would like to think otherwise, but it’s obvious. The same with 2018’s race. And I don’t know what the cinematography branch was smoking those eight years because Game of Thrones never winning that category is just ridiculous.
With that being said, Ivo, a masterful achievement isn’t always reflected by awards wins. GOT is the biggest technical achievement on television, and frankly, I don’t know how you combat that statement. You can sh*t on the writing, acting etc. all you want, but there’s no way you can discuss its technical merit – at least IMO.
I agree, but that is what you and others use to defend it – 4 drama wins for series, so we are now strictly speaking on those terms, the best technical achievement also wins directing and cinematography.
And no, it did not lost directing due to vote split, it lost due to lacking in support. How Watchmen managed to NOT vote split at DGA? How Jodie Comer overcome vote split? Stop explaining everything you do not like with vote split, it is ridiculous, we already saw that at SAG with Tony Shalhoub who supposedly won last year due to vote split, well we saw that he did not.
Your theory with the big names in directing is very weak as well. Jason Bateman is respected actor, not respected director (not until Ozark). Reed Morano was a NO ONE. Stephen Daldry won on merit thanks to his submission, “Paterfamilias” is a masterpiece of an episode, the favorite episode of the show for many of us, an incredible achievement on all levels and with impressive performances by newcomers (Philip and Charles as teens).
I have never said that GoT is not good technically, but I disliked the directing and the cinematography in his submitted episodes, I would have support “The Bell” for those, but not “The Iron Throne” (the only awards worthy cinematography was in the scenes with Daenerys and horrible directing) and “The Long Night” (messy directing and horrible cinematography).February 5, 2020 at 2:01 am #1203330610
Lol as if Julia Garner would have beaten Meryl Streep if BLL aired right at the end of May. It would have been a landslide. The only reason Streep can lose this season instead is because the show aired so early, allowing vote splitting to take more of an effect if Dern or Woodley are nommed.
Your obsession with Streep killed all the objectivity that you usually have, she would never win an Emmy for this role under any circumstances. She was snubbed at SAG, while Garner was nominated. She lost the Globe without any co-stars with her, and specifically a voting body like the Globes who HATES repeats, preferred to reward Arquette for a second year in a row just to avoid rewarding Strep and HBC. I suppose that they did not really liked Toni Collette since she was the only deserving alternative. And when she was nominated along with Dern at the CC, they both deservingly lost to Jean Smart who created a much more interesting character who was both a broken woman and a complete badass without any yellings and that managed to convert episode 3 in an instant fan favorite. So no, Streep was not liked enough, she lacked passion, even between the large fandom, more like the opposite.February 5, 2020 at 1:28 am #1203330583
Even tho spoiler acting was more wooden than what it was supposed to be, but still understandable, the writing was so exceptional that it just brought balance into the performance. Can’t say the same with S8 of GoT.
But here was completely on purpose, I think that he balanced the apathetic nature of he character very well. And yes, the writing was so good, every line was full of meaning and nuances, even the comparison with season 8 of GoT is insulting.
I would suggest you to hide the name of the actor, because there are people who have yet to watch it. Although, you have to be out of Facebook, Instagram and Youtube to not know it by now.February 5, 2020 at 1:18 am #1203330576
I think most people considered Season 2 of Ozark to be better than Season 1 it’s higher rated on Rotten Tomatoes and the episodes have higher scores on IMDb it also got its first SAG Ensemble, PGA and DGA nominations.
The industry – yes, the fans – I do not think so, on IMDB their highest rated episode is from season 1, then an episode from season 2, then again one from season 1, then again season 2, so on IMDB is more or less even. But on Facebook and Youtube more people were praising season 1 more. In the best scenario, they were liked the same, so my point remains. Also, we do not know if the Industry would have embrace it like that with stronger competition.