I don't think so because the people who vote are very likely to watch these shows. Non-voters watching or not watching don't have an influence on the outcome

Eddy Q wrote:

She isn’t though. Tutar has her own narrative arc and character growth, especially when Borat is absent.

Her narrative is a complete reaction to everything Borat does but I agree it's debatable. I think the relat

Ruby Sparks wrote:

Because it’s a heavily-watched televised event with some element of “prestige.”

That's a good point. In the eighties and nineties (not sure until when exactly) the Globes weren't even on network TV. Just cabl

I watched that link on Glenn Close's career retrospective from before and found it fascinating. I'd never heard of "The Bostonians," so I don't know what Vanessa Redgrave did or didn't do there. "The Natural" is considered as one of Close's weaker Os

[quote quote=1203853837] Peck, Davis, Sharif and Lansbury. All but one were upsets. Davis wasn't THE predicted to win. It was a very close race between her, Bancroft and Page. Bancroft won Cannes and NBR, while Page won GG. Davis had a lot

Dern easily sweeping last year was the writing on the wall that Netflix can secure career Oscars if they put the right resources behind it. Visibility afforded from campaign money was the only factor keeping Close from the finish line last time, and

Jake wrote:

I think it’s the only show that filled all available spots in any Emmy acting category

Roots did it first in the Lead Actor category actually.