It's time, kids. It's time to talk about the Emmys.
Now, I don't have a problem with the Emmys themselves, per se. Of course it makes sense for the medium of television to have its own awards show. The problem is that I don't think anyone really thought it through enough to realize that awards for television might need to be structured a little differently than those for movies or music.
Because what ends up happening is this: An actor lands a role on a show. The actor is nominated by Emmy (or Golden Globe, they have the same problem) voters. The actor wins an Emmy. And then next year, when that actor is nominated for playing the exact same role and wins again, no one says boo. I'm sorry, but even stellar actors like Alec Baldwin get stuck in this trope. No doubt that he's brilliant on 30 Rock, but there is so much good work being done on TV these days and this awards show-rut continuously rewards the same people. Like effing Tony Shaloub. Did anyone know that Monk was even still on the air? Tony Shaloub and Monk are like, the U2 of television: you don't know anyone who really likes them, yet they continue to be rewarded by their own industry (seriously, Rolling Stone: no one cares about U2. stop sucking Bono's dick and give me some more Matt Taibi and Rob Sheffield, because that's all I read anymore). Anyway, my point is that I really feel like there needs to be a rule where an actor can only win once for a particular role. I don't think it applies to the shows themselves; a show can be very different from season to season. But especially in comedies...god, I was so angry when that awful old man from Everybody Loves Raymond won over and over again, even after he died. Well, I was pretty angry when anything from ELR won at all, but that's just because I have good taste.
Seriously, though. Alec, Tina, Jon Hamm...I love you guys. You're amazing actors and you deserve the Emmys you already have. But I also love NPH and Jorge Garcia and Rainn Wilson and Jane Lynch and Zach Galifianakis and Nathan Fillion and Justin Kirk...just to name a few. And I think they deserve some recognition for the incredible work they do.
Not to mention how fucking boring the Emmys are when the same shit wins year after year. Or how mind-bogglingly infuriating it is when Two and A Half Men wins anything at all. Maybe the problem in itself lies with Emmy voters being old, unimaginative, and stupid. I wonder if it's like the Academy and if the majority of Emmy voters are people who worked on Webster and Family Ties and terrible, hokey shit like that. I would not be surprised.
I mean, I'll watch it tomorrow. I may get angry and hurl more than epithets at my TV, but I'll watch it. I've got to have hope that something new and good (or old and good and unrewarded, like The Office) will get what it deserves.
In the meantime, watch this hilarious clip from the 2008 Emmys and just tell me that Steve Carell doesn't deserve a statue of his own:
And I'll let Dwight tell you himself why he deserves an Emmy:
Catch you on the embittered-and-disillusioned-with-the-mechanisms-of-society flip side, kids.
No comments:
Post a Comment