Emmy Awards - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

jamesanthony · 04-17-2004, 02:48 PM

i have a love/hate attitude towards these awards. i like reading about who wins and who they nominate but the show itself doesn't interest me in the least. i can't recall ever watching a broadcast from that year unless I was at someone's house (I did see a few old ones at the Museum of TV and Radio in NYC but more to see what the actors looked like out of character).

They nominate the same people year in and year out and it really gets boring, but I like to see who they recognize because its like the official standard of what TV considers to be the best.

I've figured out that they don't care too much for sitcoms built around the acts of standup comics. They'd rather award trained actors. They also seem to like shows that satirize or are about tv like Mary Tyler Moore (I guess because they can relate to this more than some show about working class people). They also don't care as much about whether or not a show is popular. There are a few shows I tuned in to watch only after I learned that they were nominated for a bunch of awards but I was either unaware of or didn't care about before. Also shows on WB and UPN don't get nominated much at all for one reason or other.

From the last decade there have only been a few winners for regular comedy or drama series parts that I thought were really good and deserving:

Andre Braugher from Homocide

Helen Hunt from Mad About You the first time, maybe the second, but after that it was like they voted for her out of habit and to be cute by giving her an Emmy in the same year as the Oscar

John Lithgow in 3rd Rock from the Sun- twice maybe but not 3 times. Too much.

Mandy Patinkin and Christine Lahti from Chicago Hope- both very good choices.

Maybe Dennis Franz from NYPD once but not four times

Edie Falco from The Sopranos- haven't seen enough of this series so I can't say if she deserved multiple wins. Can't comment on her so-stars who've won as I'm not a fan of this show and gangster genre in general.

Some who won too many times:

Doris Roberts from Everybody Loves Raymond- she'd won years ago and they like her. Once maybe twice but not every year. It's too much.

Helen Hunt- see above

David Hyde Pierce- Aren't there any other actors out there who deserve this? His many wins seem political to me.

Any other thoughts about the emmies?

Rhiannon · 04-17-2004, 02:58 PM

I like the show itself, but as far as nominations go I think some shows/actors are nominated far too many times and win while many great shows/actors are overlooked.

barwars · 04-17-2004, 02:59 PM

the same people win every year, because they're just as good from year to year.
Im sure if you won something -- you'd want to win it again.

I for one, like the Emmys.
No dumb shows are honored, and so-called "ratings" don't affect the votes.
Its not a popularity contest -- but rather, a group of SMART people choosing smart and funny shows to win.

jamesanthony · 04-17-2004, 03:15 PM

Not everyone who wins repeatedly likes to though. Bill Cosby and Candace Bergen took their names out of the race because they thought they had won enough times and wanted to give someone else a chance. Cosby probably would have won for his show in the 80s if he had kept his name in and Bergen would have at least gotten nominated again. Made them look more down to earth for doing so. The guy from Night Court did the same thing in the late 80s though he's since put his name bak in for other projects. I think Roseanne did too, but she may have just given up because she had a beef with them or something.

I think the emmies let a lot of good shows slip through without getting nominated and the socioeconomics of the characters in the shows plays a part.

tvfan0101 · 04-17-2004, 04:09 PM

The only beef I have with the Emmy Awards is the fact that network and cable shows are lumped together when in fact they are quite different. Networks show more episodes, meaning they can't spend as much time on each episode, they cater to a different group of viewers (seeing as how you pay for shows like The Sopranos) and the worst thing is, since I don't get HBO I can't see any of the shows that keep winning things and therefore I feel left out.

barwars · 04-17-2004, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tvobscurities
The only beef I have with the Emmy Awards is the fact that network and cable shows are lumped together when in fact they are quite different. Networks show more episodes, meaning they can't spend as much time on each episode, they cater to a different group of viewers (seeing as how you pay for shows like The Sopranos) and the worst thing is, since I don't get HBO I can't see any of the shows that keep winning things and therefore I feel left out.

Very good point.
They should definately divide the Emmys into "The Network Emmys" and "The Cable Emmys"

barwars · 04-17-2004, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jamesanthony
I've figured out that they don't care too much for sitcoms built around the acts of standup comics. They'd rather award trained actors. They also seem to like shows that satirize or are about tv like Mary Tyler Moore (I guess because they can relate to this more than some show about working class people). They also don't care as much about whether or not a show is popular. There are a few shows I tuned in to watch only after I learned that they were nominated for a bunch of awards but I was either unaware of or didn't care about before. Also shows on WB and UPN don't get nominated much at all for one reason or other.

Im not trying to say WB and UPN only have bad shows. (even though I happen to like nothing on either channel)
But really -- I think TV would have sunk to its lowest if a sitcom from either of these networks won "Best Comedy Series"

And about Mary Tyler Moore, you also have to remember -- it was a very good show. Im not being biased, before I even liked it I realized that it was one of the best sitcoms of all time.

jamesanthony · 04-17-2004, 04:17 PM

Dividing them up makes sense. Years ago they didn't have daytime awards. With the split something like The Sopranos would probably win best drama series which it probably never would otherwise. West Wing always wins because a big chunk of the people in the academy work for either NBC or the comapny that produces that show. It's very political.

jamesanthony · 04-17-2004, 04:32 PM

I think its a matter or taste as far as Mary Tyler Moore goes. Not my cup of tea. I could watch Dick Van Dyke's show, but MTM is dull. I saw the last episode recently and I remember the pilot and the one where Sue Ann slept with Lou Grant and the one where Sue Ann's sister came to visit and the one when Ted Baxter and Georgette got married by John Ritter but I didn't think this series was all that special. It doesn't appeal me.I don't think I fit the demographic they were aiming to appeal to with that show.

The emmy winning sitcoms I like (they all won best comedy series): Danny Thomas/Make Room for Daddy, Get Smart, All in the Family, Taxi, Barney Miller, Cosby Show and I Love Lucy.

I've seen all the winners, even My World and Welcome to It from 1970 (only one episode of that so i can't really rate it).

Frasier, Golden Girls and Cheers I can watch in small doses. Not on a regular basis. The Monkees was a fave when I was 8 but watching it as an adult I keep thinking that everyone associated with that show must've been on drugs.

JT · 04-17-2004, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by barwars88
Im not trying to say WB and UPN only have bad shows. (even though I happen to like nothing on either channel)
But really -- I think TV would have sunk to its lowest if a sitcom from either of these networks won "Best Comedy Series"

IMO, "Reba" and "The Parkers" are lots and lots more funnier than "Friends," "Frasier," and "Everybody Loves Raymond."

I hate it when they act all surprised when they win too. It's so obvious who will win, especially if an NBC show is nominated. The Emmys kiss NBC's ass.

jamesanthony · 04-17-2004, 08:32 PM

Reba and The Parkers aren't about people whose lifestyles match up with the people who vote for the emmies so forget about ever seeing them nominated for anything.

db108108 · 04-17-2004, 10:16 PM

Are you kidding me? Ratings don't come into play for the emmy awards?

No drama from either the WB nor the UPN has ever been nominated when at least the WB has had some of the best dramas on tv in the past decade.

The same people get nominated over and over again. Yes, some deserve it, but the Emmy's are far behind the times in at of cases. "The West Wing" won either last year or the year before that for what was an inferior season.

And as for the person who said that shows based on stand up acts rarely get nomintated, you're right. Roseanne was never nominated for best comedy series, and it should have been nominated for its first 7 seasons and it should have won for seasons 3-6. But alas, Roseanne Barr was not Candice Bergen and Roseanne was not Murphy Brown.

I'll give them emmy's another chance this year to see if they can finally make some headway. "The West Wing" should NOT be nominated again as fans and critics agree that the show is sinking fast (as evidenced from the free-falling ratings), while "Arrested Development" should be nominated despite its tiny ratings because it's one of the best comedies to come along in years.

But here's by picks for noms this year:

Comedy:
Frasier, Friends, Sex And The City, Raymond & Will & Grace

Drama:
The Sopranos, The west Wing, Law & Order, CSI & The Shield or 24.

It'll just be the same shows all over again.

Mr. Television · 04-17-2004, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by db108108
Are you kidding me? Ratings don't come into play for the emmy awards?

No drama from either the WB nor the UPN has ever been nominated when at least the WB has had some of the best dramas on tv in the past decade.

The same people get nominated over and over again. Yes, some deserve it, but the Emmy's are far behind the times in at of cases. "The West Wing" won either last year or the year before that for what was an inferior season.

And as for the person who said that shows based on stand up acts rarely get nomintated, you're right. Roseanne was never nominated for best comedy series, and it should have been nominated for its first 7 seasons and it should have won for seasons 3-6. But alas, Roseanne Barr was not Candice Bergen and Roseanne was not Murphy Brown.

I'll give them emmy's another chance this year to see if they can finally make some headway. "The West Wing" should NOT be nominated again as fans and critics agree that the show is sinking fast (as evidenced from the free-falling ratings), while "Arrested Development" should be nominated despite its tiny ratings because it's one of the best comedies to come along in years.

But here's by picks for noms this year:

Comedy:
Frasier, Friends, Sex And The City, Raymond & Will & Grace

Drama:
The Sopranos, The west Wing, Law & Order, CSI & The Shield or 24.

It'll just be the same shows all over again.

Thats why I don't watch the emmys anymore. Most of the shows I watch don't win and very few get nominated.

jamesanthony · 04-17-2004, 11:26 PM

db your predictions will probably be the shows that get nominated in July, except Law and Order which missed out last year. Once a show misses out its usually over. Frasier I believe missed out too but could come back. The critics like Monk which I've never seen but they can't decide if it's comedy or drama so it might get left off. Besides Arrested Development what new shows would they consider?

barwars · 04-18-2004, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jamesanthony
db your predictions will probably be the shows that get nominated in July, except Law and Order which missed out last year. Once a show misses out its usually over. Frasier I believe missed out too but could come back. The critics like Monk which I've never seen but they can't decide if it's comedy or drama so it might get left off. Besides Arrested Development what new shows would they consider?

My picks for nominations this year:
(my picks for winner in bold, honest choice -- not my preference)

Comedy:
Frasier, Friends, Sex And The City, Everybody Loves Raymond & Arrested Development
(no W&G this year)

Drama: ("Monk" is a drama, right?)
The Sopranos, The West Wing, The Shield, 24, Monk
(no L&O or CSI)

04-17-2004, 02:48 PM	#1
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	Emmy Awards i have a love/hate attitude towards these awards. i like reading about who wins and who they nominate but the show itself doesn't interest me in the least. i can't recall ever watching a broadcast from that year unless I was at someone's house (I did see a few old ones at the Museum of TV and Radio in NYC but more to see what the actors looked like out of character). They nominate the same people year in and year out and it really gets boring, but I like to see who they recognize because its like the official standard of what TV considers to be the best. I've figured out that they don't care too much for sitcoms built around the acts of standup comics. They'd rather award trained actors. They also seem to like shows that satirize or are about tv like Mary Tyler Moore (I guess because they can relate to this more than some show about working class people). They also don't care as much about whether or not a show is popular. There are a few shows I tuned in to watch only after I learned that they were nominated for a bunch of awards but I was either unaware of or didn't care about before. Also shows on WB and UPN don't get nominated much at all for one reason or other. From the last decade there have only been a few winners for regular comedy or drama series parts that I thought were really good and deserving: Andre Braugher from Homocide Helen Hunt from Mad About You the first time, maybe the second, but after that it was like they voted for her out of habit and to be cute by giving her an Emmy in the same year as the Oscar John Lithgow in 3rd Rock from the Sun- twice maybe but not 3 times. Too much. Mandy Patinkin and Christine Lahti from Chicago Hope- both very good choices. Maybe Dennis Franz from NYPD once but not four times Edie Falco from The Sopranos- haven't seen enough of this series so I can't say if she deserved multiple wins. Can't comment on her so-stars who've won as I'm not a fan of this show and gangster genre in general. Some who won too many times: Doris Roberts from Everybody Loves Raymond- she'd won years ago and they like her. Once maybe twice but not every year. It's too much. Helen Hunt- see above David Hyde Pierce- Aren't there any other actors out there who deserve this? His many wins seem political to me. Any other thoughts about the emmies?

04-17-2004, 02:58 PM	#2
Rhiannon oh, snap! Forum Fanatic Join Date: Jul 19, 2002 Location: middle of nowhere Posts: 11,097	I like the show itself, but as far as nominations go I think some shows/actors are nominated far too many times and win while many great shows/actors are overlooked.
	__________________ Nothing better the feeling is so fine Simply put I saw your love stream flow

04-17-2004, 02:59 PM	#3
barwars .. Forum Star Join Date: May 04, 2002 Posts: 13,273	the same people win every year, because they're just as good from year to year. Im sure if you won something -- you'd want to win it again. I for one, like the Emmys. No dumb shows are honored, and so-called "ratings" don't affect the votes. Its not a popularity contest -- but rather, a group of SMART people choosing smart and funny shows to win.

04-17-2004, 03:15 PM	#4
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	Not everyone who wins repeatedly likes to though. Bill Cosby and Candace Bergen took their names out of the race because they thought they had won enough times and wanted to give someone else a chance. Cosby probably would have won for his show in the 80s if he had kept his name in and Bergen would have at least gotten nominated again. Made them look more down to earth for doing so. The guy from Night Court did the same thing in the late 80s though he's since put his name bak in for other projects. I think Roseanne did too, but she may have just given up because she had a beef with them or something. I think the emmies let a lot of good shows slip through without getting nominated and the socioeconomics of the characters in the shows plays a part.

04-17-2004, 04:09 PM	#5
tvfan0101 Member Forum Regular Join Date: Sep 29, 2003 Posts: 961	The only beef I have with the Emmy Awards is the fact that network and cable shows are lumped together when in fact they are quite different. Networks show more episodes, meaning they can't spend as much time on each episode, they cater to a different group of viewers (seeing as how you pay for shows like The Sopranos) and the worst thing is, since I don't get HBO I can't see any of the shows that keep winning things and therefore I feel left out.

04-17-2004, 04:17 PM	#8
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	Dividing them up makes sense. Years ago they didn't have daytime awards. With the split something like The Sopranos would probably win best drama series which it probably never would otherwise. West Wing always wins because a big chunk of the people in the academy work for either NBC or the comapny that produces that show. It's very political.

04-17-2004, 04:32 PM	#9
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	I think its a matter or taste as far as Mary Tyler Moore goes. Not my cup of tea. I could watch Dick Van Dyke's show, but MTM is dull. I saw the last episode recently and I remember the pilot and the one where Sue Ann slept with Lou Grant and the one where Sue Ann's sister came to visit and the one when Ted Baxter and Georgette got married by John Ritter but I didn't think this series was all that special. It doesn't appeal me.I don't think I fit the demographic they were aiming to appeal to with that show. The emmy winning sitcoms I like (they all won best comedy series): Danny Thomas/Make Room for Daddy, Get Smart, All in the Family, Taxi, Barney Miller, Cosby Show and I Love Lucy. I've seen all the winners, even My World and Welcome to It from 1970 (only one episode of that so i can't really rate it). Frasier, Golden Girls and Cheers I can watch in small doses. Not on a regular basis. The Monkees was a fave when I was 8 but watching it as an adult I keep thinking that everyone associated with that show must've been on drugs.

04-17-2004, 08:32 PM	#11
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	Reba and The Parkers aren't about people whose lifestyles match up with the people who vote for the emmies so forget about ever seeing them nominated for anything.

04-17-2004, 10:16 PM	#12
db108108 Teacher (for now) Senior Member Join Date: Mar 20, 2003 Location: 2 hours north of Detroit, 2 hours south of Toronto Posts: 1,023	Are you kidding me? Ratings don't come into play for the emmy awards? No drama from either the WB nor the UPN has ever been nominated when at least the WB has had some of the best dramas on tv in the past decade. The same people get nominated over and over again. Yes, some deserve it, but the Emmy's are far behind the times in at of cases. "The West Wing" won either last year or the year before that for what was an inferior season. And as for the person who said that shows based on stand up acts rarely get nomintated, you're right. Roseanne was never nominated for best comedy series, and it should have been nominated for its first 7 seasons and it should have won for seasons 3-6. But alas, Roseanne Barr was not Candice Bergen and Roseanne was not Murphy Brown. I'll give them emmy's another chance this year to see if they can finally make some headway. "The West Wing" should NOT be nominated again as fans and critics agree that the show is sinking fast (as evidenced from the free-falling ratings), while "Arrested Development" should be nominated despite its tiny ratings because it's one of the best comedies to come along in years. But here's by picks for noms this year: Comedy: Frasier, Friends, Sex And The City, Raymond & Will & Grace Drama: The Sopranos, The west Wing, Law & Order, CSI & The Shield or 24. It'll just be the same shows all over again.

04-17-2004, 11:26 PM	#14
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	db your predictions will probably be the shows that get nominated in July, except Law and Order which missed out last year. Once a show misses out its usually over. Frasier I believe missed out too but could come back. The critics like Monk which I've never seen but they can't decide if it's comedy or drama so it might get left off. Besides Arrested Development what new shows would they consider?