(no subject)
Alright, this is going to be a little hypocritical after my last post but here it goes anyway....
This year the Emmy voting system changed, it was supposed to give a bigger chance to shows that are not as widely viewed. Surprisingly (not really) this year the nominees are names that we see every year. Pretty much if you've been nominated before or a big name movie star, you're gonna get a nom even if the show you're on sucks and has recently been critically slammed or even canceled already (Malcolm in the Middle, The West Wing, The Comeback, Commander in Chief, Will and Grace). This year two excellent actresses, Kristen Bell and Lauren Graham apparently made the first cut but then fail to snag nominations, both loosing out to old time veterans who continually get nominations. Also last years best drama winner LOST (whose second season was, in my opinion, superior to the first) was COMPLETELY snubbed after getting a drama, lead actor and two supporting noms last year. You know why this is? The series leaned more in a science fiction direction this year and we all know emmy voters hate that. I would rant about the WIDELY (everyone from Variety to TV Guide) critically acclaimed sci fi show Battlestar Galactica but I know all of you would scoff.
Heres the good parts. Arrested Development snagged some nominations even though its been off the air since February, which is a nice tribute to a show that never lost steam. Also 24 got to most nominations out of any show, which proves that Jack Bauer gets WHATEVER he wants...even if its an emmy nom. Also Desperate Housewives was completely snubbed as well. Honestly I wouldn't mind if it was up for the Drama Category but if just bothers me that it was nominated for Comedy last year, the show just is never funny. Oh yeah, and Scrubs got a nominee too which is always nice. Heres a link to the full list of noms.(go to the bottom of the page)
http://www.variety.com/ac2006_article/VR1117946328?nav=news&categoryid=1983&cs=1&s=h&p=0#noms
This year the Emmy voting system changed, it was supposed to give a bigger chance to shows that are not as widely viewed. Surprisingly (not really) this year the nominees are names that we see every year. Pretty much if you've been nominated before or a big name movie star, you're gonna get a nom even if the show you're on sucks and has recently been critically slammed or even canceled already (Malcolm in the Middle, The West Wing, The Comeback, Commander in Chief, Will and Grace). This year two excellent actresses, Kristen Bell and Lauren Graham apparently made the first cut but then fail to snag nominations, both loosing out to old time veterans who continually get nominations. Also last years best drama winner LOST (whose second season was, in my opinion, superior to the first) was COMPLETELY snubbed after getting a drama, lead actor and two supporting noms last year. You know why this is? The series leaned more in a science fiction direction this year and we all know emmy voters hate that. I would rant about the WIDELY (everyone from Variety to TV Guide) critically acclaimed sci fi show Battlestar Galactica but I know all of you would scoff.
Heres the good parts. Arrested Development snagged some nominations even though its been off the air since February, which is a nice tribute to a show that never lost steam. Also 24 got to most nominations out of any show, which proves that Jack Bauer gets WHATEVER he wants...even if its an emmy nom. Also Desperate Housewives was completely snubbed as well. Honestly I wouldn't mind if it was up for the Drama Category but if just bothers me that it was nominated for Comedy last year, the show just is never funny. Oh yeah, and Scrubs got a nominee too which is always nice. Heres a link to the full list of noms.(go to the bottom of the page)
http://www.variety.com/ac2006_article/VR1117946328?nav=news&categoryid=1983&cs=1&s=h&p=0#noms