Thursday, July 8, 2010

C'MON Emmy's!

I guess I'm not really a television authority, but I try. I just took a gander at the recently announced Emmy Nominations and it's pretty hard to stomach. Where's the love for "Parks and Recreation"? Seriously. With the exception of "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia", "Parks" is the best comedy currently on television. I know that might sound like a bold statement considering the show only just wrapped up its second season, but it's the truth dag gummit.

Despite my high praise for the show, I can understand why it might not be nominated in the Best Comedy category considering it's relatively new and just picking up steam, but I still think it deserves the nomination. "The Office" got a nomination and it's just running on fumes and nowhere near the quality of "Parks", which is probably now at the same comedic level that "The Office" was at in its prime.

What bothers me so much is the lack of appreciation for the supporting actors on the show, who really make it work. Amy Poehler garnered the show's only significant nomination with her Best Actress nod (and I'll be rooting for her), but she will likely be passed over. Nick Offerman (Ron Swanson) deserves a Best Supporting Actor nomination if anyone ever has. Swanson is easily my favorite part of the show and a large part of what made the second season so superior to the first (which wasn't bad at all). Everything from his mustache to his voice to his striding gait is pitch perfect. Rising comedian Aziz Ansari should also have been considered for his role as the obnoxious and hopeless Tom Haverford. Even Chris Pratt (Andy Dwyer) could also have made the cut. If NPH is still getting noms for playing Barney Stinson, then any of these three could have made the list. Also, in the Supporting Actress category, Aubrey Plaza might have been considered, especially if Kristen Wiig deserves one for being annoying on SNL. I have faith that some of these talented actors will get nominations in the future, especially if the show continues to improve in the third season, but still the fact that none of them were recognized is pretty annoying.

Frankly, I think the Emmy's are generally pretty lame. Certain shows become powerhouses and then stay in her good graces forevermore. Like I mentioned before, "The Office" still gets nominations despite noticeable deterioration. From everything I've heard, "Mad Men" is in a downward slump too, yet it's nomination is a formality. The same damn actors are nominated every damn year despite the fact that more exciting and talented actors are starting to arise. "Damages", which airs on FX, gets a lot of attention, but "Sunny" and "Sons of Anarchy" are ignored. Just because "Sunny" is pretty offensive, doesn't mean it's not the funniest show on television. It's not even an acquired taste for younger viewers, everybody likes it. "Sons" might not be Best Drama material, but Ron Perlman and Katey Sagal both could be recognized for their performances. I just don't get why some shows get nominated and others don't.

A few other notes: I'll be rooting for Larry David in the Best Actor category because he truly deserves it, otherwise I wouldn't mind Alec Baldwin in the least. In the Best Drama Actor category, I expect Michael C. Hall will pick up the win for "Dexter", which he's outstanding in. He won the Golden Globe for his performance earlier this year, so I see no reason why the Emmy's would disagree. I'll also be rooting for "Dexter" in the Best Drama Series category, though I suspect that something like "Breaking Bad" or "Mad Men" will win, maybe even "True Blood". "Dexter" really upped its game in the fourth season, so I think it still has a slight chance.

Also, what the hell is "Glee" and why do people like it so much? I get that it's the popular new show, but geez, isn't this aimed at teenagers? What's all the hubbub about? I can't imagine this show having a whole lot of longevity. Remember how hot "Desperate Housewives" and "Gray's Anatomy" were? I predict a similar fate for this show.

No comments: