Didn't cable television have their own awards at one point ? Lets bring back the CableACE Awards ! I hope Jon Hamm finally wins - his acting this season wouldn't be what I consider the best he's done on "Mad Men" but his conference room speech on the last episode this season was bravura... I hope Robert Morse wins too ... He always gives nuanced performances with what little he gets to do...
Aw, I was just about to say this is my favorite comedy and I hope it wins. Or Modern Family, I love that show as well. Honestly I think that there are a lot of great comedies out there right now, particularly on broadcast networks. They've been really crappy for the past decade or so, but since 2010 I think the pool has improved dramatically.
The fact that they completely ignored Hannibal, with neither Hugh Dancy nor Mads Mikkelsen getting a nomination, is enough to make these nominations a complete joke.
The Emmy noms have been a joke for years, but sadly like a lot of the nominees for outstanding comedy, they're not funny.
This is the problem with the "THESE names are why it's a joke!" comments. It's so personal, and most people (not saying you) don't even watch all of the shows that are nominated to give an true opinion. It's usually just people saying "I watch this show, why isn't it up there?" Except for a few questionable decisions, I have to mostly agree with what's been nominated. We all have our personal favourites, but that's not what this is about. Otherwise Tony Todd would have gotten many more best guest actor awards!
I think it's not so much that it's personal to individuals, more than it has such a narrow definition of cream of the crop and repeats itself every time.
Basically, it seems like they "discover" a few shows and then stick with them every year, and it's difficult for anything else to break through. If you changed this to "I watch this show, so it's up there", I think it would probably sum up the way the Emmy nominations come about.
Well, it's not like they aren't willing to drop popular shows once they turn bad. The Emmys dropped 24 and Dexter like a bad habit when those shows went downhill in quality.
Reviews for the second season have tended to be more positive, but the first season was panned by most critics. Although I like it, it's not hard to take a step back and see why. Of course, it's worth noting that the Emmys are determined by the TV academy (which is to say, people who make television) not critics, but critics aren't a bad barometer to go by (just not a perfect one).
The other thing is that some shows have had multiple seasons in a row in which that show really was the best in it's category. The Sopranos, Mad Men, Seinfeld, Fraizer, The West Wing, all come to mind. True enough the Emmys sometimes misses the expiration date by a season, but I no longer begrudge the multiple winners only because they are multiple winners.
I liked 24 seasons 1-3 and 5. Just when our Trek buds Coto and Braga came aboard they decided all characters not named Jack, Kim or Chloe were 100% expendable and started to make the stories more ridiculous and melodramatic.
That certainly applies to Dexter. Dexter was nominated for Best Drama in season five for some reason. Clearly they didn't get the memo that season four was the last good season! Also once a show stops getting nominated it is extremely hard for it to come back as a nominations contender.
I only watched seasons 1 and 2 and thought it was rubbish. If those are supposed to be the good seasons, then I haven't missed anything by not seeing the rest. Oh God, they got even more ridiculous and melodramatic? I don't even want to try to imagine that...