2021 Emmy Nominations

[lightspeedbear]

People will always complain about Trek but I can't recall any of the pre-streaming shows getting this much negativity thrown its way, likewise I remember visiting this board years back and it seemed 10x busier than it is now. Obviously Twitter is partially to blame there, and more generally social media (one of society's biggest mistakes imo), has made dog-piling on something easy, so maybe that explains it a little bit.

Another explanation is that I genuinely think a lot of the complaints are 100% valid. The story-telling on Discovery and Picard is an utter mess, with jarring mid-season changes in direction, plot twists thrown in at the last minute with no rhyme or reason, and a production that's half arsed a lot of the time. I think the Discovery crew is the weakest of any Trek series, with questionable priorities and development. Oh and Lower Decks cares more about easter eggs and callbacks than actual story-telling.

I'm not someone who wants these shows to fail (seriously, how sad do you have to be to think that), but three shows later I just don't think the quality is there, that's why a lot of people criticise, and to bring it back to the thread topic, that's reflected in the lack of Emmy nominations.

 

[fireproof78]

People will always complain about Trek but I can't recall any of the pre-streaming shows getting this much negativity thrown its way, likewise I remember visiting this board years back and it seemed 10x busier than it is now. Obviously Twitter is partially to blame there, and more generally social media (one of society's biggest mistakes imo), has made dog-piling on something easy, so maybe that explains it a little bit.

Another explanation is that I genuinely think a lot of the complaints are 100% valid. The story-telling on Discovery and Picard is an utter mess, with jarring mid-season changes in direction, plot twists thrown in at the last minute with no rhyme or reason, and a production that's half arsed a lot of the time. I think the Discovery crew is the weakest of any Trek series, with questionable priorities and development. Oh and Lower Decks cares more about easter eggs and callbacks than actual story-telling.

I'm not someone who wants these shows to fail (seriously, how sad do you have to be to think that), but three shows later I just don't think the quality is there, that's why a lot of people criticise, and to bring it back to the thread topic, that's reflected in the lack of Emmy nominations.

And a lot of criticism is fair. The way you present it is very fair. However, this is an exception rather than the rule.

I don't necessarily agree with the storytelling aspects, but I can legitimately see issues there.

And finally, I put zero stock in Emmy nominations so your explanation strikes me as valid, even if I have zero notion as to its accuracy. Largely because Emmys have zero bearing on my enjoyment of a work. So, that's why I'll often struggle with the negativity and everyone like "Look at the lack of Emmy nominations!" And I'm like "Why?"

 

[lightspeedbear]

Obviously Emmy noms shouldn't dictate or influence whether you yourself like something. You like these shows and that's great, that's all that matters for you. But more broadly speaking, awards like the Emmys are one indicator of quality, and a decent one at that, imo. In no universe would I ever expect Discovery to get nominated for writing or acting.

I do agree that haters often feel the need to broadcast that hate, over and over again, but again that's what the social media mouthpiece has given the world. People shouting about their dislikes and giving them a comfortable bandwagon with other like-minded people to side with.

 

[fireproof78]

Obviously Emmy noms shouldn't dictate or influence whether you yourself like something. You like these shows and that's great, that's all that matters for you. But more broadly speaking, awards like the Emmys are one indicator of quality, and a decent one at that, imo. In no universe would I ever expect Discovery to get nominated for writing or acting.

I do agree that haters often feel the need to broadcast that hate, over and over again, but again that's what the social media mouthpiece has given the world. People shouting about their dislikes and giving them a comfortable bandwagon with other like-minded people to side with.

I saw it long before social media.

As for Emmy's, it's an indication of nothing, in my opinion. If a show is good no award will change that. Likewise, all the awards in the world will not inspire motivation to watch it. And, I think it would go better to sell them if award shows were not treated like modern day peerage, with the snobbery to match.

 

[donners22]

People will always complain about Trek but I can't recall any of the pre-streaming shows getting this much negativity thrown its way, likewise I remember visiting this board years back and it seemed 10x busier than it is now. Obviously Twitter is partially to blame there, and more generally social media (one of society's biggest mistakes imo), has made dog-piling on something easy, so maybe that explains it a little bit.

Another explanation is that I genuinely think a lot of the complaints are 100% valid. The story-telling on Discovery and Picard is an utter mess, with jarring mid-season changes in direction, plot twists thrown in at the last minute with no rhyme or reason, and a production that's half arsed a lot of the time. I think the Discovery crew is the weakest of any Trek series, with questionable priorities and development. Oh and Lower Decks cares more about easter eggs and callbacks than actual story-telling.

I'm not someone who wants these shows to fail (seriously, how sad do you have to be to think that), but three shows later I just don't think the quality is there, that's why a lot of people criticise, and to bring it back to the thread topic, that's reflected in the lack of Emmy nominations.

I was regularly on these boards years back, and I recall Enterprise and Voyager in particular getting plenty of criticism. There was ample justification for such criticism; quite a bit more than the current shows in my view. Both were astonishingly lazy and misguided shows at times. Even then, the level of vitriol became rather tedious to the point that I avoided these boards for quite a while; flawed as Enterprise and Voyager were, they were not without their positives.

I see the current shows as a significant step up in quality from most of Berman-era Trek (at least Picard and Discovery; I tend to agree that Lower Decks is too reliant on callbacks). Flawed? Sure - they are bad at ending story arcs, in particular. I’d still take them over much of what preceded them.

As to awards, I am not sold on them being used as an objective measure of quality, especially given the competition for such awards these days. Plenty of good shows miss out.

One of the most unpleasant aspects of fandom is those who believe their opinion on a show is objectively right, and that those who disagree must have inferior standards, be lesser fans, etc. There are shades of that in the reaction to these awards.

The absence of awards is something jumped on by those who want to assert objective support for their view that the shows are failing, notwithstanding Trek’s historical lack of success with such awards (and the arguments to handwave that are thoroughly unconvincing).

 

[lightspeedbear]

I'm not saying awards are the be all and end all, but when these shows consistently miss out year after year, all whilst other scifi/fantasy/superhero shows get recognised, it does mean something imo. Can anyone suggest a primetime Emmy nomination they feel these shows deserved?

Both were astonishingly lazy and misguided shows at times

See that's my criticism of Discovery and Picard. The latter for things like introducing the Borg and then not thinking their inclusion through and that plotline goes nowhere, or starting out as an introspective character drama but ending up as a tired and overdone evil AI taking over the galaxy action-packed trope. And Discovery for telling us that this crew is a family without actually proving it in deed, or the constant changes in tone and direction each season. Or things like killing Culber, and then announcing on the after-show that he'll return.

And yes, the swearing, which would be fine if it was a bit more natural, but when its followed by prolonged moments of silence in both shows, it's quite clearly just a deluded attempt to be 'edgy'. I've nothing against modernising Trek, but the f bombs were so childish

 

[fireproof78]

"Edgy" as a term is ridiculous. The swearing worked as well as swearing on every other Trek show.

And if the takeaway from Picard was "evil AI takes over the galaxy" misses the point of the show. Which, is a common enough aspect of a lot of Trek that at this point I am convinced I am watching completely different shows.

Do I know if they deserve awards? Nope and I don't care. I feel like its misunderstood by the fan base as it is. Awards won't change that.

 

[lightspeedbear]

You thought "THE SHEER. FUCKING. HUBRIS." + prolonged silence in that bizarrely hostile scene at Starfleet worked well? Wow, ok. First time I've heard that opinion but to each their own. The Discovery F bomb in season 1 was worse tbf, that felt like schoolkids using it for the first time.

And if the takeaway from Picard was "evil AI takes over the galaxy" misses the point of the show

It feels more like the showrunners themselves missed the point of the show tbh.

 

[fireproof78]

You thought "THE SHEER. FUCKING. HUBRIS." + prolonged silence in that bizarrely hostile scene at Starfleet worked well? Wow, ok. First time I've heard that opinion but to each their own. The Discovery F bomb in season 1 was worse tbf, that felt like schoolkids using it for the first time.

I work with school kids. That's not how they swear.

feels more like the showrunners themselves missed the point of the show tbh.

I think it's more they have multiple points but threading it all or balancing BTS difficulties had an impact.

 

[Isaac Lawrence]

I think the Emmys are fine. It's the television industry celebrating itself. Here's the work that we've done, and here's what our peers think of it.

It's like the Tonys. In the theater world, here's the work that we've done, and here's what our peers think of it.

The Grammys for music. Same thing. And the Oscars for movies. Same thing. And I watch the Grammys and Oscars every year because those interest me, the other two don't.

As for Star Trek and Discovery and the Emmys, it get's the same kind of nods that Star Trek has always gotten. Technical ones by and large.

Star Trek: The Original Series Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 13 nominations and 1 Honor

Star Trek: The Next Generation Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 58 nominations and 17 Emmys
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 31 nominations and 4 Emmys
Star Trek: Voyager Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 33 nominations and 7 Emmys
Star Trek: Enterprise Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 6 nominations and 2 Emmys

Star Trek: Discovery Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 10 nominations and 1 Emmy
Star Trek: Picard Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 5 nominations and 1 Emmy
Star Trek: Lower Decks Emmy Nominations and Wins -- 1 nomination

With Discovery of course, 4 of it's 10 nominations are for this past season (and naturally this is Lower Decks' first time being eligible), and this year's Emmy aren't until September. So Discovery may pick up another Emmy, or a couple if they're lucky.

Discovery's lone Emmy win so far is for "If Memory Serves," one of my top five Star Trek episodes ever. And it was for Outstanding Prosthetic Makeup For A Series, Limited Series, Movie Or Special - 2019. So another technical award, standard for Star Trek.

Anyway, again, this is just the television industry celebrating itself, and we the viewers can watch and cheer on our favorite shows and hope they win. And for people who don't care, then they don't care.

I do think Emmy nominations and wins are important to a show in that, the people who decide whether a show continues or not, and how much money to continue pumping into a show, they do look at things like the number of Emmy nominations and wins.

Ultimately of course the ratings are the first and last determining factor. And with something like streaming, ViacomCBS knows exactly who's watching what, and for how long and how many times, and any other metric that you can think of...

So Discovery on the whole: 2 nominations the first season, no wins. 4 nominations the second season, 1 win. And 4 nominations for the third season, and we'll see what happens. And these are of course seasons with 15 or less episodes.

 

[fireproof78]

That's why award shows are meaningless to me. They are self-congratulatory.

 

[Tuskin38]

Social Media has made it easier for people to voice their opinions. Had Twitter/Facebook etc existed back in the 90s when those Trek Series came out, I imagine we'd see similar shit going on.

 

[Jinn]

You thought "THE SHEER. FUCKING. HUBRIS." + prolonged silence in that bizarrely hostile scene at Starfleet worked well

There's no prolonged silence after the comment. There is silence before, as she stares at Picard in disbelieve, then she says "The sheer fucking hubris", followed almost immediately by "You think you can just waltz in here and be entrusted with taking men and women into space?" There's a musical stinger in-between, but it's less of an "oh damn, she said a naughty word on TV" and more "Picard's last hope getting crushed".
If you don't believe me, check out this video at around 1:26

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

And frankly, the "sheer fucking hubris" comment is entirely justified. Picard left Starfleet over a decade ago in a desperate bid to make them do what he thought was best (even if we agree with him), just released an interview shitting all over Starfleet in the last episode and comes in to Starfleet's commander's office, spinning absurd (even if we know they're true) tales about creating life from a person who died twenty years ago, with the severely weakened Romulans being involved and then has the sheer fucking hubris to ask Clancy for assistance. I may not like Picard (the show), but I can't find any fault with this scene, Clancy or her reaction.

 

[Jayson1]

I disagree with the idea Picards concerns were absurd. I mean this is Star Trek. Lots of more weirder more crazy stuff has happened than. Picard talking about Data and Romulans on earth. Picard should have been listened to because even though one might not like the negative stuff he had to say about Starfleet it's a far cry to think be would just make stuff up or might actually be onto something.

 

[fireproof78]

I disagree with the idea Picards concerns were absurd. I mean this is Star Trek. Lots of more weirder more crazy stuff has happened than. Picard talking about Data and Romulans on earth. Picard should have been listened to because even though one might not like the negative stuff he had to say about Starfleet it's a far cry to think be would just make stuff up or might actually be onto something.

Clancy assigned someone to investigate despite their absurdity. And was willing to back Picard up when he was proven correct. But, the idea that he can bash Starfleet and then make requests doesn't mean he gets listened to. That is hubris.

 

[Jayson1]

Government needs to have thicker skin though when facing criticism. Especially when it is coming from someone who has done so much for the Federation. I mean why do they think he was coming for help anyways if he didn't know something was up. They could have simply giving him a ship but with some conditions and also not full command.

 

[fireproof78]

Government needs to have thicker skin though when facing criticism. Especially when it is coming from someone who has done so much for the Federation. I mean why do they think he was coming for help anyways if he didn't know something was up. They could have simply giving him a ship but with some conditions and also not full command.

I love how Picard's walking away and then trash talking Starfleet is just to be ignored at this point. Picard's actions have to be taken within the full context, and not just the good he has done. It is not clear he has Starfleet's best interests at heart after that. What career he had needs to be taken in light of recent events.

And, again, Oh was assigned to investigate. Clancy just wouldn't do all that Picard wanted to do. For understandable reasons.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

People will always complain about Trek but I can't recall any of the pre-streaming shows getting this much negativity thrown its way, likewise I remember visiting this board years back and it seemed 10x busier than it is now. Obviously Twitter is partially to blame there, and more generally social media (one of society's biggest mistakes imo), has made dog-piling on something easy, so maybe that explains it a little bit.

Another explanation is that I genuinely think a lot of the complaints are 100% valid. The story-telling on Discovery and Picard is an utter mess, with jarring mid-season changes in direction, plot twists thrown in at the last minute with no rhyme or reason, and a production that's half arsed a lot of the time. I think the Discovery crew is the weakest of any Trek series, with questionable priorities and development. Oh and Lower Decks cares more about easter eggs and callbacks than actual story-telling.

I'm not someone who wants these shows to fail (seriously, how sad do you have to be to think that), but three shows later I just don't think the quality is there, that's why a lot of people criticise, and to bring it back to the thread topic, that's reflected in the lack of Emmy nominations.

Oh please, that is complete and utter nonsense. People actively tried to get TNG cancelled and it had a lot of fans accusing it of not being star trek. People hated ds9 initially because it wasnt TNG and was at the time a much darker take on star trek. Voyager copped a ton of criticism for its writing and characters, and enterprise was accused of trying to rewrite TOS and for years was remembered as the franchise killer. You really need to either bone up on your trek production history or stop viewing the berman era through rose-tinted glasses.

 

[lightspeedbear]

Oh please, that is complete and utter nonsense. People actively tried to get TNG cancelled and it had a lot of fans accusing it of not being star trek. People hated ds9 initially because it wasnt TNG and was at the time a much darker take on star trek. Voyager copped a ton of criticism for its writing and characters, and enterprise was accused of trying to rewrite TOS and for years was remembered as the franchise killer. You really need to either bone up on your trek production history or stop viewing the berman era through rose-tinted glasses.

Enterprise was accused of trying to rewrite TOS? I wasn't talking about a disagreement you had with a couple of friends, I'm talking about the general consensus. Nowhere was that the main takeaway of the show. People thought the first couple of seasons were a bit weak but didn't generally spew the hatred Discovery regularly gets.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Enterprise was accused of trying to rewrite TOS? I wasn't talking about a disagreement you had with a couple of friends, I'm talking about the general consensus. Nowhere was that the main takeaway of the show. People thought the first couple of seasons were a bit weak but didn't generally spew the hatred Discovery regularly gets.

LOL you have got to be kidding me

I was pretty active in a few online chatrooms back then like the official Startrek.com chat and also on here and I can assure you the general consensus was exactly what I said it was. Enterprise was seen as berman and braga trying to erase TOS, the Enterprise was being called the Akiraprise faciously because of it's design simlarities to the Akira class and people wanted the franchise to fall under new leadership. There's quite a lot of long term members around here like @Lord Garth who will tell you how bad things were on this board when Enterprise was airing. The franchise was burnt out as were the fans. Why else do you think Enterprise was such a ratings disaster and cancelled in fourth season? Why else do you think it took 12 years for another Star Trek series to be produced?

But it wasn't only Enterprise that received a ton of backlash when it first aired. Every series barring TOS did. TNG copped the same amount of hate as Discovery, if not more and there is plenty of documented evidence from newspaper articles to documentaries like 'Chaos on the bridge' of the highly negative fan reaction during it's first few seasons.