Outstanding Period And/Or Character Makeup (Non-Prosthetic) - Terra Firma, Part II Outstanding Prosthetic Makeup - That Hope Is You, Part I Outstanding Sound Editing For A Comedy Or Drama Series (One Hour) - That Hope Is You, Part I Outstanding Sound Editing For A Comedy Or Drama Series (One Hour) - Su'Kal Also, Lower Decks was nominated for one Emmy award: Outstanding Sound Editing For A Comedy Or Drama Series (Half-Hour) And Animation - No Small Parts
Crazy to see all the genre noms in major categories. Wasn’t long ago when that would have been unthinkable. Congrats to the Trek folks who were nominated.
Discovery should win an Emmy for Aditya Sahil's suit in "That Hope Is You, Part 1." And they should win an Emmy for that programmable matter bed. The bed should get a category of it's own: Outstanding Bed For A Comedy Or Drama Series (One Hour). Both of those were fine examples of quality television though.
No nomination for writing or acting. No nomination for directing, cinematography or editing. Not even a nomination for production design or costumes. Only nominations for technical proficiency. Color me surprised! And only four nominations! For comparison:
Congratulations to everyone! You thought I was going to say something else, but I won't. Because I know that's what you want. I prefer you starving, not fed.
As As opposed to all the Emmy nominations previous Trek series got for writing, directing and acting?
I'm a fan of both Trek and Wars but it's obvious that The Mandalorian is 10 times the production any of the new Star Trek shows are. From basically every standpoint, vision, direction, story-telling, visuals, audio, cinematography, cohesion... Re: production design, it might have got a nomination if it didn't look like every other modern sc-ifi. I've no problem with them changing things or being loose with canon but I wish Discovery had had the confidence to use the retro TOS aesthetic and own it, like modern Star Wars does. Ironically that would have been a breath of fresh air.
The Mandolorian doesn't look like my style of show. I've never been a Star Wars Fan in general -- I don't hate it or anything like that, I'm just not a fan of it (it happens) -- and Baby Yoda doesn't exactly make me want to go see it either. The '60s are over. But "Power to the people, man!" Strange New Worlds will be closer what you want to see, so have at it when it comes out. When I saw Star Trek: New Voyages, it allowed me to actually see what '60s-style Star Trek would be like today (ignoring the acting) and what I saw was nice, but isn't what I want to see in an official series. In fact, it's the exact opposite of what I want to see. EDITED TO ADD: Before someone mentions "In a Mirror, Darkly"... No. Just no. It's fine for a one-and-done (or a two-and-done in this case), not for an ongoing series, and especially not for an ongoing series that was supposed to bring Star Trek into a new era. The "novelty" of it would've worn off pretty fast. At least for me.
With it's supposedly episodic nature, sure, I'm really looking forward to that, but the production look and feel will be similar to Discovery and Picard I suspect. "The 60s are over" is no excuse. A New Hope came out in the 70s, yet modern Star Wars has the confidence to make all the tech as retro as the originals. It would have been a bold move to have Discovery double down on the TOS aesthetic, but I think it would have made the show a lot more memorable, in a good way. imo.
You forgot the part where I said "I'm not a Star Wars Fan". Also, the third season of DSC renders this point moot, now that it takes place in the 32nd Century. Maybe a point where we both agree is that the 32nd Century is where it should stay.
That has never been the Star Trek way. Star Wars can do that because it is deliberately unconnected for current humanity. Star Trek is not, and never has been. From TAS to TMP to TNG Star Trek has always up the tech look. This is not even close to a fair comparison because the productions are as far away in terms of approach as apples and rocks.
It doesn't matter if you yourself like Star Wars or not, the point is that a retro aesthetic can work in modern film and television, regardless of whether "the 60s are over" or not. I'm just saying I personally think it would have been more memorable than the usual flashy lights and holographic displays. The topic is about Discovery's relative lack of awards recognition after all.
And I'm saying why I don't think they would use it, lack of awards or not. But, what do I know. I find Discovery more memorable than Enterprise or Voyager in terms of design work.
This bullshit false equivalency get more and more tired every time I hear it. Previous Trek series were low-budget larks slapped together at a frantic shooting schedule. They had a lot to write and produce but no time or money to do it. And aside from the captains who were recognizable to most people but no one knew their names, were cast with a veritable flock of nobodies. Discovery and Picard have massive budgets and huge turn-around time between shooting schedules to (presumably) iron things out. And are chalked full of highish-profile B-listers, including the biggest female action star in the world. And one could argue Tig is borderline A-list at this point. All of whom have done acclaimed work in the past. It's budgeted and film as prestige television. It presents itself as prestige television. The "Old Star Trek hur da dur." argument doesn't hold any water at all. And now for the second year in a row, the franchise's long-time rival and competitor has come on to its turf (TV) and kicked its ass.
The Mandalorian is a dopamine comfort food. Congratulations to those nominated. Exactly. The people want comfort food TV. That is what they are getting. Congratulations. It is now uninspiring.
But lens flare, flashy holographic interfaces and the same tired time travel or rogue AI takes over the galaxy tropes isn't? The evidence is there for all to see. Zero nods for cinematography, writing, acting, directing, editing, set design... Trek being on tv again is the 'comfort food' you mention, but the production is sub-par, imo.
The evidence is there...and it has zero bearing on my reaction to the shows as presented. Mandalorian getting awards doesn't make that show inspiring. So, by all means, take in the awards. They are well earned, no doubt. Trek wasn't comfort food but is shaping that way now. More's the pity.
Perhaps it is a small taste of how tiring the constant shitting on current series is. Those “low-budget larks” included what was described at the time as the most expensive show on TV. The flaw in your argument can be demonstrated by two words - Quantum Leap. It ran contemporaneously with TNG, was far from a big budget series, had 22 episodes a season, and yet its virtually unknown lead Scott Bakula picked up four Emmy nominations for best actor.
Neither of these things are the arguments you think they are. TNG only became that way when it's budget was nearly doubled before the sixth season - after the success of the middle three seasons.** And wouldn't you know, the show did end up getting nominated in one of the (or the) main categories. Now, like most people, I don't really count it because it was so obviously a 'feel-good gimmie'. But the common assumption is that it was a make-up for season four, which absolutely did deserve it. After the seminal television that was the first season of TOS, it the best season of Star Trek without question. Even for a show that remained episodic, it presents a defined season-long thematic arc, which is stated right up front in big blue letters with the title of the first episode after the cliffhanger resolution. And each of the main characters gets their own episode dedicated to exploring a certain aspect of that theme, all culminating in the season finale. It's concise, consistent, and clear. It's what well-planned, conceptually thought-out writing looks like. **And let's be clear, even after the huge boost in TNG's budget it still didn't cost half as much per episode (adjusted) as Disco does. And that still ignores the fact that they were making 26 episodes every nine months versus 13 episodes every 18 months. As for Bakula, I never said unknown actors didn't get Emmy nominations. That would be a ridiculous assertion as it happens all the time. The whole point I was trying to make is that there is a clear difference in both intent and expectation in bringing Lucius Malfoy and the guy from Rent versus casting Robert Beltran. I actually had to look this up because I had no idea what you're talking about. I don't think I was aware that was even a thing. Or if I did, I probably set it when I joined (twenty fucking years ago) and haven't given it a second thought since. And for all I know, I only picked it because it's the first option. I'm not really a fan of any of the shows. I'm a fan of episodes. And there are episodes I like from every series. And lots and lots of episodes I never care to see again. I suppose if I had to pick, I'd choose TOS, but only the first season. And even then, there are a few episodes that, while great, I don't personally care for. But I'm happy to fill your confirmation bias assumption quota for the day.