BUFFYVERSE

Buffy snubbed by Emmys again

POSTED BY: HJERMSTED
UPDATED: Sunday, July 21, 2002 11:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5380
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:33 AM

HJERMSTED


Two noms for Buffy:
Outstanding Hairstyling For A Series
Outstanding Makeup For A Series (Non-Prosthetic)
Both for episode “Hell’s Bells”

Complete Emmy list:
http://www.emmys.com/primetime/2002/2002awardsarts.html

Man this Emmy thing is getting pathetic. What a bunch of snobs.

mattro

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:41 AM

TLSMITH1963


Babylon 5 never got nominated for the big, important awards, either. I think the Academy members can't look beyond cop-shows, lawyer-shows, & sitcoms. I'm really tired of seeing good series ignored just because they don't conform to narrow-minded views about what is supposed to be good.

Tammy

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:44 AM

HJERMSTED


Whoops!
Found two more noms. Here's all of them:

Outstanding Hairstyling For A Series
Outstanding Makeup For A Series (Non-Prosthetic)
Outstanding Makeup For A Series (Prosthetic)
All for episode “Hell’s Bells”
Outstanding Music Direction
For “Once More With Feeling”

Whedon, the cast, and writers all still thoroughly snubbed.

Complete Emmy list:
http://www.emmys.com/primetime/2002/2002awardsarts.html

mattro

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 6:12 AM

HAKEN

Likes to mess with stuffs.


Also, I think it's because only shows that belongs to the big 3 networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) and two big cable networks (HBO and Showtime) gets nominated and win in the major categories.

Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but just think about it. The academy membership consists of people who works in the industry, the majority of which works for the big 3 or the cable big 2.

If you are employed by those networks, you would naturally want to vote for a series that belongs to your network. A winning series or one that gets nominated on the voter's network guarantees that he'll have a job for another season. The larger the production, the more people it employs, the more votes it's able to receive from it's own network, own employees and own subcontractors, etc..

The smaller networks don't stand a chance simply because they don't have enough voters on their side. It's even worst for syndicated shows where production is across the border or overseas.

So unless a Joss Whedon series ends up on ABC, CBS, or NBC, chances of him winning anything in a major category are slim.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 6:43 AM

PANDORA


I think a lot of it has to do with genre as well, obviously- we've had many discussions about it in chat and here. But the thing is, personally, I'm over worrying about the Emmys. Ultimately, an Emmy doesn't really mean anything anyway- all it is is the consensus of popular opinion, and most popular opinion isn't really informed enough to properly judge quality (ok, maybe that's kind of nasty, but I see no other explanation of why melodrama like Judging Amy would be Emmy nominated and not Buffy). Most of the American public sees fantasy and sci fi as silly and for kids, so they would never give an award that takes itself too seriously anyway to a show of one of those genres. (This isn't even getting into the politics of it all.)

I'd be way gratified if they started a TV award that acknowledged quality regardless of genre, network, or otherwise. Of course, I'd also be way gratified if I suddenly inherited a hundred million dollars, so there you go.

Pandora

Edited to add: I will grudgingly add that this year, the bar seems to have been raised with shows like 24... and Sex and the City is really good. I'm also annoyed and gratified in equal parts that Six Feet Under has been nominated for like - everything (annoyed because I hate the Emmys, gratified because I love the show)... however, I think we could have stood to see Buffy nominated for at LEAST best lead actress, or best writing, or *something*. Throw us a bone here, people.

"Mrs. Krabappel and Principal Skinner were in the closet making babies and I saw one of the babies
and the baby looked at me." -Ralph Wiggum

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 7:07 AM

BOBKNAPTOR


OK, I just have to say this:

OUTSTANDING HAIRSTYLING?

What the heck? I mean, I am not saying that they have crappy hair, by any stretch of the imagination... I'm just saying, What a lame catagory. Is that so they can say "see, we didn't snub Buffy entirely!"????

Not that I was filled with faith in the process before, (truth be told, i never paid attention to the emmy's before this year) but I have a complete and utter LACK OF FAITH in them now.

______________
I woke up, and I looked in the mirror, and I thought, hey, what's with all the sin?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 10:33 AM

MILLERNATE


Well I guess its time once again for yours truly to post a rambling, somewhat intelligent, response to someone else's post. Hopefully this is more coherent than my usual posts of this kind.

Quote:


. But the thing is, personally, I'm over worrying about the Emmys. Ultimately, an Emmy doesn't really mean anything anyway- all it is is the consensus of popular opinion, and most popular opinion isn't really informed enough to properly judge quality (ok, maybe that's kind of nasty, but I see no other explanation of why melodrama like Judging Amy would be Emmy nominated and not Buffy).



But you see, the thing is, these awards are *supposed* to be about judging quality. It isn't supposed to be a popularity contest or a political game (I have the same annoyance at the Oscars for just that reason, well that and continuing to let Whoopi Goldberg host). Also, I don't know if you read Kurt Vonnegut but you might want to check out the foreward to his short-story collection Welcome to the Monkeyhouse in which he talks about those who dismiss Science Fiction.

Quote:


I'd be way gratified if they started a TV award that acknowledged quality regardless of genre, network, or otherwise. Of course, I'd also be way gratified if I suddenly inherited a hundred million dollars, so there you go.



Well, judging only by its first slate, the AFI awards at least seem to be making the attempt to reward merit so its a start. NO it isn't perfect but it seemed to genuinely try to reward based on merit (hey they awarded best director to Robert Altman instead of Ron Howard so that's a step in the right direction ).

Quote:


I will grudgingly add that this year, the bar seems to have been raised with shows like 24... and Sex and the City is really good.



You know, I saw the first 3 or so episodes of 24 and I didn't come off as overly impressed. I mean it was alright but it really came off as more of an intellectual game than a great show (plus the fact that there wasn't really any sort of connection with the characters that weren't Jack Baeur). I personally would have liked to have seen Buffy nominated for Best WRiting (I think we all know for what episode) and Best Supporting Actress (Alyson Hannigan for making completely horrid writing tolerable) though if they are going to nominate Jennifer Garner () they might as well nominate Sarah Michelle as she did a better job than her (even if I didn't care for her performance for much of the year).



Nathan
"Being popular and well liked is not in your best interest. Let me be more clear; if you behave in a manner pleasing to most, then you are probably doing something wrong." - Janeane Garofalo, from "Feel this Book"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 12:04 PM

ZICSOFT


Hmm. I rather like the hair for the last couple of seasons. But before then -- blech! I suppose it was deliberate -- B is supposed to be a valley girl who dresses herself from bad fashion magazines.

As for the Emmys -- WHO CARES? It's just a bunch of shallow TV types congratulating themselves for their "quality" shows. I'll not watch the awards ceremony for the same reason I don't watch 90% of what's on TV -- I need something to engage my brain. Not too much, of course -- that's what books are for!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 12:12 PM

ZICSOFT


Quote:

You know, I saw the first 3 or so episodes of 24 and I didn't come off as overly impressed. I mean it was alright but it really came off as more of an intellectual game than a great show (plus the fact that there wasn't really any sort of connection with the characters that weren't Jack Baeur).
That's an interesting perspective. I started out liking 24 a lot, then hating it totally -- and for exactly the opposite reasons. I thought the first 4 or 5 episodes were interesting and engaging. But then when they finally got around to "explaining" things, I began to lose interest. They were obviously making things up as they went along, and had no desire to make things fit together. The plot was determined by drama, not logic. For example, it makes no sense for the scheme to kidnap Jack's family to be so damned elaborate. But of course if the Bad Guys and just gone to his house and taken the women at gunpoint, there couldn't have milked that part of the story for so many episodes!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 1:05 PM

BOBKNAPTOR


I'm not sayin I didn't like the hair. the hair was fine. some might even say great. but the point is... it's a STUPID catagory... it's like a throw away. They got tons of "anti-buffy" press when they left OMWF off the ballots. Then they turn around and nominated the show for something that nobody gives a rats ass about.

I was glad to see that Michael Chiklis was nominated for "The Shield". It was a great new show (and I saw every episode). But I thought 24 was agressively un-interesting. Oh well. I never paid attention to the Emmy's before, i shouldn't be annoyed that the first time I do, they suck. I just won't pay attention to them anymore.

______________
Demons after money. Whatever happened to the still-beating heart of a virgin? No one has any standards anymore.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 3:00 PM

ZICSOFT


Aren't the category nominations done by the people who work in that category? So obviously hairdressers like to watch Buffy!

Mentioning The Shield gives me an excuse to flame the stupid PR hacks again. I almost didn't watch it because FX advertised it to death (during Buffy of course), and sold it as Dirty Harry Goest To South Central. It's certainly better than that.

But not that much better. OK, the acting's very good, and the writing's good. And I appreciate the way they refuse to flinch when they show stuff that might bother some people. (Most of you will be thinking of the love scenes betweent the two guys, but I'm thinking of the scene where the woman says that shooting anglos and shooting hispanics "isn't the same thing".)

And they also get points for having characters that are morally ambiguous.

But the whole package is not much more than Just Another Cop Show. Just because a show is brave or original, doesn't mean it's great.

Not that I'm saying it's a bad show. It's certainly better than any other cop show.

Or maybe I'm just being petty because of those stupid promos.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:13 PM

MILLERNATE


As an added bonus The Shield was created by Shawn Ryan, who wrote several episodes for the second season of Angel. So support of The Shield is support of a former member of the Mutant Enemy family .

As for myself, I generally liked The Shield but I feel that it sort of comes off as a hybrid of Homicide and Hill Street Blues (man I wish I had been old enough to watch this back when it was originally on, those Bravo channel reruns are awesome) taken to the next level. Either this or Hill Street Blues is the best cop show I've ever seen.



Nathan
"Being popular and well liked is not in your best interest. Let me be more clear; if you behave in a manner pleasing to most, then you are probably doing something wrong." - Janeane Garofalo, from "Feel this Book"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 9:01 PM

SHUGGIE


Quote:

Originally posted by Pandora:
I'm also annoyed and gratified in equal parts that Six Feet Under has been nominated for like - everything (annoyed because I hate the Emmys, gratified because I love the show)...



Six Feet Under has just started over here in the UK - we've had 4 or 5 episodes so far. I like it but I can't quite see what the fuss is about. The writing's ok - sometimes it's a little too self-consciously quirky for my taste. The acting's fine - I think the leads all perform well. But it doesn't really grab me somehow. I keep feeling like it's just about to get really weird and amazing but it never does.

Maybe it's an unfair comparison but it's dark, quirky with a wry sense of humour - I keep expecting Twin Peaks - but it's not in the same class.

I do like the dead father - he's the most interesting character so far.

Shug

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 18, 2002 11:27 PM

CHARLIEBLUE


Quote:

Originally posted by Zicsoft:
Quote:

I thought the first 4 or 5 episodes were interesting and engaging. But then when they finally got around to "explaining" things, I began to lose interest. They were obviously making things up as they went along, and had no desire to make things fit together. The plot was determined by drama, not logic. For example, it makes no sense for the scheme to kidnap Jack's family to be so damned elaborate. But of course if the Bad Guys and just gone to his house and taken the women at gunpoint, there couldn't have milked that part of the story for so many episodes!


I suspect that's the fault of the WTC attacks. I remember reading an article in TV Guide shortly before the show premiered where they said that they had to do a major change of direction midstream to focus the show more on Jack and less on somebody toppling the government or whatever it was they were going to do.

So, that would kind of explain the making things up as they go along. It should be interesting to see what they do this year with a fully planned-out season.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 19, 2002 4:31 AM

ZICSOFT


Quote:

Originally posted by CharlieBlue:
I suspect that's the fault of the WTC attacks. I remember reading an article in TV Guide shortly before the show premiered where they said that they had to do a major change of direction midstream to focus the show more on Jack and less on somebody toppling the government or whatever it was they were going to do.

Nice theory, but...

-- The first 10 or so episodes were done before 9/11. They didn't reshoot these eps, they just edited out stuff that would have offended people. So they still blew up an airliner, but they didn't show the airliner exploding. Must have killed them to throw away all that expensive CGI!

-- Anyway, if they didn't want to remind people of 9/11, would they have stuck with a story involving terrorists and hostages? Especially that "shoot the women!" scene that the critics all loved, but I thought was downright pornographic.

-- They've come right out and said that they didn't decide who the mole was until it was time to unmask same.

-- Naked Mandy was supposed to be a key character, but she just disappears after a few eps. Obviously she wasn't popular with the focus groups.

-- Ever watch La Femme Nikita? Same producers. They never had any qualms about making things up as they went along.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 19, 2002 10:42 AM

PANDORA


Quote:

Originally posted by Shuggie:
Six Feet Under has just started over here in the UK - we've had 4 or 5 episodes so far. I like it but I can't quite see what the fuss is about. The writing's ok - sometimes it's a little too self-consciously quirky for my taste. The acting's fine - I think the leads all perform well. But it doesn't really grab me somehow. I keep feeling like it's just about to get really weird and amazing but it never does.



I wasn't that excited about it in the first four or five episodes either... It was a slow build, but now I'm completely in love with it. It just gets better and better, building on itself. Of course, I'm really about strong characters, and this show has them in spades. It's not much a grabby show. It's more like you step into the pool and melt in of your own volition.


Quote:

Maybe it's an unfair comparison but it's dark, quirky with a wry sense of humour - I keep expecting Twin Peaks - but it's not in the same class.

I do like the dead father - he's the most interesting character so far.

Shug



I never watched Twin Peaks, though from what I understand of it, Six Feet Under is *not* Twin Peaks. Get thee gone, David Lynch! (no offense to Mr. Lynch, but I wouldn't be that interested in seeing SFU all Lynched out... bleh).

Six Feet Under is unequivocally the best show I've ever seen. Of course, everyone's welcome to disagree...

Pandora

"Mrs. Krabappel and Principal Skinner were in the closet making babies and I saw one of the babies
and the baby looked at me." -Ralph Wiggum

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 19, 2002 1:05 PM

ZICSOFT


Quote:

I never watched Twin Peaks, though from what I understand of it, Six Feet Under is *not* Twin Peaks. Get thee gone, David Lynch! (no offense to Mr. Lynch, but I wouldn't be that interested in seeing SFU all Lynched out... bleh).
Twin Peaks was the first Lynch work I saw, and for most of the first season I was blown away by it. But then I realized that DL, while very, very good at setting a scene, has no skill at -- or interest in -- actually telling a story. By the time you find out who killed Laura Palmer, you've stopped caring.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 19, 2002 1:30 PM

MILLERNATE


Theoretically Lynch's short-comings in the storytelling department were supposed to have been made up for by co-creator and fellow Executive Producer Mark Frost (who also was one of the main contributors to Hill Street Blues among other things).

I haven't seen much of Twin Peaks lately (as I'm fighting buying the DVD since they only include the first 7 episodes, excluding the pilot, of the first season) but I did see a version of the pilot (a VHS special release that had a new ending slapped on to make it more of a complete movie) and that still held up today. The important thing about Twin Peaks was that it did contribute change in *how* people did television storytelling and that is a big part of why it made the TV Guide 50 greatest series ever list.





Nathan
"Being popular and well liked is not in your best interest. Let me be more clear; if you behave in a manner pleasing to most, then you are probably doing something wrong." - Janeane Garofalo, from "Feel this Book"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 20, 2002 9:10 AM

ZICSOFT


I've heard about the movie version of Twin Peaks. As I understand it, the extra ten minutes weren't "slapped on". When they were financing the series, part of the deal was that they'd do a movie version of the first two episodes for release in Europe. Which meant at the same time they were shooting the series, they shot a half-reel of story that was never shown on TV. I've often wondered what they could do in ten minutes to bring the story to a reasonable end. Care to share? You should probably use the spoiler tag.

A movie version of the first two episodes would certainly work better than the series did. You could see everything resolved in one evening, instead of waiting months and months, until you finally gave up -- as a lot of tv viewers did.

But the big draw would be Lynch's trademark visual exposition. Which is popular in some circles, but which I find I'm now pretty bored with.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 21, 2002 11:58 AM

MILLERNATE


The first season of Twin Peaks didn't really decline in the ratings. That didn't seem to be a problem at all then as a whole lot of people stuck around for the whole year (it was the second season that shot itself and good). I'll recap what I recall about the Twin Peaks: The TV series movie (I call it this to distinquish it from the Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me prequel) though I should recall that I was watching this about 2-3 months ago so my recollection isn't going to be perfect (this is going to be barebones and will probably leave out somethings from the beginning). Also, a video of this has been available at every Hollywood Video outlet that I have been in under the "Cult" section (along with Dr. Stranglove, Blue Velvet, Brazil, and Cannibal: The Musical) so it might be available for rental in your area.

Select to view spoiler:



The end sequence kicks in shortly after the ending that we did see (of Agent Cooper calling it a night) originally in the pilot. In his hotel room Cooper gets an anonymous phone call stating that the killer is at the hospital, after calling Sheriff Truman they proceed to go to the hospital. Finding the anonymous caller they proceed to the basement and confront the Killer (who was called "Bob") there was a struggle and the caller (who apparently was tracking "Bob" after he killed someone that the caller knew) shot the killer before suffering what appeared to be a heart attack. Bob (the killer) made mention of a cryptic comments that included "Fire walk with me" at some point (I forget if this was immeadiately before or after he got shot, darned long-term memory).

After this a caption mentioned "[x] years later" (I forget exactly how many) you see one of the patented Agent Cooper dream sequences as he is in a room with the red-clad, weird talking midget (anyone who is a fan knows what I'm talking about), and Laura Palmer. What follows was a somewhat bizarre conversation between the midget and Cooper (was there any other kind ) involving Laura. Then music started up, the midget starts to dance, and laura leans over and whispers something in Coopers ear that we don't get to hear (and then the credits role). I have no problems with this extra time until the midget scene, which seemed far more tacked on than I remember the other "midget scenes" being in the series.




RE: the idea of a Twin Peaks movie instead: I'd be more opposed to the idea of Twin Peaks having just been a movie of the first two episodes as we'd have lost a lot of the influence that it had on television as a whole (It should be noted that Joss Whedon has listed Twin Peaks among his favorite three television series of all time in a section in Entertainment Weekly). Plus there is the sneaking suspicion that a Twin Peaks movie would have turned out a lot like Mulholland Drive - good, but not necessarily something that will be remembered forever.

Though I will say that Twin Peaks would have been better as a one-season "Maxi-Series" instead of carrying over into that second season (which is the point that most people, myself included, seem to feel that the series went off the rails) which I think David Lynch agrees with in hindsight (given that that is how he pitched Mulholland Drive back when it was a television project).


Nathan
"Being popular and well liked is not in your best interest. Let me be more clear; if you behave in a manner pleasing to most, then you are probably doing something wrong." - Janeane Garofalo, from "Feel this Book"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
The anti-Joss anti-Buffy fever
Fri, January 20, 2023 20:16 - 4 posts
Oh boy... Joss gets triple teamed by Buffy / Angel alums - Charisma, Sarah , Amber
Wed, April 7, 2021 10:55 - 81 posts
Felicia Day On Escape!
Sun, February 28, 2021 20:17 - 6 posts
Is there life after Buffy...??
Sat, January 26, 2019 17:27 - 7 posts
Buffy Comics Reading Order?
Thu, July 19, 2018 03:00 - 3 posts
BUFFY BRACKETOLOGY - Round 7
Wed, January 31, 2018 20:35 - 1 posts
BUFFY BRACKETOLOGY - Round 6
Wed, January 31, 2018 20:30 - 1 posts
Just finished watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer for the first time
Mon, October 31, 2016 23:08 - 17 posts
Chop wifes head off... get a free hug
Sun, October 30, 2016 12:30 - 3 posts
Sarah Michelle Gellar wins People Choice Award 2014
Wed, April 20, 2016 18:51 - 4 posts
Xander goes wild ! Nicholas Brendon arrested for rowdy antics in hotel room.
Thu, September 3, 2015 08:16 - 9 posts
SMG is a dork
Wed, April 15, 2015 04:09 - 4 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL