Slimmed-Down Emmys


 

Looks like the Emmy Awards are going to do like the Tonys and streamline the show by leaving out some of the less-showy awards. They’ll show the acceptance speeches, taped before the live show, but not the presentation of the awards.

The main criterion seems to be which of the awards would make for the least interesting (no, that’s the wrong word — “ratings-friendly” is more like it) presentation. So that might help explain the otherwise bizarre decision to pre-tape the awards for best writing in a drama but leave the best writing in a comedy award for the show proper. The inevitable 30 Rock victory might produce a funny speech or at least a shout-out to Tina Fey (though she isn’t nominated for any of the four scripts). The equally inevitable Mad Men victory might produce a funny speech, but they wouldn’t be expecting it in advance.


 
Filed under:

Slimmed-Down Emmys

  1. This is only moderately related ot the above, but would the Academy get over itself and either
    a) give Hugh Laurie the freakin' Emmy, already.
    or b) Stop nominating him and make room on the list for another talented actor.
    as it is, nominating him year after year is getting repetitive and irritating. The man is a genius and a brilliant actor, but this. is. getting. ridiculous.

    • Hugh Laurie is a hack. I'm amazed people like him can make a living in the business. His constantly boring and rigid acting on House shows no expression of talent. Its just one thing again and again and again. Anyone who call themselves an actor can do what he does. Don't get swept away by hype. He doesn't deserve any awards. Gets nominated because of his connections and the popularity of the show.

  2. I disagree with you- I think his portrayal of House is excellent, but moreover I am astonished at the mans range. Having loved him in Jeeves and Wooster and A Bit of Fry and Laurie, watching him in House makes me aware of how brilliant an actor he is, given that he is as convincing as a tortured doctor as he is as a fop.