[ad_1]
Daniel Fienberg: We are still in the glow of the 70th Primetime Emmys, the biggest party on the TV calendar (if you have a rather restrictive approach to the more than 500 TV shows). There is a lot to say about winners and losers, but let's start with the telecast itself! Tim, were you so grateful that the Emmys ended up right now that you're ready to call the series of triumphs?
Tim Goodman: No, it's the worst Emmys show I've ever seen. This is not a hyperbole. (Maybe there was such a bad broadcast when I was a teenager and I was not paying attention?) It was dead, dull, badly produced, terribly written and there was hosts who were not welcome enough and last night, they were not funny enough and not enough engaging). The presenter association was poorly designed. The material that was given to them was pathetic. Almost all the "bits" of the show have imploded on itself. The staging seemed to come from 1978. People seemed not to want to be there. The fact that the television industry, the night it is supposed to celebrate its own achievements, can not really make an interesting TV event is really pathetic.
DF: There are many lesser-known people than Michael Che and Colin Jost – for the best or the worst of one of NBC's flagship shows and attracting just under 10 million viewers – who would have done a fantastic job. I fully agree that they were, in all respects, the wrong choices to accept and that they were also presented in the least attractive light, with both a lame monologue and faint appearances of followed. Admittedly, Maya Rudolph and Fred Armisen were to be the centerpiece of one of the many elements that never simply evolved from "idea" to "thing executed that was funny," and I imagine that many people in Amazon lament the promotional opportunity of Forever this morning. Do you have someone else that you want to make a distinction?
TG: Well, it's a long list. But in reality, it's at the TV Academy. We need more supervision. It's not enough to let Lorne Michaels and NBC take over the Emmy and kill them. That was, as you said in your review, basically a SNL production and long announcement for NBC. I would say (again, sighing) that the most urgent problem of the Television Academy is to expand each category to 10 nominations. But after that, doing something – no matter what – to fix the Emmys in broadcast is essential. And I'm done with broadcast television. I prefer to see him on Netflix. The TV Academy and Netflix could easily find a way to pay for it. There would be no need to worry or bend to "ratings" – something that Trump (hey, there is a name that did not appear last night) will use as a cudgel against the entertainment industry if they are down, be. Focus on the nominees and winners and worry less about the spotlight. If it never returns to the television and this stupid rotating format, I would be happy. The television broadcast needs to be redesigned. He needs new ideas, new directors and writers (perhaps from a show less "hey, these people make awards, so let's use them") and a change of scenery.
DF: Are there more boring clichés on television than when, after a character has spoken at length, the person he is talking to replies, "But tell me what you really think"? What's fun is that Monday's show has actually left room for clips, which is not always the case for rewards, and I think if you had reduces Fred & Maya. I included the inclusion of clips in any positive category of the series, even though they were very strangely stuck before announcing presenters and their generally low joke. Do you have any positives that you want to recognize?
TG: Uh, that you should see him again and not me? OK, yes, the clips. Agree on that.
DF: Betty White! The marriage proposal of Glenn Weiss! Emmys repairs! From there, I should probably start to invent things.
TG: Well, as you said, White is a legend that you let her do what she wants, but as you mentioned, it was difficult to know exactly what her purpose was, at share the time spent on the television. Weiss's proposal was adorable and easily diverted attention from the fact that another Emmy had gone to lead a series of awards. The Emmy bit repair was good, but on a better broadcast, it would have been the fifth or sixth thing we would note. So, yes, we should probably go to winners and losers. It was interesting?
DF: "Interesting" sounds good. Do we want to start with an overview? Is it particularly significant that this is the first time that Netflix has been able to connect with HBO for most of Emmy's victories? Does this require an asterisk given the number of wins, including a couple on television, from the treatment Black mirror episodes like TV movies or treat something like Seven seconds in limited series?
TG: The category shenanigans have been going on for a long time, and although it annoys and tilts the percentages, as you note, it's another thing that the TV Academy could and should correct (or correct). It is not so hard. Maybe common sense? Regina King is amazing, but even she seemed stunned to see that she had won (or maybe someone remembered the series?). Big picture, I would say it was clearly the night of Amazon with The wonderful Mrs. Maisel. I certainly have ideas about it. Ahem. (And if only Rudolph and Armisen could be given quality material, Amazon might have been interested in Forever, which I liked and commented on.) HBO certainly reminded people that it would not go away. And FX did extremely well for its size, even though Keri Russell did not win as I hoped (in a very very competitive category) and, unfortunately, Americans did not win at his last chance either (as that should probably be the case, but at least he was killed by a gigantic and dignified series The iron Throne; Even though I like Claire Foy, this trophy should have gone to Russell).
DF: A lot to touch on it, but let's start with Americans. Arriving last night, there were only two victories of Emmy, both for Margo Martindale, including at least once for an episode in which she could have appeared in two scenes. To what extent have you found gratifying the two rather important victories in this film, his last shot at the glory of Emmys?
TG: Well, I loved that Joe Weisberg and Joel Fields won for writing. I mean, the story as it was told through six seasons of Americans was fantastic. I thought the final of the series was great, and it seemed like a deserved and deserved victory. Matthew Rhys is superb and has been from the beginning. The real tragedy is that Keri Russell and he work together on magic – an intriguing representation of on-screen marriage, and it's hard to conjure up happiness without feeling depressed by the other without winning. Especially since this last season could have been the best of Russell. Were victories enough for you or is there disappointment? And what do you know? We must talk about AtlantaDan. We do.
DF: It was essentially double Emmy last season identical Friday night lights did when Jason Katims and Kyle Chandler won, but heaven knows Connie Britton could have won, but not. Here, Russell has just found himself in an almost impossible category in which almost everyone wins, including the last sign of Foy's hand for The crown, would have been deserved. When it comes to Atlanta, it is hard to say how disappointed I am to see that the broadcast has been totally interrupted, because it seems that I am being insulted The wonderful Mrs Maisel and I love this show and I love Amy Sherman-Palladino and their accomplishments are also of paramount importance. But damn it, oh, man – Hiro Murai should have won for leading the "Teddy Perkins" episode, and that's just the bare minimum.
TG: Good, Wonderful Mrs Maisel is a beautiful show – and now a behemoth for Amazon – but I thought Rachel Brosnahan was the only real lock. And that Atlanta was going to get the best comedy, best actor for Glover and best achievement for Murai. Maybe more? Despite the song and dance at the beginning of the broadcast and all the backgrounds on diversity, I think it's hard to ignore. Wonderful Ms. Maisel is the quintessence of the TV Academy type broadcast and Atlanta is not.
DF: I think that probably a lot of people have misunderstood the "We have solved it!" musical number as being sincere, which was very clearly not. The main interest of the show was how far back-skating is hollow and how inclusive the gains can be superficial, then the show and the awards went and emphasized this point . I think Wonderful Mrs Maisel seems quite adventurous if you stick to the standard of, say, the long term of Modern family like a Juggernaut Emmy, but very little seems adventurous if you compare it to Atlanta. I think Barry was probably worthy of both victories, and I think Brosnahan and Alex Borstein deserved theirs. Give Sherman-Palladino his writing win and give Atlanta win for the staging and comedy series and then you get three great shows that feel sufficiently honored, not to go all "Everyone gets a trophy" on things. You are more excited about The iron Throne that I am these days. I always applaud the magnitude and ambition of the show, while thinking that in terms of execution, there were many superior alternatives for the gratitude. You are quite satisfied with The iron Throne winning drama series?
TG: Not at all. Basically, my thought is that Americans should have won, hands down, and if she did not win then the price should have gone to Counterpart on Starz, but of course, this show was not even nominated when it was, in my opinion, the second best drama this year. I mean, if Americans will lose, better lose to The iron Throne – who now has three wins and a very good season – than any other category in the category. I remain distraught Americans losing.
DF: At least Americans will always have his TCA Awards! And when was the last time the winner of a major Emmy thanking TV critics? Hi Joe and Joel! Probably The iron Throne was a more appropriate winner Emmy, because although it's clearly a show about the cost of power and all sorts of eternally relevant virtues, it's not a show on something explicitly contemporary. The same is true of Wonderful Mrs Maisel, a show about feminism conceived safely relative to the period, as opposed to the conflicting commentary of one Atlanta. This seems relevant for a night when almost no one wants to use the stage as a political pulpit. Tim, did you find Trump's lack of smearing as a welcome escape or a dishonest abdication of an important platform?
TG: I saw it as another lost opportunity and I was surprised and disappointed by his lack of presence. This country is in a culture war. There is no way around this truth. And yes, Trump supporters and Republicans in general would have decried Liberal Hollywood for blending politics with pop culture, but that is precisely the opportunity and the need. It should be "no, you can not take advantage of our entertainment talents without hearing our constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression and a burning opinion about what we want to talk about." It's the opportunity that has been lost. People will always lie and say, "I will never watch your show / movie / etc." but then almost never save that. And even if they do, good riddance. Celebrities should not be afraid of losing their fans or harming their "brand" by speaking up. The fact that no one directly mentioned Trump or assaulted his leaders is disappointing (oh, of course, put John McCain in the In Memoriam section, but no one says a word about the shameful way Trump and the administration dealt with his death). That no one mentioned Brett Kavanaugh is really surprising. The fact that the #MeToo message was not continually being beaten was also unfortunate. This is not the time to shut up. Politics in your pop culture is the benefit Hollywood needs for change.
DF: It was felt that there was some fear because of #MeToo, Hollywood has no or no moral highlight, rather than dealing with #MeToo like a sign of rotting in the industry and recognizing that the entertainment industry is in the process of change and this can be a change that is reverberating to every corner of society. On Monday night, we had nothing more involved or more engaging than Rachel Brosnahan to remind people to vote. That's a start, I guess? As we finish this complaint of Emmy Night, is there any chance that we can simply agree that The iron Throne and Veep will we be gleaming locks to win the best dramas and comedies next year for their respective seasons and that, therefore, we can simply begin to consider the prognosis for 2020 (at multiple levels) right now?
TG: In fact, I'm going to predict here, a year before that happens, that any of these emissions will win. I think there will be real candidates for the dramas – especially if the categories are 10 – and three wins for The iron Throne Something else will win. Same thing for comedy – even though right now it's hard to see the TV Academy falling in love with Wonderful Ms. Maisel, so maybe that's the favorite of luck.
[ad_2]
Source link
