Emmy Nominations 2007

SoSueMe

Lead Actress in a Drama Series
Patricia Arquette
Minnie Driver
Edie Falco
Sally Field
Mariska Hargitay
Kyra Sedgwick

Lead Actor in a Drama Series
James Gandolfini
Hugh Laurie
Denis Leary
James Spader
Kiefer Sutherland

Supporting Actress in a Drama Series
Rachel Griffith
Katherine Heigl
Chandra Wilson
Sandra Oh
Aida Turturro
Lorraine Bracco

Supporting Actor in a Drama Series
William Shatner
Masi Oka
T.R. Knight
Michael Emerson
Terry O'Quinn
Michael Imperioli

Outstanding Drama Series
Boston Legal
Grey's Anatomy
Heroes
House
The Sopranos

Outstanding Comedy Series
Entourage
The Office
30 Rock
Two and a Half Men
Ugly Betty

Outstanding Reality Series
The Amazing Race
American Idol
Dancing with the Stars
Project Runway
Top Chef

Lead Actress in a Comedy Series
America Ferrera (Ugly Betty)
Tina Fey (30 Rock)
Felicity Huffman (Desperate Housewives)
Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Old Christine)
Mary-Louise Parker (Weeds)

Lead Actor in a Comedy Series
Alec Baldwin (30 Rock)
Steve carell (The Office)
Ricky Gervais (Extras)
Tony Shalhoub (Monk)
Charlie Sheen (Two and a Half Men)

Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series
Jaime Pressly
Jenna Fischer
Holland Taylor
Conchata Ferrell
Vanessa Williams
Elizabeth Perkins

Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series
Kevin Dillon
Jeremy Piven
Jon Cryer
Neil Patrick Harris
Rainn Wilson

gazzer

Im very surprised that Becki Newton and Michael Urie did not get nominated for Ugly Betty. I thought they would have been dead certs for it.

ixoy

So "Grey's Anatomy"'s third season got nominated but nothing for "The Wire?" Once again, the Emmy nominations are tiresome - both in their predictability and their reluctance to introduce much change into the mix.

tvnutz

ixoy wrote:

So "Grey's Anatomy"'s third season got nominated but nothing for "The Wire?" Once again, the Emmy nominations are tiresome - both in their predictability and their reluctance to introduce much change into the mix.

Exactly, it is predictable at this stage, 4 seasons of quality tv from the Wire but nothing from these types of award shows. I can't stand Boston Legal and Grey's Anatomy??? It is watchable but nothing amazing.

I also hate how a show gets nominated for a string of awards just because it is its last season. The second half of the Sopranos season 6 was nothing special, nor was the season 6 eps aired last year. With the exception of a few great episodes it doesn't deserve it. Kind of like Lord of the Rings ROTK getting all the Oscars because it was the last one when the other two were actually better.

Mainstay

I am disappointed that neither Michael C Hall from Dexter or Gerald McRaney from Deadwood got nominated.

Michael C Hall made Dexter what it is.


But then again Deadwood never really got the respect it deserved

Mr.Nice Guy

Lost gets sh*t on again I see. Boston Legal? Zzzzz.

Rjd2

ixoy wrote:

So "Grey's Anatomy"'s third season got nominated but nothing for "The Wire?" Once again, the Emmy nominations are tiresome - both in their predictability and their reluctance to introduce much change into the mix.

Agreed some fine articles here

The Final Cut
Get With the Program!
Once again, the whacked Emmys voting system will mean snubs for ''The Wire'' and other excellent series -- but here's one way to fix that...

BRIEFLY NOTED Emmy voters typically favor Boston Legal's pantless antics (right) over the high-quality and often unwatched drama The Wire (left)
The Wire: Paul Schiraldi; Boston Legal: Michael Ansell

By Mark Harris Mark Harris
Mark Harris is a writer and former executive editor of EWIf the Oscar contenders for Best Picture were chosen by people who watched 10-minute clips of a bunch of movies and then completed their ballots, would you take them seriously? Would anyone? Of course not. Yet this process — or its equivalent — is how the Emmy nominees are determined. Why, pointy-winged Emmy goddess, why?

Before we gut-punch the Emmys, let's give them credit: For decades, they have, at their best, helped extend the lives of series from Hill Street Blues to Arrested Development. And their complex nomination process — which combines a popular vote with volunteer judging panels — is intended to give high-quality, low-profile shows a shot at recognition. What still needs improvement is the voters themselves. Last year, in a display of sloth and dishonesty, they nominated Ellen Burstyn for a performance (in HBO's Mrs. Harris) that lasted literally 14 seconds. The rules now stipulate that an actor must appear on screen for longer than the duration of a burp, which I suppose is an indirect way of saying, ''You actually have to WATCH the shows, not just check off famous names, you dozy bastards.''

I'm writing this column before the Emmy nominations have been announced, but according to an early report revealing the semifinalists, they're going to showcase a far greater embarrassment: The Wire was out of the running for best drama series, despite a season that many TV critics ranked among the medium's great dramatic achievements. The Wire was doomed because voters had already decided that it wasn't even one of the year's 10 best dramas. The shows that did make that list include 24, for a season so implausible that even Chloe couldn't keep a straight face, and Boston Legal. That's right: Presented with a staggeringly powerful piece of work that wove politics, drugs, race, violence, and poverty into a crushing examination of the way inner-city public schools betray kids, the Emmy membership decided it just wasn't quite as incisive as William Shatner yelling, ''Denny Crane!''

I'll concede that awards are a semi-silly thing to get excited about (unless you win one), but if you're giving them, you might as well do it right. (Kudos to TheEnvelope.com's Tom O'Neil for being the first to point out how they do it wrong.) Some might argue the omission of The Wire is merely a matter of taste; let's file that under Sounds True But Isn't. The Wire was not excluded because voters weighed it against the competition. Most of them probably didn't even watch it.

And there lies the system's biggest failing. The top 10 drama series were chosen by popular vote, which favors shows with big audiences and/or network backing. That's why, in addition to The Wire, The Shield and Battlestar Galactica missed the cut. And the 10 were narrowed down to five by factoring in the ballots of judges who hunkered down to watch just one episode of each series in what Jack Bauer would call one very long day. (When I say ''judges,'' feel free to substitute either ''committed, intelligent industry veterans'' or ''ax-grinding rageaholics whose last major gig was a guest shot on Mannix,'' depending on your level of cynicism.)

The one-show rule favors series that can submit episodes with largely self-contained plots (House, Boston Legal, and the surprise entry Dexter were all in contention) and shows that are already familiar from years of Emmy voting (24 and The Sopranos). New series whose pleasures reside in the cumulative intricacy of their mythology (Heroes) or nuanced character development (Friday Night Lights) offered up their pilots in the hope that judges weren't too bewildered by them. But for the most part, programs with small, impassioned followings and dense backstories are at a huge disadvantage. In an era when most good dramas are at least somewhat serialized, is this any way to treat good TV?

The same rule also rewards flamboyant scenery-chewing over real acting: Each performer can submit only one show, a limitation that favors Very Special Episodes (you cry, you suffer, you battle alcoholism) over careful, character-building work during the course of a season. Last summer, this dopey rule essentially kept James Gandolfini and Edie Falco from nominations.

Nobody can accuse Emmy administrators of not attempting to fix the system. (They tried last year, too, but their only accomplishment was yielding the weirdest crop of nominees in recent memory.) Obviously, you can't ask hundreds of people to watch every episode of every show. So here's a proposal: Let the nominators do their best (and worst) — but create a separate panel of smart TV professionals (and, yes, maybe even critics and bloggers) with the power to add one or two nominees per category if they feel a worthy show or actor has been excluded. That would create a more exciting competition, and a fairer one than this year's, in which — as will become clear on July 19 — some of the season's best work never even stood a chance.

How would you change the Emmy nomination system? Have you had it with scene-stealers, too? And which of your favorite shows do you fear will get the snub this year? Post your own comments below.


Posted Jul 17, 2007 | Order Article Reprints

How Emmy Blew It Again
Predictably, today's nominations say more about what's wrong with the system -- a bias toward the familiar -- than what's right with the outcome -- noms for a few deserving first-timers. Here's one quick fix for the most serious oversight

EMMY'S CROSSED 'WIRE' Williams' portrayal as Omar is just one of several performances on The Wire that was unfairly overlooked
The Wire: Paul Schiraldi

All AboutThe Wire By Mark Harris Mark Harris
Mark Harris is a writer and former executive editor of EWCreeeeeeaaaak! This year's Emmy nominations, as predicted and dreaded, turned out to be, in many ways, the exact display of boobishness and ignorance that many of us had feared. Over 140 programs were nominated — including, for the record, According To Jim, CSI: NY and the telecast of the Golden Globes — and yet, not a single nomination for The Wire in any category. Not one. I mean, seriously — cancel the telecast, go home, and hang your freaking heads in shame.

The Emmy voters are like your great-grandmother; news travels slowly to them, and you have to say anything very loudly to make sure it gets through. Thus, word of Friday Night Lights, of the spectacular work of Michael Chiklis, CCH Pounder, and Walton Goggins in The Shield, and of the entire, stunning cast of The Wire (to mention just three of the deserving: Michael K. Williams as Omar, Aidan Gillen as Tommy Carcetti, and Andre Royo as Bubbles) did not penetrate the ear trumpets of the actors' branch this year. The Emmy voters are also like your 2-year-old: Once they learn something, they like to say it over and over and over and over and over and over and...so it's no surprise that this year's nominees include Monk's Tony Shalhoub (his fifth), Law & Order: SVU's Mariska Hargitay (her fourth straight), Kiefer ''I don't have time to explain it to you, just cut the wire!'' Sutherland (six in a row) and, of course, William Shatner, making it four in a row as Denny Crane! If not for the minor technicality of the show not being on any more, I'm sure they would have nominated Martin Sheen for The West Wing again too.

Given those handicaps, two cheers for what the Emmys did right: Some major and deserving love for 30 Rock (ten nominations), The Office (nine, including first nominations for Rainn Wilson and Jenna Fischer), and a set of first-timers that includes Entourage's Kevin Dillon, Ugly Betty's Vanessa Williams, and The Riches' Minnie Driver, not to mention 15 nominations for The Sopranos. And while I'm cheering, the nominations for four openly gay performers — Neil Patrick Harris, T.R. Knight, Ian McKellen and Ellen DeGeneres — must represent some kind of a record, so now can we call a halt to quotes from closeted publicists, agents and managers about how coming out destroys your career?

But the Emmys still have a huge problem to fix: Their valiant attempt at a democratic voting system gives too many people with too little taste too much of a say in the outcome. Volunteer judging panels watching one episode of an actor's performance is a bad enough system, but the fact that their votes are then weighed down by the ballots of thousands of voters who may never have even watched the shows at all is shoddy. Did I mention The Wire earlier? Being grim and complicated and urban and irreducible to one episode (and, not incidentally, largely about poor black people), The Wire's just not really Emmy's cup of tea. The thing is, ignoring a show like this doesn't hurt the reputation of the series, just of the prizegivers. There is, however, a way to rectify it. The Emmys have a Governor's Award, which can be given at its discretion for an outstanding current achievement. Handing it to The Wire this year would not only be richly deserved; it would serve as an acknowledgment that the Emmy Awards can still recognize excellence, even when their own nominators can't.

Tim Goodman on the Emmy nominations -- better, but what about 'The Wire'?
Tim Goodman

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Printable Version Email This Article del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Reddit Slashdot
Fark
Newsvine
Google Bookmarks
Georgia (default)
Verdana
Times New Roman
Arial

Emmy Nominations
Emmy nominations -- better, but what about 'The Wire'?

Complete list


(07-19) 13:52 PDT -- It's best to examine the Emmys calmly, since the normal reaction to nominations from the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences is to have your head blow into tiny fragments. Given that, the best that can be said about nominations for the 59th Primetime Emmy Awards, announced Thursday, is that they are a vast improvement over the embarrassing disaster of last year.

To take it one step further, embracing positivity, some of the tinkering in the way the nominations are made has resulted in an overall improvement in quality and, according to the folks at the Emmys, a 60 percent increase in "fresh faces and shows" over last year.

Better? Sure. Fixed? Not quite.

The most glaring example of how woefully unresponsive the nomination process still is to the entirety of television (the emphasis this year seems to be on what was popular as opposed to what was brilliant, though the two strands did meet fortuitously on some occasions) is the omission of the best show on television. If you don't nominate the best show on television, then there's a gigantic problem that needs to be addressed -- right after the Emmy voters stop congratulating themselves on how much the process has improved thanks to their tireless efforts and desire not to be torched with embarrassment as they were last year.

"The Wire," on HBO, is the best series on television, period, and though it's wonderful that the Emmys have sent "The Sopranos" into the sunset with 15 well-deserved nominations, it does not for a minute excuse the egregious oversight of "The Wire."

But if you're in the mood to forgive or, barring that, to accept the soul-crushing idea that it's just not going to happen for "The Wire," having never been nominated in four seasons, then maybe we can stick with our slightly more upbeat theme this year and casually note, along the way, several other oversights.

Before dissecting the major categories, a few general observations.

It's good that last year's best drama winner, "24," wasn't even nominated this year. The argument on of "24" -- at least on this end -- was always that it was a guilty pleasure and no more, and winning awards for its rampant stupidity was a disservice to television. Nice to see that rectified, though nominating Kiefer Sutherland for best actor was, let's not kid ourselves, just asinine.

To have "Lost" get virtually snubbed this year is also mystifying, since it overcame a slow start to finish with an incredible season. Of course, this is as good a place as any to note that the reason the Emmys remain flawed is that Emmy voters base their decisions on one episode only, then partake in a popular vote that elevates the top 10 shows in a selected category. Those top 10 shows are winnowed into the five nomination slots by additional votes, weighted 50-50 on behalf of the voting base and a "blue-ribbon" panel of apparently more dedicated and enthusiastic members.

The idea was to avoid unforgivable and beyond-shameful lapses, such as last year's nomination of Ellen Burstyn in "Mrs. Harris" even though she was onscreen for all of 14 seconds. Yes, seconds. That proved conclusively that Emmy voters weren't watching, just ticking off familiar names. The "blue ribbon" panel was also supposed to correct the situation of mythology-heavy serials, like "Lost," that are at a disadvantage in the one-episode-entry system. Ironically, "Lost" wasn't nominated in this improved year.

On to the major categories to survey the good, the snubbed and the inexcusable.

Drama series: "Boston Legal" (ABC), "Grey's Anatomy" (ABC), "Heroes" (NBC), "House" (Fox) and "The Sopranos" (HBO). This is, by far, the category with the most wrongs. First, it showcases how the Emmy voters can't make up their minds on whether nominees should be based on popularity or quality. That "Boston Legal" and "Grey's Anatomy" were even considered is a joke. Entertaining fluff, sure. But not Emmy worthy. Missing from this category are "The Wire," "Deadwood" (both on HBO), "Dexter" (Showtime), "Rescue Me" and "The Shield" (both on FX) and "Battlestar Galactica" (Sci-Fi). Now it's pretty clear here that Emmy voters snubbed cable and leaned on the networks. But even then, why not put something like "Lost" or "Friday Night Lights" in there instead of "Boston Legal"?

Comedy series: "Entourage," (HBO), "The Office" and "30 Rock" (NBC), "Two and a Half Men" (CBS) and "Ugly Betty" (ABC). A strong argument can be made that "Extras" (HBO) and "Weeds" (Showtime) are glaring oversights -- and they are -- but there's less to quibble with here. This is a strong category, and the inclusion of "30 Rock" shows some foresight.

Lead actor in a drama series: James Spader, "Boston Legal"; Hugh Laurie, "House" (Fox); Denis Leary, "Rescue Me" (FX); James Gandolfini, "The Sopranos"; and Kiefer Sutherland, "24" (Fox). Spader and Sutherland are the real errors here. Even without "The Wire," you've got Ian McShane from "Deadwood," Michael C. Hall from "Dexter," Eddie Izzard from "The Riches" and Michael Chiklis from "The Shield" (both FX) and Jonathan Rhys Meyers from "The Tudors" (Showtime). Those are just the obvious ones. An argument could be made for Matthew Fox on "Lost" and Matthew Perry on "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" (NBC).

Lead actress in a drama series: Sally Field, "Brothers & Sisters" (ABC); Kyra Sedgwick, "The Closer" (TNT); Mariska Hargitay, "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" (NBC); Patricia Arquette, "Medium" (NBC); Minnie Driver, "The Riches"; and Edie Falco, "The Sopranos." There were less obvious slights here, in what shaped up to be relatively fair category.

Lead actor in a comedy series: Ricky Gervais, "Extras" (HBO); Tony Shalhoub, "Monk" (USA); Steve Carell, "The Office"; Alec Baldwin, "30 Rock"; and Charlie Sheen, "Two and a Half Men." Again, a mostly fair selection. Zach Braff, "Scrubs" (NBC), Jason Lee, "My Name Is Earl" (NBC) and even Josh Radnor, "How I Met Your Mother" (CBS), could have made this list, but overall there are no complaints here.

Lead actress in a comedy series: Felicity Huffman, "Desperate Housewives" (ABC); Julia Louis-Dreyfus, "The New Adventures of Old Christine" (CBS); Tina Fey, "30 Rock"; America Ferrera, "Ugly Betty" (ABC); and Mary-Louise Parker, "Weeds." Do you sense a trend here? It's as if the Emmy voting process almost works. Outside of Sarah Silverman, whose audacious star turn in her Comedy Central series was snubbed, there's very little to raise the hackles here. This is a very strong category, where in years past it was dismal.

Supporting actor in a drama series: William Shatner, "Boston Legal"; T.R. Knight, "Grey's Anatomy"; Masi Oka, "Heroes"; Michael Emerson, "Lost"; Terry O'Quinn, "Lost"; and Michael Imperioli, "The Sopranos." Perhaps this is a good time to exhale. It's certainly the perfect time to suggest that this is proof that the Emmys still misses, "blue ribbon" panel or not. Nobody from "The Wire," nobody from "Deadwood," nobody from "The Shield" or "Rescue Me" or "Battlestar Galactica" etc. etc. etc.

Now, if we're willing, even for argument's sake, to allow that cable comedies are often so far under the radar that their exclusion is understandable, while powerhouse cable dramas absolutely can't be ignored, then you have to wonder why this whole category isn't littered with cable entries. Sad, really, because the best work is being done there. Shatner and Knight? It just doesn't make sense.

Supporting actress in a drama series: Rachel Griffiths, "Brothers & Sisters"; Katherine Heigl, Chandra Wilson and Sandra Oh, all from "Grey's Anatomy"; and Aida Turturro and Lorraine Bracco from "The Sopranos." Though this is entirely too much attention for "Grey's Anatomy," just so you don't think there's a knee-jerk cable bias here, why include Bracco? She was barely in "The Sopranos." A better argument could be made for CCH Pounder on "The Shield," Katee Sackhoff on "Battlestar Galactica" or Callie Thorne or Andrea Roth from "Rescue Me." Way too many network actresses here.

Supporting actor in a comedy series: Kevin Dillon and Jeremy Piven, "Entourage"; Neil Patrick Harris, "How I Met Your Mother"; Rainn Wilson, "The Office"; and Jon Cryer, "Two and a Half Men." A righting of the ship here, though once again the snub of John C. McGinley from "Scrubs" makes no sense at all and one day Terry Crews from "Everybody Hates Chris" will need to get his due.

Supporting actress in a comedy series: Jaime Pressly, "My Name Is Earl"; Jenna Fischer, "The Office"; Holland Taylor and Conchata Ferrell from "Two and a Half Men"; Vanessa Williams, "Ugly Betty"; and Elizabeth Perkins, "Weeds." They managed to cram six in this category and still forget Tichina Arnold from "Everybody Hates Chris." Otherwise, a pretty good lineup.

Overall, this is a significant improvement in the nominating for the Emmys (which will air at 8 p.m. Sept. 16 on Fox), and maybe that's all we should ever hope for from this bunch. It's just disheartening that among the standard oversights is the unacceptable omission of the towering artistic achievement that is "The Wire."

E-mail Tim Goodman at tgoodman@sfchronicle.com.

chalkitdown1

The Emmy's being rubbish aside, I'm glad both Entourage and Weeds got acting noms. Thoroughly deserved. They won't win, though. Well.......Piven might, Dillon won't. Weeds doesn't have a hope in hell, though. It'll go to DesperateUglyAnatomy, yet again.

The (mostly) lack of cable show noms and the absolutely bewildering repeated Boston Legal and Grey's Anatomy nominations in light of The Wires(amoungst others) snubbing for the 4th year in a row is inexcusable, though.

They really need to get their sh*t together.

tvnutz

Some great articles about the Wire there. Emmys are a joke with that system of nomination.

ghostdancer

The Wire didn't deserve it for it's 4th season, it was pretty bad compared to the 1st and 3rd seasons.

The Shield on the other hand had possibly it's best season ever, and not one nomination. shocking.

ixoy

ghostdancer wrote:

The Wire didn't deserve it for it's 4th season, it was pretty bad compared to the 1st and 3rd seasons.

:eek: :eek: Blasphemy! A blistering fourth season with some of the most touching moments I've seen on TV in my life. Highest scoring season of any show on meta-critic!!
And even if you didn't like it as much as others, can you honestly say 'Boston Legal' or 'Grey's Anatomy' was more deserving?!

The Shield on the other hand had possibly it's best season ever, and not one nomination. shocking.

Well if '24' can get nominated, a show with lots of brutality and action, 'The Shield' should certainly as its better than '24' in every single way - stories, characters, acting, direction.

ghostdancer

re: boston legal + grey's anatomy, of course not, it just goes to show the incompetence of the average tv viewer, i'm suprised lost didn't sweep the board. yeah, The Wire is far better than those, but i think it really deserved awards for the 2 seasons i mentioned rather than the 4th, which didn't seem to know what it was trying to achieve.

yeah, The Shield is by far better than 24, unfortunately middle america prefers it's nice glitzy superstar shows as opposed to anything with great dialogue, great acting, and great plots, á la The Wire and The Shield.

godtabh

ghostdancer wrote:

The Wire didn't deserve it for it's 4th season, it was pretty bad compared to the 1st and 3rd seasons.

The Shield on the other hand had possibly it's best season ever, and not one nomination. shocking.

I've seen you say this many times (or at least I think its you) and I just dont get it.

Season was on par with season 1 and to me they were the best in it (followed by 3 then 2).

Everything about it was class.

Its a pity about no nominations but I wonder do they give a flying fcuk about it?

ghostdancer wrote:

The Wire is far better than those, but i think it really deserved awards for the 2 seasons i mentioned rather than the 4th, which didn't seem to know what it was trying to achieve.

Seriously are you watching the same Wire as every one else?

It just sounds to me is that you just didnt understand what was going on.

tvnutz

The 4th season of the Wire was the best IMO. The kids storyline was amazing and even more so when you realise this is what life is like for a lot of children in Baltimore. Some great stuff with Omar and Marlo. Best season I reckon. More worthy thatn any of those shows on the list.

Basq

Just after seeing the nods now... not much to say except they're probably the most generic obvious Emmy nominations yet.

Same actors gets nominated ever year, as does the same comedies, dramas etc. At least 'Desperate Housewives' isn't up for best comedy this year!

zuutroy

Piven has to win....legend

pickarooney

best supporting actor (comedy) is a toughie. 3 good noms there. Mostly cack otherwise. Katherine Heigl? What strength crack would you need to be on to find her a good actress...

aequinoctium

i'm in between the sopranos and house