Like the rest of you I could nitpick these noms to death. Let’s just give one big YES!!! for Michael Emerson’s nomination for his work as ‘Ben’ in “Lost”.
and
Hugh Laurie Is Overdue.
Lastly - How in the name of all that is holy did 3 1/2 men get a nom for anything? Have they actually tried to watch this crap??? I don’t like the Old Christine show either, but that at least is debateable. Gah!
Hell, yes, he’s so overdue. 
Wasn’t he scheduled for something like three episodes originally?
(I’m keeping everything I can cross crossed for Hugh Laurie this year.)
Hugh Laurie Hugh Laurie Hugh Laurie.
Also, where’s the love for Robert Sean Leonard?
I am delighted to see Stanley Tucci and Oliver Platt nominated against each other for Guest Appearance, and it reminds me of their great 1998 farce The Impostors, in which they hammed it up so much that Tucci (the director) awarded the daily Jambon d’Or for the most outrageous performance. I want to see them wrestle for the Emmy on the stage at the award ceremonies. I want to see Platt sit on Tucci and Tucci reach up and poke his fingers in Platt’s eyes.
Then I want to see Alec Baldwin jump up and referee.
After ignoring it for all these years, I’ve recently started watching late night reruns. It’s not exactly earth shattering material, but it’s pretty funny, and better than 95% of the situation comedies produced in the last (horrible, horrible) decade or so. (King of Queens, I’m looking at you!)
The part that’s puzzling me is that Charlie Sheen gets a best actor nomination, and Jon Cryer only gets supporting actor, but in the actual show it’s pretty much 50/50. I guess that’s what movie fame will win you.
I’m very glad to see Bryan Cranston nominated for Breaking Bad. That show was amazing, and he was amazing in it. But it doesn’t seem like anybody’s seen it!
Apparently, it’s been renewed for a second season, and a full season at that. Hopefully, he wins, and the show will get the attention it deserves. Well, even the nom should help.
And for what it’s worth, IMHO, the Emmys are mostly boring and pointless. Primarily because they do the same things over and over. I mean, how am I supposed to be interested in watching Kelsey Grammer receive Best Actor in a Comedy Series for the eleventh time?
I wish they’d institute a rule where a person couldn’t win more than once for a character/category combination. For example, to use Kelsey Grammer’s Frasier character…If he had won for Supporting Actor in Cheers, he couldn’t have been nominated again. But he could have still have been nominated for Best Actor/Comedy in Frasier, and Guest Star/Comedy for his turn as Frasier on Wings. And he could be nominated again in any of those categories for a new character, or for playing Frasier in a new category. (Frasier John, M.D.?)
You’d have to allow consecutive-year nominations for people who didn’t win. But having James Spader up for his third Emmy for Best Actor/Drama for his role in Boston Legal has two negative effects–it means there is no space for someone new to be recognized, and it makes the whole exercise tedious for the viewer.
It might also have the positive effect (positive effect for the whole TV industry, I mean) of exposing viewers to new shows, and boosting viewership. A bunch of you have mentioned Battlestar Galactica. Maybe someone hasn’t checked out the show because they’re not particularly interested in science fiction. But if one of the actors had been nominated in a major category, they might have become more aware of the show, and maybe when seeing a clip, say “hey, that looks pretty good. I’ll try watching it.”
He definitely deserves one for that two-part finale.
I cannot fathom why The Wire never gets any nominations for acting. Pretty much anyone in the cast could be nominated and deserve it-- Dominic West, Michael K. Williams, Lance Reddick, Andre Royo, Isiah Whitlock, and Clarke Peters definitely. The directing was also outstanding. Maybe it’s the Emmys’ way of admitting that some shows are too edgy for them. There’s also a distinct lack of love for Battlestar Galactica, despite worthy performances by Mary McDonnell, Katee Sackhoff, and Tricia Helfer in a lackluster Outstanding Actress in a Drama Series nominee list this year (not to mention EJ Olmos and James Callis). Maybe Emmy doesn’t deal with genre programming either? In any case, these are glaring omissions that make me respect the Emmy Awards less.
On the up side, the nominations I applaud: the Lead Actor in a Drama Series is full of deserving nominees. Bryan Cranston for Breaking Bad, wow. That show was fantastic and it’s largely because of Cranston. But I’d be happy seeing anyone but James Spader get it.
I’m glad Damages got recognition, as it was excellent. Ditto Mad Men, also brilliant.
Glynn Turman was amazing in In Treatment and brought tears to my eyes (though Blair Underwood and Mia Wasikowska deserved one too, you can’t have everything).
Excellent point! I’ve never understood why the industry fails to see this as an opportunity to showcase a wide variety of programs rather than nominating the same things over and over year after year.
As for repeating nominees, I remember “back in the day” when actors like Bill Cosby, Alan Alda and I think John Laroquette (IIRC) would pull their names from consideration so other performers could be recognized. After all, they are playing the same character, once they are recognized for the performance it seems redundant to keep awarding someone for playing the same character, even if they are doing it well and it’s an interesting character.
I can see Spader doing this, if he keeps getting nominated. He seemed almost angry about his win last year.
My dream would be to see Hugh Laurie, Michael Emerson, and Neil Patrick Harris all win this year. It probably won’t happen, but if it did it would be legen—wait for it----
All would be worthy nominees.
McDonnell, however, should have won the Emmy by now. Her performance is compelling, chilling, realistic, awesome in every way. It’s the best character in the recent history of dramatic televsion, if not the ENTIRE history of dramatic television, being portrayed by about as good an actress as there is on TV.