The Emmys have never had the glamor of the Oscars.
Taking place in early September or late August, they essentially herald the advent of the new television season — a nearly obsolete concept today given year-round programming.
NBC has so little regard for Emmys that whenever it hosts the show, like this year, the network moves it into August so it doesn’t interfere with “Sunday Night Football.” This year it even shifted the ceremony to Monday so it could air a pre-season game and avoid a conflict with that ratings killer, the MTV’s Video Music Awards.
Although the Academy Awards still command the prestige, during the past decade, television has changed dramatically for the better. I would argue that many of Monday’s awards are more significant in terms of acting, writing and in some cases directing than those the Oscars hand out.
While I have always had a passion for film, I am awe-struck on what I’m seeing on television these days. The Emmys use the word “outstanding” in all 104 of its categories. And this year, every performance in the 12 major acting categories truly is. Given that most shows are done over eight to 22 episodes, allowing the characters to develop in ways that are impossible in a two-hour movie, it is even more impressive.
In contrast, a winning Oscar performance sometimes is about impact. Sir Anthony Hopkins won the 1992 Academy Award for his character Hannibal Lecter in “Silence Of The Lambs,” with a little more than 16 minutes of screen time. Dame Judi Dench’s best supporting actress performance in “Shakespeare in Love” was three scenes and about eight minutes. It’s not even the record. The shortest Oscar-winning performance: Beatrice Straight spent 5 minutes 40 seconds on screen in “Network.”
Don’t get me wrong, I adore all three performances. As a former movie snob, I once believed television had little to offer, and, for the most part, still think I was right back then. But I’ve come around 180 degrees since.
Undoubtedly, as many have observed, the TV landscape was irrevocably altered for the better in 1999 with David Chase’s magnificent adult mob soap opera, “The Sopranos,” on HBO. Recognition and change started slow at first, but now there is a flood of great shows on TV and Emmy nominations — and not just on pay channels like Showtime and Starz but basic cable’s FX and AMC, among others, and streaming services like Netflix.
But before we go overboard, let’s put a little perspective on the TV awards. The Emmys are not, as one recent headline suggested, the new Oscars. Even as cable, streaming services and major networks have raised the bar with some superb shows, the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences remains mired in a confusing awards system.
TV is still a medium that takes game shows, talent shows, reality shows and some fairly mind-numbing stuff seriously. There are 104 categories in the Emmys this year. On Aug. 16, there were 80 awards given out at the Creative Arts ceremony. Categories include Outstanding Art Direction for a Period Series, Miniseries or a Movie and Outstanding Hairstyling for a Single Camera Series.
The film Academy gives out its own technical awards before its main ceremony, but the winners of those are given certificates of merit — not Oscar statuettes. So it seems a bit weird that if AMC’s “Breaking Bad” — a show Vince Gilligan created, writes and directs — is named best drama at the Emmys on Monday night, Gilligan will receive the same statuette as last week’s winner of Outstanding Art Direction For Variety, Nonfiction, Reality or Reality-Competition Program (which was, ironically, “The Oscars”).
It’s a bit like those kids’ sports teams where everybody gets a trophy.
The Emmys will give out 24 awards during the prime time show Monday, half of which are in acting categories. The 80 already awarded will be referenced during the show and, of course, be part of the overall total wins that networks and series will brag about later on.
(For those counting: HBO leads with 15, followed by NBC (10) and PBS (eight). “Saturday Night Live” got five but likely won’t win the one it’s up for Monday. “Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey” has four but isn’t up for anything Monday. “True Detective,” “Game of Thrones” and “Sherlock: His Last Vow” also have four. “Orange Is the New Black” hasthree.)
Occasionally, the Oscars stir up some flap over whether an actor should be in the best or supporting category, but Emmys’ machinations are far crazier. For instance, FX’s “American Horror Story” has mostly the same cast each year with the actors playing what might be described as reincarnated versions of the same characters. Though the names and settings change, the basic dynamic of the show is much the same. I would call it a drama series, but “American Horror Story” — along with its actors, writers and directors — competes in the best miniseries category.
FX’s “Fargo” — which will, like “American Horror Story,” be back next year but supposedly with a new cast — is also considered a miniseries. HBO’s “True Detective” will also return next year with an entirely new cast and a new setting. So it’s a miniseries, right? No. It’s competing as a drama against favorite “Breaking Bad.”
If the HBO show had been in the miniseries category, it might have been the favorite instead of “Fargo.” In my book, it would and should.
There are no satisfactory explanations as to why this happens. If you read the definitions of each category — too long to recap — “True Detective” fits both. As it turns out, “True Detective” is in the drama category, essentially, because of the phrasing on its credits. This type of thing only makes the Emmys look foolish. While this shouldn’t tarnish the award, somehow it does.
The television landscape is different today than 15 years ago when “The Sopranos” arrived. (Should we even call it television anymore?) Yet, the TV Academy seems content to simply add categories instead of rethinking what it’s doing.
I’m not here to solve the problem. Once, TV was relegated to being the boob tube, but now it’s arguably the most important performing art medium in the country. Theater continues to struggle, and movies fall into two categories: all-too similar blockbusters and struggling indies. Some small films are wonderful, gleaming short stories, but there are fewer places to see them these days and less investors to make them.
Now, many of the great cable series are like novels — expansive, with characters and stories developing as they would in a work by Dickens, the master of the serial. Once, people waited anxious to find out what happened next with “Oliver Twist” or “Nicholas Nickleby” and were able to read a new chapter while in a café or at home. Today, fans anywhere with a cellphone or a tablet can find out what dire predicament Carrie Mathison is in on Showtime’s “Homeland” or binge-watch Francis Underwood’s sinister political dealings in Netflix’s “House of Cards.”
Whatever problems the Emmys have, it doesn’t diminish the outstanding work we’ve seen on television this year. Just look at the heavyweights in the best drama series: Bryan Cranston on “Breaking Bad;” Jeff Daniels on “The Newsroom;” Jon Hamm on “Mad Men;” Woody Harrelson on “True Detective;” reigning Oscar-winner Matthew McConaughey on “True Detective” and two-time Oscar-winner Kevin Spacey on “House of Cards.”
If I could, I would add brilliant performances by Demian Bichir in “The Bridge;” Joel Kinnaman on “The Killing;” Matthew Rhys on “The Americans;” Michael Sheen on “Masters of Sex” and James Spader on “The Blacklist.” They all should have been on the list. When someone isn’t nominated, pundits like to call it a snub, but the truth is that television has an embarrassment of riches. It’s too bad that the Emmy program, with its bewildering categories, is not part of it.
