Laying the Odds for This Years Emmys: Part 2: Lead Actor and Actress in a Drama

OUTSTANDING ACTOR IN A DRAMA

Jason Bateman, Ozark: 4-1. For Playing: Money Launderer Extraordinaire Martin Byrde. Pro: Already renowned for his superb comic work, Bateman’s portrayal of the fast-talking, ultra-efficient Marty is one of the hidden gems on any television server. His SAG award earlier this year shows that his fellow actors clearly appreciate his skill. Con: Bateman’s skills doesn’t change the fact that he’s just playing yet another sleazy antihero. The Emmys may be getting tired of honoring the type

Sterling Brown, This Is Us: 6-1. For Playing: Model Husband/ Father/ Son/ Councilman Randall Pearson. Pro: We already knew Brown’s work as Randall created one of the more endearing characters on TV. But in Season 3, we got to see a certain measure of his selfish streak – particularly in his marriage – and it was amazing how quickly he could make us turn on the man we’d spent two and a half season’s loving. That’s remarkable. Con: He’s already won twice before, and the Emmy hasn’t had back to back winners in this category since Bryan Cranston. They may want to honor a new face.

Kit Harington, Game of Thrones: 11-2. For Playing: Night Watchman Jon Snow. Pro: Of all the morally gray characters on this series, Harington may have ended up being the most heroic of the group. The fact that he managed to be loyal to his queen even while killing her – and paid the price – may have been the only universal positive of the finale. Con: For all the series triumphs in the past, they’ve never done particularly well in the acting categories. And if Harrington couldn’t win for staging the most famous resurrection in history, he might not be able to win for the controversial end.

Bob Odenkirk, Better Call Saul: 9-2. For Playing: Lawyer/Con Artist: Jimmy McGill. Pro: Odenkirk is due. Like beyond due. Over the past four seasons, Jimmy has managed to nearly equal Cranston’s work on the parent series. And in this season, particularly in the finale where Jimmy pulled his greatest con, and embraced his true destiny, Odenkirk made us really mourn for the man that we had lost. He deserves it. Con: Odenkirk has never had the best of luck in this category, even though its really hard to argue with the winners.

Billy Porter, Pose : 39-10. For Playing: Ballroom Impressario Pray Tell. Pro: The heart and soul of one of the best collaborations between FX and Ryan Murphy, Porter’s performance revealed both a brilliant showman and a far more haunted human being. He deserves to get one step closer to an EGOT. Con: History. Emmys haven’t honored a lot of African American actors. Or a lot of openly gay ones. Can the conservative Academy honor both in the same award?

Milo Ventimiglia, This is Us: 7-1. For Playing: Legendary Father Jack Pearson. Pro: The first two seasons, Ventimiglia portrayed Jack as someone who was a borderline saint. This year, as he was got a look at his service in Vietnam – and the brother he came to protect and then gave up on – we saw a much darker side of him, one that caused his loving family in the present to doubt him. That deserves recognition. Con: For better or worse, Ventimiglia has been overshadowed by the rest of the cast. If he couldn’t win when we found out he died, can he when we learn how he lived?

PREDICTION: This will be a tough one. Odenkirk deserves to triumph and probably will, but don’t rule out sentiment and justice giving the prize to Porter.

OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTRESS

Emilia Clarke, Game of Thrones: 6-1

For Playing: Danerys, the Mother of Dragon, and (as it turned out) the Mad Queen. Pro: Clarke had one of the most complicated arcs of any of the characters in this epic saga. Initially seeming to be the heroine of the piece, she ended up being a tragic villain. Considering everything her character went through, Emmys may want to honor. Con: When Clarke herself admitted in an interview she was upset with how her final arc went, you know the writers screwed up. For the Emmys to acknowledge her for it would seem a real slap in the face to the fans.

Jodie Comer, Killing Eve: 11-2

For playing: Villanelle, the assassin at the center of the series. Pro: Not since the early days of Michael C/ Hall’s work as Dexter has there been a more frightening portrayal of a psychopath. As much credit as Sandra Oh has gotten, Comer is really the guts of the series. Con: Two words: Sandra Oh. So much of the credit and trophies have been handed to her, it’s going to be easy for them to ignore her

Viola Davis, How To Get Away With Murder: 7-1

For playing: Annalyse Keating, the razor sharp attorney. Pro: Davis has become a force of nature ever since this series went on the air, and even at its most unbelievable, she keeps you watching. Con: Not many people are watching this series any more, and even the most devoted fans think its run out of gas. This nomination may be another example of an Emmy hangover than any others in the category.

Laura Linney, Ozark: 6-1

For playing: Wendy Byrde, the scheming but struggling wife and mother of the Byrde clan. Pro:  Linney is one of the greatest actresses of our generation in just about any medium she works in, and the role of Wendy – a woman trying her damnedest to keep a level of normalcy in a crisis – is one of her greatest roles in the medium. Con: I love her work, but have enough Emmy voters really credit her understated work in a category of showier performances?

Mandy Moore, This is Us: 13-2

For Playing: Rebecca Pearson, the matriarch of the Pearson clan.  Pro: She’s long been due recognition for her work on this series, as the only character in every timeline, she has the greatest range. And her work in the episode ‘The Waiting Room’ – as she tried to stay calm as her family was imploding – was magnificent. Con: Playing a fundamentally good person doesn’t seem to be what it takes to win an Emmy any more.

Sandra Oh, Killing Eve: 5-1

For playing: Eve, the MI-6 worker drawn into a psychosexual relationship with the assassin she’s chasing. Pro: Well, she’s won practically every trophy between her and the Emmys. Many people think she should’ve won for Grey’s Anatomy, never mind last year. And an Asian actress has never won an Emmy. It would take a Villanelle to keep her from the podium. Con: Some people thought the second season was weaker than the first, but since people thought she should’ve won last year, that’s probably not much of a handicap.

Robin Wright, House of Cards: 13-2

For Playing: President Claire Underwood. Pro: It says a lot for the caliber of the opposition in this category that Wright never managed to win before. Considering this is her last chance, people may think she’s due. Con: The Kevin Spacey scandal brought a premature end to the series, which pretty much destroyed any future the series had, and caused the last year to collapse. Frankly, I’m amazed she got nominated at all.

PREDICTION: Oh my, this is the easiest one of the night. I’d like to see Moore or Linney triumph, but this is Sandra Oh’s to lose.