What The Emmys Are Doing This Year To Try And Appease The Critics Is The Dumbest Thing They Could Do (And Not Just Because It's Already Backfired)

 

I've said this at least a dozen times in the last few years but I'm going to say it again. Awards shows: stop trying to please reviewers of your ceremonies.

Never in my lifetime, never, ever, has any awards show involving films, TV, plays anything, gotten any response from any major critic more favorable then: "It was okay. I guess." At this point I'm convinced they've pre-written every awards show review they've done in advance like the critical equivalent of a mad-lib and just fill in the names and dates every year.

I don't know what a critic is expecting when they watch the Oscars or the Golden Globes or the Emmys. You'd think after all their years of watching them they would have realized an awards show for what it is and graded it on those merits rather than the kind of entertainment its honoring. An awards show is not a film or a TV show, nor is it a concert or a play. If you are grading it by those standards, which I assume these critics are, it will always be inferior.

But an awards show is not about providing entertainment to a live audience: it is there to give awards to performers for their body of work. The emcee or the presenters are working primarily to keep the mood light in the theater. They are there to celebrate the industry and honor the nominees and winners. The idea of entertaining those watching at home is a distant third on their priorities or at least it should be.

All of the flaws that the critics trot out over and over make me wonder if they understand this distinction. Of course awards show are self-congratulatory, they are congratulating themselves. If you expect them to be simultaneously entertaining while they do so, you're asking far too much of everybody involved. And if you're watching this awards show for entertainment purposes rather than because you have an interest in the shows and actors nominated, then I truly question whether you have a functioning brain.

I really don't know why anyone would watch an awards show if they didn't care about Hollywood or the industry in some degree. Indeed these days with every other channel on TV running alternate and occasionally new episodes of shows and streaming services allowing to watch films or TV shows while the awards show going on, there are probably thousands of better ways you could pass your time if you wanted to have fun. An awards show is about giving awards; it's not about entertaining those watching. It's going to run long no matter how much the producers will try to streamline it; it's going to be full of dull stretches and it's going to be self-congratulatory with famous people mentioning people you don't know and in many cases people you don't recognize thanking their wives and children. Perhaps the average viewer doesn't realize that, but the average critic has to by now.

In my lifetime no matter what the Oscars or the Golden Globes or any other awards show do to try and please the critics they have always failed for that reason. The critics don't know what their ideal awards show is, only that each year they never get it. And considering that in so many of their reviews of your films and TV shows they tend to malign and judge the people who watch the more popular ones, I really don't know why you're making such an effort anyway.

With all of that said, I have to tell you the decision that NBC has made regarding the Emmys this year ranks as one of the dumbest any awards show has made in history and one that has already received backlash. It's not as short-sighted as the Oscars deciding to seat the most prominent nominees closer to the front in 2021 – which almost certainly led to the circumstances of Will Smith slapping Chris Rock – but it's one of those decisions that makes no sense in terms of the broadcast and even less sense when you consider the logic – which even now I can't figure out.

I'm talking, of course, of the decision to have the glut of the awards for Outstanding Limited Series – including most damningly Supporting Actor and Actress – out of the primetime ceremony and giving in during the Creative Arts Ceremony next weekend.

This decision received so much backlash almost immediately across the board – from critics performers and every single guild in Hollywood – that when it was announced back in July I was certain it would become so overwhelming that the Academy would have taken it back by now. Yet here we are, less than two weeks from the Awards, and both NBC and the Emmys are standing by a decision that even by the standards of network television and the Academy has to rank as one of the most foolish they've ever made. And that's including the decision to have five of the nominees for Best Game Show Host act as a collective emcees in 2008. Because at least they were willing to have that award be part of the ceremony. This is dumber and a far bigger slap in the face to almost everybody involved.

Start with the obvious one. While there's very little suspense of who will win Best Drama and Best Comedy there's actually quite a bit who will win Best Limited Series. All five contenders have no clear frontrunner, although Season 2 of Beef is gaining ground. Still the overwhelming majority of the nominees in writing, directing and both Supporting acting awards would help influence – and the Emmys is shafting them.

Second, it leaves out the very real fact that in this decade alone – the 2020s – some of the most memorable moments of the Emmys have come wins in those categories. I'm talking about Jennifer Coolidge's hysterical acceptance speech for The White Lotus's first season in 2022, Niecy Nash-Betts call of defiance for her work in Monster in January of 2024, Jessica Gunning's incredible speech in Baby Reindeer that September. And who among can't forget Owen Cooper's incredible acceptance speech for Adolescence last year? I didn't even like that series that much but I knew it was a moment in Emmy history.

And how many great writing and directing talents have been recognized in this category the last three years alone. We saw it for Lee Sung Jin for Beef, Richard Gadd for Baby Reindeer and Stephen Graham for Adolescence. Are we now supposed to say their triumphs must be moved to Creative Arts for the reason of time crunch?

And it's not like this year isn't going to offer a similar chance for such moments. David Harbour and Jason Bateman have worked in TV for decades, often nominated, never winning. Now both are favorites to win Supporting Actor in DTF ST. Louis. Several actresses I admire immensely are competing in Best Supporting Actress in a Limited Series/TV movie: Constance Zimmer for Love Story, Dakota Fanning for All Her Fault and the current favorite Linda Cardellini for DTF. St. Louis. All of them deserve their moments in front of their peers on prime time. The Emmys is essentially decided to shunt their triumphs to a basic cable channel that I guarantee you no one bothers to watch unless they knew it existed in the first place.

And finally – and I really shouldn't have to say this – by doing this, the Emmys is setting a dangerous precedent. The Emmys has always had all of the winners for these categories in the prime time ceremony since forever. To do it just one will be sending a message that these prizes are expendable and irrelevant to what the audience comes to see.

Now I don't know what the Emmys is planning to do in the place of these awards for Limited Series. And honestly I don't give a damn. What possible tribute to television could be worth sacrificing four awards that have been prominent in Emmy voting for decades? Who could they possibly be celebrating in order to say to these actors and talent who worked on this project "I'm sorry, we're putting your moment in the cheap seats."

No disrespect to the Creative Arts Emmys here, I've been watching you guys every year for thirty years and will be doing so this year.  But everybody – including them – knows what your place in the pantheon of the Emmys. You’re the place where all of the 'other awards' are giving, the ones that 'viewers don't care about, really." I get it, I do, if they had to give awards to all of the technical people on the same night the Emmys would be eight hours long. You need two nights to get through it all and you have to condense it to one two and a half hour showing. Your editors, cinematographers, makeup artists, scorers, and visual effects teams (among many, many others) have a generosity of spirit I'm not sure I would be able to have if I was among the best in my field, recognized my peers over and over in Hollywood, and nobody knew who I was even when I was acknowledged.

Personally I think the Emmys should devote some screentime each year for some of you wins, if only to just acknowledge that TV's biggest night isn't just about the onscreen talent. And that's again where I keep coming up against a brick wall because limited series is very much about the onscreen talent as well as writing and directing – and the Emmys is saying very clearly: "No, you're not really."

This goes against so much of what we've seen long before this, whether it is Angels in America, Big Little Lies, American Crime, American Horror Story, Sherlock and all the other shows on Masterpiece Theater that have won in the 21^st century alone. This is a knife in the heart to those of us who loves these shows (I am one of their biggest boosters) and a slap in the face to those and make them.

And why? Trust me when I tell you: the critics are going to have the knives out because the Emmys chose to do this. I guarantee you every single critics from The Hollywood Reporter to Variety and everyone in between has a paragraph in their review already criticizing you for leaving these people out. I guarantee you TV Guide has already set up a Jeer for you in advance in the next issue that comes after the Emmys. What possible tribute can you give to other actors or a legacy show that will compare to this? How can you justify celebrating TV's past at the expense of its present?

I know the talent in Hollywood always has work done but trust me when I tell you cutting your nose off to spite your face is never a good look for the industry. Considering the many, many other problems you're facing right now you're going to lose a lot and I don't see what you can possibly gain.

There's a reason I know you'll regret this. After the Critics Choice Awards decided to merge TV and film into one ceremony in 2016, they had some growing pains of their own. In their 2018 award shows they didn't bother giving any of the Supporting Actor or Actress awards in any categories in television as part of their one ceremony to try and condense it for two hours.

Immediately after that they realized that they'd made a huge mistake and they began to pull away from it and by the end of the decade they decided to give all the acting awards for TV as part of their ceremony. If that meant the show was going to run over three hours long, so be it.

These awards, I should mention, are given by critics so perhaps they had an understanding that so many other awards show don't. We know we can't be pleased when it comes to the length or makeup of these shows, so let's make this night about the industry and not about us.

You still have a week to do the right thing. And if you must insist on carrying forward with this monstrosity, all other networks who do this going forward for the love of God learn from your mistakes. This night is about you, not trying to please the critics. For one night be as self-centered and egotistical as you want. Stop trying to please those highbrow, narrow-minded, ill-tempered who can barely say polite things about anything. I can say that about them because I'm one of them – and you can say it about them too.

 

Here endeth the sermon. This week I'll be covering every  single one of these awards as if they were going to be given in prime time because they should be and because I appreciate what these people are doing even if the Emmys doesn't this year.