Emmy Nomination Ballots Out: Hello, Rob Lowe; Goodbye, Charlie Sheen

Emmy ballots are being posted! (Performers, directors, and writers; note that they are .pdf files. ETA: Here’s a gateway to all categories–the hairstyling/makeup submissions are really fun to read!) We haven’t had much time to look over them, but there are always a few standout crazy moments:

  • Always fun to see the different writing submission strategies (which are also, of course, dependent on the makeup of writing teams)–The Middle submits one, Modern Family submits nine. Nine. Glee submits one per writer, Cougar Town submits eight. Friday Night Lights submits only the series finale; Covert Affairs submits eight and Burn Notice nine. I don’t know that one strategy is superior to another (hard to imagine Burn Notice, which I like very much, getting a nom, while Modern Family will likely get a few), but it’s fun to play with.
  • No America Ferrera for Guest Actress for The Good Wife? Boooooo.
  • No Jennifer Aniston in Guest Actress for Cougar Town? Odd.
  • As suspected, Rob Lowe–God love him–thinks he’s a lead actor on Parks and Recreation. Maybe Charlie Sheen’s absence will open up a slot for Lowe (is there a back door through which Sheen can still make it in? That…is probably not a good way to ask that question).
  • Oh, y’all, Community submitted the Christmas episode in the animated category. Love it!
  • The headshots are golden. Nice knit hat, Alan Cumming. Jennifer Love Hewitt managed to find three different headshots for her three different submission. Bless.

What interesting tidbits are you finding?

4 thoughts on “Emmy Nomination Ballots Out: Hello, Rob Lowe; Goodbye, Charlie Sheen

  1. On the one hand, Rob Lowe submitting as a lead on Parks & Rec is just naked hubris (as it was when the did the same thing on West Wing). On the other, have you seen the competition in the comedy supporting actor category? Lord. You almost can’t blame the guy for wanting to get out of the path of that tsunami of talent. Almost.

  2. Looking at the ballots (and this is the first time I’ve ever actually bothered to look at the ballots), I think we’ve found where in the voting process things need to be changed to help shake things up. The ballots. Or, who gets to go on the ballots. No wonder voters just check the folks they know, they have to wade through so many names. It shouldn’t be that anyone who submits their name can go on the initial ballot (hello dude from Hellcats, I’m looking at you). There should be some sort of initial vetting process (no idea what this would be) and only those who get through the vetting process make it onto the actual ballot. I have no idea how you would do this to make it fair, but it seems like voters not having to wade through page after page of potential nominees would be a good first start.

  3. To both of your points: the performers ballot is *218 pages long* and includes 1249 submissions. Seriously.

    Lead Actor in a Comedy=41
    Lead Actor in a Drama=58
    Lead Actor in a Mini/Movie=30
    Lead Actress in a Comedy=25
    Lead Actress in a Drama=56
    Lead Actress in a Mini/Movie=26
    Supporting Actor in a Comedy=139
    Supporting Actor in a Drama=217 (!)
    Supporting Actor in a Mini/Movie=30
    Supporting Actress in a Comedy=96
    Supporting Actress in a Drama=148
    Supporting Actress in a Mini/Movie=27
    Guest Actor in a Comedy=77
    Guest Actor in a Drama=121
    Guest Actress in a Comedy=77
    Guest Actress in a Drama=81

    B, I think the one attempt at modifying the nomination process in recent years was having the typical vote sorting through this mess that led to an 10-candidate group. That group submitted an episode that was watched by a “blue-ribbon panel” from which a 5-person final nominee list was derived. (For the record, I’m not an Emmy historian, so some details may be inaccurate.) I don’t know how well this worked, both because it doesn’t really help with the morass of 1249 submissions and because I recall Mary McDonnell making the Top 10 but not the Top 5, so did it really make a difference in, for example, genre exposure?

  4. I believe you are right about the one-year change (and isn’t that the year that there were a few more surprise nominations/wins?). That seems like a better choice that the current process. I stopped reading through after the first few acting categories. And by the time I got to the Lead Actor in a Mini/Movie category found myself doing what I imagine voters do. Because right from the get-go you’ve got Hugh Bonneville (I finally got caught up on Downton Abbey), Kenneth Brannagh, Jim Broadbent and Benedict Cumberbatch. Two actors (Bonneville and Cumberbatch) from shows I watch that I really like, and then two name actors who are more often than not very good in whatever it is they are in. So I’ve got four people I’d potentially nominate before ever even getting past the letter “C”.

    Sort it down to ten in the lead categories, twenty in the supporting roles and send those ballots out to the voters. If nothing else at least we’d know that people actually read through and considered their votes, since who wants to wade through all of these names?

    One thing we haven’t considered is should they open up the field and have more nominees a la the Oscar Best Picture? For as much as that was clearly done to have more commercial films get nominations (and therefore movies the tv viewing audience had actually seen) it did also allow for smaller movies like Winter’s Bone to slip in and get nominated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s