Once again the Emmy's were awarded to the television elite last night, and once again I came up empty handed. That is not to say that I was nominated, nor that I did anything that would qualify this year but the ego of an actor can not be over estimated. Perhaps the best example of how the Hollywood ego works can be viewed in the Christopher Guest movie "For Your Consideration"
To vet myself with full disclosure, I don't know anyone who has ever delivered a line on a television stage who does not also secretly prepare an Emmy acceptance speech just in case. I certainly have one ready. I got to use a version of it when I won the Tony® Award but just in case the Emmy gods are reading this I'm still ready to receive that golden angel for my mantel.
So under the category of "Who really cares outside of Los Angeles county" I think the Emmy qualifications need to be changed. In the history of the Emmy's you will find that the same show and the same actors win consecutive Emmy's for the same work year after year. Not that they don't deserve to be honored for continuing to produce good work, but it is the only major award where that is even possible. And frankly it is boring.
SOAP was nominated for Emmy's year after year but always lost to M*A*S*H*. At the time M*A*S*H* was the juggernaut that could not be stopped. M*A*S*H* was on for 11 years and won 14 Emmy's. For the years 1971 through 1982 the bet was alway on M*A*S*H* to win and it usually did.
In contrast "Phantom of the Opera" has been running for 22 years on Broadway. It opened on January 26, 1988 and that year won 8 Tony's. Unless it closes and is one day brought back as a revival it will not be eligible for that award again. And rightly so. The American Theatre Wing has already honored this production with it's highest award.
The same is true of the Academy Awards Oscar. A movie, actor, producer, director or any other job on a movie is only eligible for consideration the year it opens.
The Emmy can be awarded to the same actor or the same show, every year the show continues to run. To me this is not fair to newcomers who may require more than a year to establish a character or show. So if you are listening "Academy of Television Arts and Sciences" here is how I would change the Emmy's.
First of all a show or actor can be nominated every year the show and that character run on television. Do the work and reap the benefits I say... but here is the difference. If a show/actor wins an Emmy for work during a season... they are not eligible to be nominated for the next two years. To keep giving out the same Emmy for the same role to the same person is boring. The next two years that Emmy is available to someone else. Then after two years if an Emmy award winning show/actor is still doing the same high quality work they can be nominated again. If that show or person were to win again, the second Emmy would not be for the same work you did last season, but would honor the fact that for the last two years a person continued to do great work.
I have been on this band wagon before and don't know of anyone else who is a champion for the same change. Try to convince Alan Alda how much better it would be if he only had three Emmy's for M*A*S*H* under a new rule instead of the 6 he received under this existing system. I doubt it will change and the rule will always be "Them that's got seem to get more".
As you were,
Brought to you by: "Jay Johnson: The Two and Only" for your Consideration.....
Please download, watch, purchase, rent or just send cash.