Big Bang Theory Awards

[3ku11]

I was just curious as to who thinks currently from the show who could get an Emmy. This is all hypothetical. Of course as of nine years, the show has no major awards (other then Jim of course ). For me I think Simon should win Best Supporting Actor imo. The episode today Johnny should get nominated For Best Lead Actor in a Comedy Series. Mayim should of Won Four Emmys by now lol. Kaley too I think should of won, but I guess her character as it is. She reminds me of Courtney Cox, she makes it look so easy, almost like she is not actually "acting". I thought the show would win for S7. So while S9 has been outstanding so far, even if it keeps it up, too many damn politics.

Edited November 20, 2015 by 3ku11

[Chiany]

To me, only one really shines constantly, and that's Mayim.

Two others who shines from time to time are Jim and Simon.

The rest of the cast is good, but doesn't jump out enough to be nominated imho.

[3ku11]

That's fair enough from you lol. I have to disagree. I think Johnny stands out most of the time. I think Kaley shines more then Mayim some times. But because of her character, and her ease as an actress, it is probably not so noticeable.

[Chiany]

23 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

That's fair enough from you lol. I have to disagree. I think Johnny stands out most of the time. I think Kaley shines more then Mayim some times. But because of her character, and her ease as an actress, it is probably not so noticeable.

I thought you wanted just our choice, but I see you prefer a discussion...

But have it your way, all hail the Queen Kaley

Edited November 20, 2015 by Chiany

[Lionne]

I think everyone in the ensemble is incredibly talented. But some of them are more underrated than others.

I don't put a lot of stock in awards; that's often very controversial anyway.

Here's what I think:

Kaley - When you watch the original pilot with another girl playing the role of Katie, often with many of the same lines Penny will later get in the new pilot, you swiftly come to appreciate Kaley Cuoco more than you ever thought she would. Kaley is a natural actress and not necessarily that different a person from Penny, and so she does make it look easy and you don't always realize how her line delivery and personality shine on a whole other level than what other actresses could do with the role. Kaley is in the underrated category, and will probably never win more than "People's Choice" awards, but that's who she is: A Women of the People. And they love her, and in some ways that might be more valuable to her in the long run than awards.

Simon - So consistent, so funny, he never fails to deliver Howard Wolowitz as an actual human being. That's something key to note about Simon's performance. It would be SO EASY for Howard Wolowitz to turn into a caricature of himself, and for Simon to just go through the motions of playing him, but he never, ever does. Wolowitz could just be a sum of his quirks and his problems and his baggage, but Simon gives him life, and it's an amazing, genius comedic performance season after season, episode after episode. Simon should at least be nominated or awarded, what he does as an actor is something which is usually admired and valued, and it sometimes makes me upset to wonder if the reason he gets overlooked is that he lacks the sex appeal. I'm not sure why he gets overlooked all the time, but the show should stump for him more.

Johnny - Galecki gets overshadowed by Jim, pure and simple. Not because of any competition between the two of them, but simply because Sheldon is such a unique character and Leonard is such a typical nerd. Sheldon is a very unique character who is deliberately drawn from many of the greats that set people's imagination on fire: the Spock or Sherlock type. Which always always outshine or get more attention than their counterparts: Bones or Watson. (I know you think it's Kirk, but Kirk was really the "hero" between Bones's emotion and Spock's cold logic, the other two were there to balance Kirk out. But people hardly ever talk about Bones, they talk about Spock, or Spock and his relationship with Kirk.) Physically, Sherlock, Spock and Sheldon are all taller, leaner, and smarter, and more physically attractive than their shorter, stockier, servicably cute but not handsome, and very intelligent just not as awe-inspiringly intelligent as the other. Bones, Watson and Leonard are supposed to play the straight man, the normal more average guy, the one that the audience gets access to the bizarre Spock, Sherlock or Sheldon, and who often humanizes him and allows us to see and access the other, but isn't as appreciated.

But interestingly enough, Galecki deliberately asked to play Leonard when they originally offered him Sheldon. Weirdly, that's exactly what Courtney Cox did as well, turning down the role of Rachel for Monica. i think they both knew what suited them, and it made room for Jim Parsons and Jennifer Aniston to come in. Johnny is a laid back guy and in some ways the center and calm leader of the cast, just like Courtney was the center and "mother" of her cast as well, and kept them together. These people are often the underrated rocks of their shows and their cast, but they don't get the same attention or appreciation, or all the awards.

That's how the cookie crumbles. Mayim might not have won, but she gets noticed. Jim has won so many times in a row I think some people are a bit pissed off by it. But those two have characters who are the most unique (although I find Wolowitz pretty unique) and that definitely gives them a boost. But on top of that they turn in solid performances.

Melissa and Kunal turn in solid performances too, and their talent with line delivery is also amazing. To be honest, I think that Melissa might end up having the most legs as far as her career goes after this series is over. And since she's been paid so much less, and awarded and noticed so much less, she'll be hungrier, I think.

[Chrismo]

3k. You beg for an argument and I will help it a long. I think Jim Parsons while being a great actor benefits from PC votes, like Modern Family, so it's not totally based on acting.  Mayim Bialik benefits from being the "average" looking actress on the show. Thus voters think her acting must be great. I'm not saying she's not a good actress but she went back to school for a reason. Kaley Cuoco on the otherhand,who most people think is attractive, is going to be perceived as a bad actress and got her role solely by her looks. In terms of your poll who do you really think is going to get the most votes on this forum? 

[Kasey]

I voted for Simon only because I think he provides solid and versatile performances with what little he is given.

 

 

[Einstein Von Brainstorm]

51 minutes ago, Lionne said:

Johnny - Galecki gets overshadowed by Jim, pure and simple. Not because of any competition between the two of them, but simply because Sheldon is such a unique character and Leonard is such a typical nerd. Sheldon is a very unique character who is deliberately drawn from many of the greats that set people's imagination on fire: the Spock or Sherlock type. Which always always outshine or get more attention than their counterparts: Bones or Watson. (I know you think it's Kirk, but Kirk was really the "hero" between Bones's emotion and Spock's cold logic, the other two were there to balance Kirk out. But people hardly ever talk about Bones, they talk about Spock, or Spock and his relationship with Kirk.) Physically, Sherlock, Spock and Sheldon are all taller, leaner, and smarter, and more physically attractive than their shorter, stockier, servicably cute but not handsome, and very intelligent just not as awe-inspiringly intelligent as the other. Bones, Watson and Leonard are supposed to play the straight man, the normal more average guy, the one that the audience gets access to the bizarre Spock, Sherlock or Sheldon, and who often humanizes him and allows us to see and access the other, but isn't as appreciated.

I feel a bit sorry for Johnny, he is playing the 'straight man' of the piece so often that you sort of forget that he's funny too.

He's either the romantic lead or the only normal guy in the room most scenes while Simon, Jim and Kunal are doing the crazy stuff and he is sort of forgotten about in the laughs  

To the OP - Is there a reason Jim Parsons isn't on the poll?

[Einstein Von Brainstorm]

3 hours ago, Chrismo said:

3k. You beg for an argument and I will help it a long. I think Jim Parsons while being a great actor benefits from PC votes, like Modern Family, so it's not totally based on acting.  Mayim Bialik benefits from being the "average" looking actress on the show. Thus voters think her acting must be great. I'm not saying she's not a good actress but she went back to school for a reason. Kaley Cuoco on the otherhand,who most people think is attractive, is going to be perceived as a bad actress and got her role solely by her looks. In terms of your poll who do you really think is going to get the most votes on this forum? 

Care to elaborate on what "PC votes" means exactly?

Last time I checked the Emmys, or any other acting award for that matter, are not judged based on 'attractiveness' or lack thereof. 

[phantagrae]

I think that Jim has benefitted from the fact that he's a great actor, and that his character isn't just an average character.  I remember an early article in TV Guide, regarding Jim's first nomination, I believe, for either the Emmy or Golden Globe, where the writer said he deserved to be nominated "for all the good work he's been doing on The Big Bang Theory".  I still remember reading that from before I even watched the show (I remember thinking, "Who's Jim Parsons and what's The Big Bang Theory?")

 I think that he's gotten repeat awards because he's still very good at what he does.  And part of the reason that all the others don't get recognized as much is that the fields are always very crowded and there are a lot of strong performers out there.  And it depends on what the Emmy voters are watching or who they're interested in or what new thing has come down the pike.

Big Bang has been around so long now that I wonder if any of them will be nominated in the future, if someone new in a remarkable role comes along.

I think that the whole cast is strong and each has their own value--that's why they were cast in the first place and that's why their characters have endured.

[Bavarian ShamyShipper Girl]

It's difficult for me to judge which one is the best, but for me Simon is clearly the most underestimated actor. My english is not good enough to describe it, but often when watching the episodes I'm impressed how superior and precise his acting as Howard is. I just forget that it's acting, he really *IS* that often creepy and repulsive and soooo funny character . I can only guess how Simon is as a private person (I guess lovely) because he manages to step 100% in that character. And he is not afraid of being ugly.

[Stephen Hawking]

Haven't you missed off an actor, from the poll?

[Chrismo]

7 hours ago, Einstein Von Brainstorm said:

Care to elaborate on what "PC votes" means exactly?

Last time I checked the Emmys, or any other acting award for that matter, are not judged based on 'attractiveness' or lack thereof. 

Politically correct. Most award shows aren't judged by talent either. A good example is Bob Newhart. In his long acting career he never won an Emmy before TBBT. You make disagree with me but IMO his acting had been better earlier in his career. I think the award was more based on his years of acting than being Professor Proton.

[3ku11]

Kaley partially got casted because of her looks. But imo shes the most underrated comedic actress on tv. No one comes near her in terms of comedic timing. I said shes like Courtney Cox, because she makes it look easy, like shes not actually "acting". Technically Kaley is just as gd as actor as say Mayim or Jim. Same with Johnny. But i agree the character you play plays a big part. Theirs not much depth matarialistically to Pennys character. Shes basically playing an older version of Bridgett. But i think some of you are underestimating her. She wins pcas every year mostly. Yeah fan voted. But clearly ppl can see she can act at a certain degree. 

 

Edited November 21, 2015 by 3ku11

[kelliluvtbbt]

Jim was the break out actor. I had never seen him in anything until i started watching  "Judging Amy". I think that's why he received so many awards in so little time and let's face it, the man can act. 

Mayim and Johnny have been actors since they were kids, both starring on hit shows ( Roseanne more so than Blossom) and even Kaley has been on the popular show, "Charmed" and a short-lived series with the late John Ritter. That's why I think they get overlooked sometimes. 

As for the other 3, their roles are just not big enough to attract that kind of attention. I mean, they are great at what they do but  there's not enough exposure.

 

[3ku11]

Yeah I agree with that ^. I think the point being made here is all the actors are at least on the same level. But because Jim is the breakout star. Same way Jennifer Aniston was the breakout star in Friends. Jim/Sheldon gets a lot of the attention. I mean some people don't know or watch Big Bang. But know Sheldon as he is such a uniquely annoying character lol. Because of this Jim is a great actor, but he gets a lot of the attention. Johnny while also a great actor. Almost plays the normal nerdy character, who is playing it straight. He is the Jerry of Big Bang, everything is seen from his point of view. You need that rock in a hard place. Johnny I Think enjoys and is very comfortable playing a character who basically is the rock of the show. Kaley is similar to Johnny too where she prob plays the most universal character of the show. And in a show with so many weird, eccentric characters haha. You need a Leonard or a Penny to balance things out. Of course the charm of Lenny is they defy societies conventions and rules, hence why they have always been my favourite couple on this show. Kaley dominates PCA's because she is just likeable, and people just love her. And of course she has a big fanbase. Johnny posted on IG, receiving a PCA would be one of the highlights of his career. As I guess receiving an industry award is prestigious. Receiving an award from the people who actually watch TV, has a more sentimental value.

Edited November 21, 2015 by 3ku11

[Stewie99]

On 11/20/2015, 9:04:37, 3ku11 said:

I was just curious as to who thinks currently from the show who could get an Emmy. This is all hypothetical. Of course as of nine years, the show has no major awards (other then Jim of course ). For me I think Simon should win Best Supporting Actor imo. The episode today Johnny should get nominated For Best Lead Actor in a Comedy Series. Mayim should of Won Four Emmys by now lol. Kaley too I think should of won, but I guess her character as it is. She reminds me of Courtney Cox, she makes it look so easy, almost like she is not actually "acting". I thought the show would win for S7. So while S9 has been outstanding so far, even if it keeps it up, too many damn politics.

If any super-fan of this show had their way, every actor/actress on the show would win every award. But the fact is that people are comparing the actors to each other, saying "Simon is the best" etc, rather than comparing them to actors on other shows. The cast members aren't against each other for the Emmys, they're against all of the other shows. Unless you've seen most of the network television (plus Netflix and Amazon Prime) comedy output I think it's difficult to assert that any of the TBBT cast 'should' get an Emmy.

As a fan of TBBT, I personally would like Kunal Nayyer and Simon Helberg to win Emmys because I think their performances have been outstanding and worthy of that kind of recognition. However, Eric Stonestreet (to name just one example) is probably a better supporting actor with better comedic timing and performances than those two, and I am sure there are many more actors in many more shows I haven't even heard of who have produced superior performances this year and deserve to get nominated more than Nayyer and Helberg.

3ku11, you say that "Kaley makes it look like she is not actually acting". Isn't that the point of acting? If there are any actors on prime-time network shows who look like they are "acting" and not playing an actual character, then they shouldn't be anywhere near this level. The whole point of TBBT is that it's meant to be realistic.

The subject of Johnny Galeki and the Emmys comes up often. I don't believe he deserves "Best Lead actor in a Comedy Series" because he isn't even the best lead actor in his own show, never mind the rest of them!

I'm not sure what you mean about "damn politics". Are you trying to blame TBBT's lack of success at the Emmy's on some kind of conspiracy?

 

23 hours ago, Chiany said:

To me, only one really shines constantly, and that's Mayim.

Two others who shines from time to time are Jim and Simon.

The rest of the cast is good, but doesn't jump out enough to be nominated imho.

I agree Chainy. Jim and Simon are the standout actors for me and whilst the rest of the cast are fantastic, they're not outstanding enough to be nominated at this present time.

8 hours ago, 3ku11 said:

Kaley partially got casted because of her looks. But imo shes the most underrated comedic actress on tv. No one comes near her in terms of comedic timing. I said shes like Courtney Cox, because she makes it look easy, like shes not actually "acting". Technically Kaley is just as gd as actor as say Mayim or Jim. Same with Johnny. But i agree the character you play plays a big part. Theirs not much depth matarialistically to Pennys character. Shes basically playing an older version of Bridgett. But i think some of you are underestimating her. She wins pcas every year mostly. Yeah fan voted. But clearly ppl can see she can act at a certain degree. 

 

You make a number of quite wild assertions here. You say that "no one comes near [Kaley] in terms of comedic timing".  How do you know that? What about Julie Bowen, or Patricia Heaton, or Anna Faris? All fantastic actresses, and arguably just as good if not better at comic timing than Kaley.

You also say that "technically, Kaley is just as good an actor as Mayim or Jim". What do you mean by that? Jim Parsons has won Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series 4 times. Are you saying Kaley should have won it that many times also? Or in terms of technique, it would be hard to argue that Jim isn't the best actor on the series, given the difficult scientific terminology he has to memorize as part of his lines and the character with so many different aspects to his personality that he has to act. Kaley, by contrast, has a relatively easy character to act.

Yes, she wins PCAS, but who is voting them? The fans. And TBBT has the highest viewer numbers so it's likely to have the most fans. Just because TBBT is the most watched comedy doesn't make Kaley the best actress on TV. I believe Kaley is a very good actress but I don't think that just because she has won some fan voted awards she deserves an Emmy.

 

[3ku11]

And Stewie your making alot of wild pesumptions. Not sure why your attacking my post seeing you rarley post, you seem to jump to alot of wild presumptions on most of my posts  i said Kaley is thebest comedc actress on tv in terms of timing cos she is. Oh really Julie Bowens on Mf? I had no idea. Im stupid. In nz we live in a third world country. Ive never seen MF ever. Once again making presumptions. Ive seen them i just think Kaleys better. Once again another presumption. I never said A: Kaleys the best comedic actress on tv. I said she has the best comedic timing B: I never said Bbt getting high ratings makes kaley the best actress you did. 

 

When i said Almost like kaleys not acting. I kno shes till acting genius. I meant she gives that impression based on her seemlessness as an actress. And saying Johnny isint the best actor on the show is personal opinion. Johnny has prooven hes just as gd as an actor as Jim. Just the difference between uniquness between characters. That and Jim gets more attention. Doesent make Jim the better actor, its equal. I diddnt open the thread for you to take wild presumptions of my views. Kaley remembered complicated scientific dialogue in a week. In season 3 episode Based on your same logic technically Kaley should of won an Emmy for that, whats the difference? Besides Johnny has to remember the same ammount of scientific dialogue. And based on Johnny getting a golden globe nomination for Best Lead Actor in 2011. I think the industry agrees with me. 

[Denzel]

On 20/11/2015 13:47:10, Lionne said:

I think everyone in the ensemble is incredibly talented. But some of them are more underrated than others.

I don't put a lot of stock in awards; that's often very controversial anyway.

Here's what I think:

Kaley - When you watch the original pilot with another girl playing the role of Katie, often with many of the same lines Penny will later get in the new pilot, you swiftly come to appreciate Kaley Cuoco more than you ever thought she would. Kaley is a natural actress and not necessarily that different a person from Penny, and so she does make it look easy and you don't always realize how her line delivery and personality shine on a whole other level than what other actresses could do with the role. Kaley is in the underrated category, and will probably never win more than "People's Choice" awards, but that's who she is: A Women of the People. And they love her, and in some ways that might be more valuable to her in the long run than awards.

Simon - So consistent, so funny, he never fails to deliver Howard Wolowitz as an actual human being. That's something key to note about Simon's performance. It would be SO EASY for Howard Wolowitz to turn into a caricature of himself, and for Simon to just go through the motions of playing him, but he never, ever does. Wolowitz could just be a sum of his quirks and his problems and his baggage, but Simon gives him life, and it's an amazing, genius comedic performance season after season, episode after episode. Simon should at least be nominated or awarded, what he does as an actor is something which is usually admired and valued, and it sometimes makes me upset to wonder if the reason he gets overlooked is that he lacks the sex appeal. I'm not sure why he gets overlooked all the time, but the show should stump for him more.

Johnny - Galecki gets overshadowed by Jim, pure and simple. Not because of any competition between the two of them, but simply because Sheldon is such a unique character and Leonard is such a typical nerd. Sheldon is a very unique character who is deliberately drawn from many of the greats that set people's imagination on fire: the Spock or Sherlock type. Which always always outshine or get more attention than their counterparts: Bones or Watson. (I know you think it's Kirk, but Kirk was really the "hero" between Bones's emotion and Spock's cold logic, the other two were there to balance Kirk out. But people hardly ever talk about Bones, they talk about Spock, or Spock and his relationship with Kirk.) Physically, Sherlock, Spock and Sheldon are all taller, leaner, and smarter, and more physically attractive than their shorter, stockier, servicably cute but not handsome, and very intelligent just not as awe-inspiringly intelligent as the other. Bones, Watson and Leonard are supposed to play the straight man, the normal more average guy, the one that the audience gets access to the bizarre Spock, Sherlock or Sheldon, and who often humanizes him and allows us to see and access the other, but isn't as appreciated.

But interestingly enough, Galecki deliberately asked to play Leonard when they originally offered him Sheldon. Weirdly, that's exactly what Courtney Cox did as well, turning down the role of Rachel for Monica. i think they both knew what suited them, and it made room for Jim Parsons and Jennifer Aniston to come in. Johnny is a laid back guy and in some ways the center and calm leader of the cast, just like Courtney was the center and "mother" of her cast as well, and kept them together. These people are often the underrated rocks of their shows and their cast, but they don't get the same attention or appreciation, or all the awards.

That's how the cookie crumbles. Mayim might not have won, but she gets noticed. Jim has won so many times in a row I think some people are a bit pissed off by it. But those two have characters who are the most unique (although I find Wolowitz pretty unique) and that definitely gives them a boost. But on top of that they turn in solid performances.

Melissa and Kunal turn in solid performances too, and their talent with line delivery is also amazing. To be honest, I think that Melissa might end up having the most legs as far as her career goes after this series is over. And since she's been paid so much less, and awarded and noticed so much less, she'll be hungrier, I think.

All the cast is the greatest team ever on tape to me, they act together, and there is a true convergence between every actors as if Jim plays theater too. Each character has no reason to be without an other, and that's why I was really about before falling too sick to watch. They have each developped a unique and original personnality, that prevents to make fall them in 'clichés'. BBT can't be compared to a other sitcom for this, and I think will stays a classic, in spite of stylistic fails.

[Kasey]

You know it's funny when people say that "oh they've won so many awards so that means they are the best" I just don't think that is always the case.  Meryl Streep has been considered one of the best actresses of her generation and I sincerely don't like her acting at all. 

When you create a poll and ask people what their "subjective" feelings are it's really hard to dispute them because it's people's own opinions.  And it's really hard to hold these actors up to other show's actors because not everyone has either seen the show or even likes the show. 

I would say though that characters who are "different" from the standard character tend to get noticed more by the Emmy committee because I feel they think it's harder to play a character that is different as opposed to someone who is more of a person you meet everyday.  Hence Jim Parsons getting nominated. 

Bob Newhart played several great characters and his comedic timing was consistent and solid throughout his successful shows.  Yet he had to wait until what 83 to win an Emmy - why one may ask.  Could it be that the Emmy's look for the quirky and not necessarily the best. 

[Einstein Von Brainstorm]

14 hours ago, Chrismo said:

Politically correct. Most award shows aren't judged by talent either. A good example is Bob Newhart. In his long acting career he never won an Emmy before TBBT. You make disagree with me but IMO his acting had been better earlier in his career. I think the award was more based on his years of acting than being Professor Proton.

I presume by 'politically correct' you are implying that Jim Parsons won his Emmy awards because he is gay, yes?

So in 2010 and 2011 before he came out, the academy voted him as winner because he was gay?

In 2012 - the year he came out - he did not win the Emmy he was nominated for, where were the 'cus he's gay' votes that year? presumably the politically correct votes should have kicked in big style that year, no?

In 2014 he was nominated for 'Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series' and won for TBBT.
That year he was also nominated for 'Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Miniseries or a Movie' for his role as gay rights activist Tommy Boatwright in The normal Heart. He did not win - Where were his 'cus he's gay' votes that day?
Martin Freeman won that year for Sherlock. (He is not a homosexual just fyi) In that category there were 4 actors nominated for the Normal Heart, none of them won and the argument was made, by some, at the time that they did not win simply because it was a gay movie.

In fact of the 9 Emmy awards The Normal Heart, a movie where the majority of the characters are gay, a movie about the gay rights movement, the only one that it won was 'Outstanding Television Movie' - Where were all the cus-gay^TM votes?!

Jim Parsons has been nominated for an Emmy award an amazing 7 times (6 for TBBT) and won 4 for his work on The Big Bang Theory

2009 - Nominated - Winner was Alec Baldwin (last time I checked he is not gay)
2010 - Winner 
2011 - Winner
2012 - Nominated - Winner was Jon Cryer (also not gay)
2013 - Winner
2014 - Winner for TBBT also nominated for TNH

He is tied for most wins in this category with Michael J Fox, Kelsey Grammer and Carroll O'Connor, making him arguably one of the most successful sitcom actors of all time.

Your assertion that he has only won because of 'politically correct' votes is wholly incorrect and to be frank does not paint you in the best light.

[Denzel]

2 hours ago, Einstein Von Brainstorm said:

I presume by 'politically correct' you are implying that Jim Parsons won his Emmy awards because he is gay, yes?

So in 2010 and 2011 before he came out, the academy voted him as winner because he was gay?

In 2012 - the year he came out - he did not win the Emmy he was nominated for, where were the 'cus he's gay' votes that year? presumably the politically correct votes should have kicked in big style that year, no?

In 2014 he was nominated for 'Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series' and won for TBBT.
That year he was also nominated for 'Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Miniseries or a Movie' for his role as gay rights activist Tommy Boatwright in The normal Heart. He did not win - Where were his 'cus he's gay' votes that day?
Martin Freeman won that year for Sherlock. (He is not a homosexual just fyi) In that category there were 4 actors nominated for the Normal Heart, none of them won and the argument was made, by some, at the time that they did not win simply because it was a gay movie.

In fact of the 9 Emmy awards The Normal Heart, a movie where the majority of the characters are gay, a movie about the gay rights movement, the only one that it won was 'Outstanding Television Movie' - Where were all the cus-gay^TM votes?!

Jim Parsons has been nominated for an Emmy award an amazing 7 times (6 for TBBT) and won 4 for his work on The Big Bang Theory

2009 - Nominated - Winner was Alec Baldwin (last time I checked he is not gay)
2010 - Winner 
2011 - Winner
2012 - Nominated - Winner was Jon Cryer (also not gay)
2013 - Winner
2014 - Winner for TBBT also nominated for TNH

He is tied for most wins in this category with Michael J Fox, Kelsey Grammer and Carroll O'Connor, making him arguably one of the most successful sitcom actors of all time.

Your assertion that he has only won because of 'politically correct' votes is wholly incorrect and to be frank does not paint you in the best light.

I'm not sure the 'gay' vote is politically correct, just that he was the right man the right place and saying another because of fun would have be uncalled for. His work for Sheldon is amazing, and BBT very popular this moment...

[vonmar]

10 hours ago, 3ku11 said:

<snip>

When i said Almost like kaleys not acting. I kno shes till acting genius. I meant she gives that impression based on her seemlessness as an actress. And saying Johnny isint the best actor on the show is personal opinion. Johnny has prooven hes just as gd as an actor as Jim. Just the difference between uniquness between characters. That and Jim gets more attention. Doesent make Jim the better actor, its equal. I diddnt open the thread for you to take wild presumptions of my views. Kaley remembered complicated scientific dialogue in a week. In season 3 episode Based on your same logic technically Kaley should of won an Emmy for that, whats the difference? Besides Johnny has to remember the same ammount of scientific dialogue. And based on Johnny getting a golden globe nomination for Best Lead Actor in 2011. I think the industry agrees with me. 

In addition both Jim and Johnny have received Theatre World Awards.

Johnny during the 2006-2007 Broadway Season for "The Little Dog Laughed"

Jim during the 2010-2011 Broadway Season for "The Normal Heart

This award is given annually to 6 actresses and 6 actors in recognition of an outstanding debut performances on or off Broadway.

[Stewie99]

On ‎21‎/‎11‎/‎2015‎ ‎10‎:‎17‎:‎33, 3ku11 said:

And Stewie your making alot of wild pesumptions. Not sure why your attacking my post seeing you rarley post, you seem to jump to alot of wild presumptions on most of my posts  i said Kaley is thebest comedc actress on tv in terms of timing cos she is. Oh really Julie Bowens on Mf? I had no idea. Im stupid. In nz we live in a third world country. Ive never seen MF ever. Once again making presumptions. Ive seen them i just think Kaleys better. Once again another presumption. I never said A: Kaleys the best comedic actress on tv. I said she has the best comedic timing B: I never said Bbt getting high ratings makes kaley the best actress you did. 

 

When i said Almost like kaleys not acting. I kno shes till acting genius. I meant she gives that impression based on her seemlessness as an actress. And saying Johnny isint the best actor on the show is personal opinion. Johnny has prooven hes just as gd as an actor as Jim. Just the difference between uniquness between characters. That and Jim gets more attention. Doesent make Jim the better actor, its equal. I diddnt open the thread for you to take wild presumptions of my views. Kaley remembered complicated scientific dialogue in a week. In season 3 episode Based on your same logic technically Kaley should of won an Emmy for that, whats the difference? Besides Johnny has to remember the same ammount of scientific dialogue. And based on Johnny getting a golden globe nomination for Best Lead Actor in 2011. I think the industry agrees with me. 

You have said that I have "made a lot of wild presumptions" but you don't specify what any of these are. Is this because I haven't made one "presumption" in my response to your post, and simply expressed an opinion contrary to your own?

I really don't see what the prolificness of my posting has to do with anything. Just because I have posted less than you have doesn't make my opinion any less valid than yours.

You say in your second paragraph that "saying Johnny isn't the best actor on the show is personal opinion". That is exactly why I prefaced my comment with "I believe", which indicates that it was a personal opinion. Meanwhile, you have said that "Kayley is the best comedic actress on TV in terms of timing because she is". That is a personal opinion, is it not? Is there not some hypocrisy or at least some irony there?

I have made perfectly clear that all my personal opinions are just that- my opinions. You meanwhile continue to assert your opinions and ideas as facts, which they are not. You cannot prove or say with any certainty that Kaley Cuoco is "the best comedic actress on TV in terms of timing". There is no way of definitively saying that Kaley is any better at comic timing than Julie Bowen, Patricia Heaton or Anna Faris. Therefore, it is your personal opinion, not the fact which you claim it to be.

I'm not really sure what you're talking about when you refer to New Zealand and Modern Family, you seem to have misunderstood what I've said so I'm not going to respond to that part of your post.

Nothing I said in my post was a "presumption" as you claim it to be. Whether you have seen Modern Family, The Middle, or Mom is irrelevant really; my point is that you can't prove that Kaley Cuoco has better comic timing than any of the lead actresses in those shows.

Kaley may well have remembered complicated scientific dialogue for one week 6 years ago, but Jim Parsons learns far more challenging terminology as part of his dialogue in every episode, week in, week out. Seeing as you seem intent upon "following my logic", my logic (as I already stated in my post) is that Jim Parsons has a much more difficult character to play, both in the difficult dialogue he learns and the complexity of the character which he has to play. Sheldon is far more complex a character than Penny, therefore I would say that Jim Parsons has a more difficult acting job than Kaley Cuoco and deserves greater recognition as a result.

You say that "I didn't open the thread for you to take wild assumptions of my views". I haven't made a single assumption and based on the question you asked in your thread title, you clearly opened the thread to invite other people's views and discussion regarding which members of the TBBT cast different members believe should get Emmys. Why then are you so aggressive when someone expresses a view contrary to your own?

With regards to Johnny Galeki having to remember scientific dialogue, of course he has to remember some, but Sheldon has a different manner of speaking to Leonard and uses scientific dialogue far more in his everyday language than Leonard. As a result, I believe Jim Parsons has had to learn far more scientific dialogue for his role over the course of the series than Johnny Galeki has for his. You claim that "the industry agrees with you"; why then, has Jim Parsons won 4 Outstanding Lead Actor Emmys for his TBBT role whilst Johnny Galeki hasn't won any?

[5Mississippis]

Simon deserves an Emmy.