Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Who is the industry sending a message to?  The viewers?  TBBT was the # 1 scripted show for the 2015-2016 season.

Emmy voters number a little over 20,000.  TBBT viewership numbers are at 20+ million (first run, on demand and repeats/reruns).

(IMO) At the end of the day you can all rage on about the "Sheldon show" all you want, quite frankly Warner Brothers, CBS and the cast and crew could give a shit.  Emmy and other awards are nice but.....huge ratings and hefty ad revenue are nicer. 

P.S. very happy for Bob, Laurie, Christine and for the crew for their nominations.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just my two cents... I think every Emmy-win and nomination for Jim was deserved. Also Mayim deserved her nominations resp. Johnny his nomination. And I think it's a pity that Simon wasn't ever on

I'd much rather see a renewal for at least two more years, than an emmy nom.  

I agree that the rest of the cast deserved some love from the Emmys as well as various points in the show - especially Simon! But with those voters it always comes down as what makes an impact and wha

Posted Images

1 minute ago, vonmar said:

Who is the industry sending a message to?  The viewers?  TBBT was the # 1 scripted show for the 2015-2016 season.

Emmy voters number a little over 20,000.  TBBT viewership numbers are at 20+ million (first run, on demand and repeats/reruns).

(IMO) At the end of the day you can all rage on about the "Sheldon show" all you want, quite frankly Warner Brothers, CBS and the cast and crew could give a shit.  Emmy and other awards are nice but.....huge ratings and hefty ad revenue are nicer. 

P.S. very happy for Bob, Laurie, Christine and for the crew for their nominations.

My point is Ratings clearly mean squat to Emmy voters. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, 5Mississippis said:

As a fan of the show when it it is written as an ensemble, I'm glad The Sheldon Show didn't secure any acting or writing nominations. IMO, from what we were given in Season 9, it didn't deserve any.  When TBBT morphed into The Sheldon Show, centering it around what can be called a very polarizing character and invested itself in minimizing all the others, the show, for me, lost a very great deal. Chief among them the humor, clever writing, and ensemble work that originally hooked me into the show. I hope that the lack of recognition for The Sheldon Show MIGHT make TPTB step back and look a lot harder at what orginally made this show great, the wonderful writing and ALL the cast. And maybe, we can return to that previous glory for a little bit with what little time we have left with these characters. 

But when the show and the writing was great and they focussed on all characters, even then, only Jim and Mayim ever got Emmy recognition(season 5-7), the rest of the cast was still snubbed. Emmy recognition was always Shamy/Sheldon centric.  It is not like the writing being great in season 6 resulted in Johnny,Kaley or Simon getting nominated for Emmys anyway. 

There was was always focus on Sheldon and Shamy (since s5), even in the early seasons. So what changed ?IMO, it is the writing. The difference was that the writing used to be better.

Moreover, I think Sheldon and Amy were in the background for the second half of season 9  or had mostly B stories, yet the writing didn't improve. They focussed on all other characters - Raj dating, Howard/Bernie's baby plot, the guys' project and they had many Lenny plots in s9 second half. But the stories were just as unoriginal imo. Infact, imo,  the 2nd half of season 9 was worse than the 1st half.

So I think it all comes down to declining quality of writing, for all characters. Like I've said before, I still prefer season 1-4 . 

Edited by serena_nyc1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Johnny, Kaley, or Simon were nominated For Emmys in 2012 for S6, could be wrong. But have to disagree the past two seasons has been every Sheldon and because Amy is part of Shamy, Very Shamy centric. Have some missed LEnyn in the background on kitchen island lol? So overall the show has been less of an ensemble the past couple seasons. But I agree the overall writing has declined significantly. And I get the whole ideal, WB won't care about the Emmys. Revenue bla bla bla. But most fans don't care about the ratings, or money. To them, Awards is the pinnacle. So I am presumign majority are dissapointed. 

Edited by 3ku11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

I don't think Johnny, Kaley, or Simon were nominated For Emmys in 2012 for S6

Johnny was nominated for Lead Actor in a Comedy in 2011.  No one else in the cast has received individual nominations except for Jim and Mayim.

20 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

To them, Awards is the pinnacle. So I am presumign majority are dissapointed. 

But they are still watching.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 3ku11 said:

I don't think Johnny, Kaley, or Simon were nominated For Emmys in 2012 for S6, could be wrong. But have to disagree the past two seasons has been every Sheldon and because Amy is part of Shamy, Very Shamy centric. Have some missed LEnyn in the background on kitchen island lol? So overall the show has been less of an ensemble the past couple seasons. But I agree the overall writing has declined significantly. And I get the whole ideal, WB won't care about the Emmys. Revenue bla bla bla. But most fans don't care about the ratings, or money. To them, Awards is the pinnacle. So I am presumign majority are dissapointed. 

IMO no one was snubbed. There are simply better new shows. TBBT has a lot of awards recognition in the past so I disagree that it is anything to be disappointed about.

 I am happy that Jim has 4 Emmys already.  That is the pinnacle of awards recognition. But I don't really want him to win 5 for the same role. Jim probably has run out of acceptance speeches too. Mayim also has multiple nominations. If they were being overlooked continuously as people put it, they wouldn't have got the recognition they got in the previous years.

The show has simply gotten old and writing is not very good. Neither Jim nor Mayim could elevate it. The focus on other characters in the 2nd half was equally dull. As a fan of the older seasons, I am happy Jim also won Emmys for older episodes(s3 and 4) . And I am cheering for Christine. She is gorgeous, talented and I hope she wins again !

Edited by serena_nyc1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, vonmar said:

 

(IMO) At the end of the day you can all rage on about the "Sheldon show" all you want, quite frankly Warner Brothers, CBS and the cast and crew could give a shit.  Emmy and other awards are nice but.....huge ratings and hefty ad revenue are nicer. 

 

I believe you are 3/4 right. The cast has all the money they will ever need. Recognition IMO in getting prestigious awards (not the Nickleodeon or People's Choice Awards) at this point is more important.

59 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

But when the show and the writing was great and they focussed on all characters, even then, only Jim and Mayim ever got Emmy recognition(season 5-7), the rest of the cast was still snubbed. Emmy recognition was always Shamy/Sheldon centric.  It is not like the writing being great in season 6 resulted in Johnny,Kaley or Simon getting nominated for Emmys anyway. 

 

Jim and Mayim getting nominations and Johnny, Kaley, and Simon not getting nominations really had nothing to do with acting IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Think the point is. While I agree WB won't care, based on all the ad revenue and money and having a 20 mill show. But you know what who cares about that. Alot of people see Emmy's as the prestegious recognition. I am sure the cast has all the money, but recognition for their craft is also important. And they are not getting it. I guess Season 7 was their best shot at an Emmy. In S6 the best arch of the show imo was Lenny, Johnny and Kaley were excellent that Season. Other then a few Critic Choice Awards, where Kaley won. NO love from the Emmys at all. And same in 2016. I think Jim and Mayim got nomianted more in S5-7. As alot of the episodes they submitted focused on Shamy. Look we can go around around with this, Big Bang has, and never well win a Emmy. It's clear now. 

Edited by 3ku11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

 I am sure the cast has all the money, but recognition for their craft is also important. And they are not getting it. 

---------Are you saying that winning 4 Emmys for Lead Actor is not enough recognition for their craft ????

Edited by serena_nyc1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

---------Are you saying that winning 4 Emmys for Lead Actor is not enough recognition for their craft ????

It seems that 3k has some of his facts wrong but there are others on the show besides Jim Parsons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

---------Are you saying that winning 4 Emmys for Lead Actor is not enough recognition for their craft ??

Emmys for any acting position are more about the characters, the fit for the actor, the writing or a combination of all three.  Unless  you are going to try and tell me that Don Knotts (with five Emmys, for the same role) was a much better actor than Andy Griffith the star of two series that ran for more than eight years.  Or that Barbara Bain (three consecutive Emmy wins in a regular series) was a better actress than Barbara Stanwyck (two Emmy wins in a regular series)  .  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

37 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

I am only talking about 1 show-TBBT.

I'm sorry, I didn't see anything about only TBBT in this comment

2 hours ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

---------Are you saying that winning 4 Emmys for Lead Actor is not enough recognition for their craft ????

 As for this

37 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

Where did the multiple series thing come from ?

I was using other shows, actors, and characters as examples of my points.  

37 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

LOL. Yes, an acting award is only for a specific character(and the writing of that character by extension), but it is a recognition that they play the character well (which is what an actor should do)

You can act the hell out of a badly written character and get nothing for it.  Jim does a great job with the character, but does anyone really believe if it was a poorly  written character, that doesn't fit him, he would have received the number of nominations and the number of awards he has received?  If it was all Jim, where was his nomination for supporting actor for "Garden State"?  How about his Emmy nomination for supporting actor for Judging Amy?  Maybe his supporting nomination for a acting in a limited series for "Taste"?  Does anyone really think that Jim was a bad actor in those?  Or was it more of the writing or type of character her played for the reason of his not getting nominated, much less winning.   

37 minutes ago, serena_nyc1995 said:

.Awards are given for excellence. 

Which is why I asked the question.  From this comment, you seem to think the acting of Don Knotts (who won awards for his character) was more excellent than the acting of Andy Griffith (who didn't win awards)?   Emmy awards (even nominations) for acting are a combination of writing, directing, acting, along with intangibles such as fit for the role, type of role,  etc.  It's never down to just acting.

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vonmar said:

Who is the industry sending a message to?  The viewers?  TBBT was the # 1 scripted show for the 2015-2016 season.

Emmy voters number a little over 20,000.  TBBT viewership numbers are at 20+ million (first run, on demand and repeats/reruns).

(IMO) At the end of the day you can all rage on about the "Sheldon show" all you want, quite frankly Warner Brothers, CBS and the cast and crew could give a shit.  Emmy and other awards are nice but.....huge ratings and hefty ad revenue are nicer. 

P.S. very happy for Bob, Laurie, Christine and for the crew for their nominations.

I agree  i am over the the emmy tbbt is still number one with the public i still cant believe modern family is still getting nominated  lets hope we here some good news shortly about bbt being renewed  more seasons

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tensor said:

I'd much rather see a renewal for at least two more years, than an emmy nom.  

Well that is fine, but the shows been on way too long, and been very succesfull to not have an Emmy. I don't see the point in a 2 year renewal, if its struggling to produce any real Quality. I mean I get some peoples pov, that oh the shows ratings, its massive revenue e.t.c. But I would rather it win an Emmy, then have high ratings. OF course its Ratings is the reason it is still on air. But I don't know other popular comedies win Emmys, why can't big Bang. I just don't see the show makes money as an argument oh Emmys don't matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

Well that is fine, but the shows been on way too long, and been very succesfull to not have an Emmy. 

Do you know that the three longest running live action sitcoms, that's 40 seasons combined, have won exactly zero best comedy Emmys.  In fact, in nine years, TBBT has been nominated as many times as those three series have been COMBINED.  So, no, it has not been on too long or have been too successful to not have won an Emmy.  

 

14 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

 I mean I get some peoples pov, that oh the shows ratings, its massive revenue e.t.c. But I would rather it win an Emmy, then have high ratings.

CBS would rather have high ratings, than win an Emmy.  Emmy winners usually bring in more viewers.   Modern Family has won five in a row, as a series, but do you really think that CBS would rather have Modern Family, or TBBT?  

 At the Screen Actors Guild awards, in 2013, Tina Fey had to beg viewers to record The Big Bang Theory.  CBS would much rather have the ratings for TBBT (As a matter of fact, TBBT REPEATS, this year, have higher ratings than 30 Rock originals had in 2011-12 and 2012-13).  Do you think CBS would rather have TBBT ratings, or 30 Rock's three outstanding comedy series Emmys?  

14 minutes ago, 3ku11 said:

OF course its Ratings is the reason it is still on air. But I don't know other popular comedies win Emmys, why can't big Bang. I just don't see the show makes money as an argument oh Emmys don't matter. 

Because Broadcast Television is a business.   CBS is in business to make money.  If a show wins an Emmy, that's nice, it may bring in more viewers and more viewers, means more money coming in.   However, more Emmys doesn't necessarily mean more money.   See 30 Rock for instance.  If a show is bringing in enough viewers to make money, the network could care less about it winning Emmys.  

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lagernisse said:

I would guess that it is viewers and ratings that keep a show on the air, not Emmys

At this point everyone knows Big Bang does very well commercially. Some like me think at this point, seeing other popular comedies have all won. Big Bang got snubbed for years. Past two years snubbed for good reasons. IT is kinda passe at this point, Big Bang was always going to be on air. Does not change the fact the show is not getting recognised for its craft. PCA's are meaningless imo. MF keeps getting nominated, and well prob win again, for shit writing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole talk of TBBT cast never winning anything prestigious is factually incorrect. Jim has won 4 Emmys, 2 Critics Choice and a Golden Globe, Mayim won the Critics Choice Award and multiple emmy nominations, Johnny has received an Emmy nomination, Simon and Kaley have won the critics choice and Bob has also won an Emmy. And Christine and Laurie have multiple nominations. So I don't know why everyone thinks they never got anything prestigious.

Just because they didn't get nominated this year does not mean they never got recognized  in the past. Emmys are just making way for new shows.

Edited by serena_nyc1995
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the rest of the cast deserved some love from the Emmys as well as various points in the show - especially Simon! But with those voters it always comes down as what makes an impact and what is memorable and exciting or whatever. We're currently in an age of television where we have a ton of great shows, shows that are young and not afraid to take risks, that are more diverse and progressive with their stories and characters. 9 years in TBBT is, for better or for worse, reliable comfort food. Doesn't mean that it's any better or worse than before in an objectively measurable way but there are just many other shiny new things out there that catch the voter's attention.

To quote Jim here: "Someone else's success is not your failure." I think this sentiment need to be kept in mind with award shows. A lot of great shows and wonderful actors get snubbed every year - that doesn't make them any less enjoyable or good.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, April said:

I agree that the rest of the cast deserved some love from the Emmys as well as various points in the show - especially Simon! But with those voters it always comes down as what makes an impact and what is memorable and exciting or whatever. We're currently in an age of television where we have a ton of great shows, shows that are young and not afraid to take risks, that are more diverse and progressive with their stories and characters. 9 years in TBBT is, for better or for worse, reliable comfort food. Doesn't mean that it's any better or worse than before in an objectively measurable way but there are just many other shiny new things out there that catch the voter's attention.

To quote Jim here: "Someone else's success is not your failure." I think this sentiment need to be kept in mind with award shows. A lot of great shows and wonderful actors get snubbed every year - that doesn't make them any less enjoyable or good.

Thank you so much, April, for your balanced, calm perspective.  Jim is exactly right--I'm sure his attitude is that he is grateful for the four Emmys on his bookshelf.  I think he is in the field because of the passion he has for telling stories, and I look forward to him telling us more--on stage, the screen.    But today, with what happened in France, it seems infinitely small.  Again, I appreciate you, April.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tensor said:

I'd much rather see a renewal for at least two more years, than an emmy nom.  

I'm not sure I want to see two more seasons if they are like season 9.

9 hours ago, Tensor said:

 

 

You can act the hell out of a badly written character and get nothing for it.  Jim does a great job with the character, but does anyone really believe if it was a poorly  written character, that doesn't fit him, he would have received the number of nominations and the number of awards he has received?  If it was all Jim, where was his nomination for supporting actor for "Garden State"?  How about his Emmy nomination for supporting actor for Judging Amy?  Maybe his supporting nomination for a acting in a limited series for "Taste"?  Does anyone really think that Jim was a bad actor in those?  Or was it more of the writing or type of character her played for the reason of his not getting nominated, much less winning.   

Which is why I asked the question.  From this comment, you seem to think the acting of Don Knotts (who won awards for his character) was more excellent than the acting of Andy Griffith (who didn't win awards)?   Emmy awards (even nominations) for acting are a combination of writing, directing, acting, along with intangibles such as fit for the role, type of role,  etc.  It's never down to just acting.

 

 

Agreed. When you see those Intel commercials do you see Jim Parsons or Sheldon Cooper. IMO most see Sheldon Cooper

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tensor said:

 

I'm sorry, I didn't see anything about only TBBT in this comment

 As for this

I was using other shows, actors, and characters as examples of my points.  

You can act the hell out of a badly written character and get nothing for it.  Jim does a great job with the character, but does anyone really believe if it was a poorly  written character, that doesn't fit him, he would have received the number of nominations and the number of awards he has received?  If it was all Jim, where was his nomination for supporting actor for "Garden State"?  How about his Emmy nomination for supporting actor for Judging Amy?  Maybe his supporting nomination for a acting in a limited series for "Taste"?  Does anyone really think that Jim was a bad actor in those?  Or was it more of the writing or type of character her played for the reason of his not getting nominated, much less winning.   

Which is why I asked the question.  From this comment, you seem to think the acting of Don Knotts (who won awards for his character) was more excellent than the acting of Andy Griffith (who didn't win awards)?   Emmy awards (even nominations) for acting are a combination of writing, directing, acting, along with intangibles such as fit for the role, type of role,  etc.  It's never down to just acting.

 

 

I was using Jim as an example of a cast member who has received awards recognition in the past, just like Mayim or Simon or someone else. And each acting award is intended to be given for excellence in that one role in one show/movie for which you are nominated. That is just Emmy rules. Whether they get it right is debatable and lack of winning is in no way related to anyone's acting ability. Acting depends on writing and type of role, but on tbbt all cast members have done a good job imo and as stated in my previous post, they were also recognized. 

 My entire post was specific to acting on tbbt as I mentioned jim's emmys -all of which are for tbbt so I'm not sure why there is confusion as to whether I'm talking about other roles or other shows.

Edited by serena_nyc1995
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to jump in here with two points:

1.  I don't recall starting to watch a show based on whether or not they won a bunch of Emmys.   So the fact that TBBT didn't pick up any major Emmy nods means nothing to me.

2.  As Tensor pretty much said, I think that the Emmy voters tend to look for the more quirky acted characters (ie:  Barney Fife, Sheldon) as opposed to a character that is grounded and consistently acted (Andy Griffith, Leonard). 

That's all I got...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the fact when Big Bang started it wsaen't susposed to go past Season One. SO whether ot not one wathed to see it get Emmys is kinda redundant if you ask me. Besides if it does not matter that Big Bang did not get any nomiations. Then why on earth are we even talking about it huh? Why was this thread created in the first place? In the context of Big Bang and Emmys, clearly it does matter. IT is just conceded to me. OH Emmys don't matter. Welltht is convinient lol. I mean i am sorry obviousley the show does not deserve to be nomianted. But in the past it shoudl of won for S3 and S7. But their is a clear bias againgst multi camera sitcoms. Fair enough you diddnt watch to see the show get Emmys. But we woulden't even be talking about this, if the show diddn't go past Season One. 

Edited by 3ku11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.