Awarding the 80s
Jul. 18th, 2016 09:07 amDeterminedly non-political entry, since the times, they keep getting dreadfull-er: when I lived through the 80s as a teenager, I never expected to feel so nostalgic about them. But I've started to watch Stranger Things on Netflix, and wow, does it ever hit those unexpected buttons. Also, based on the first two episodes, it's a wondrous crossover of Stephen King tropes and Steven Spielberg visuals.
(Key difference between the Steves of the 80s: while in E.T., the sequence where Elliot's home is invaded by white decontamination suit wearing government officials is viscerally scary, in the end said officials aren't depicted as evil but benevolent. They really want to help E.T. (and Elliot). Meanwhile, in a Stephen King novels, you can rely on such types being really truly evil, and probably co-responsible for the horror of the day in the first place. So far, Stranger Things, despite paying visual homage to E.T. like no one's business, seems to be on the King end on the spectrum, content wise.)
And speaking of the 80s - the most joyful thing when this year's Emmy nominations were released for me was that The Americans finally got five of those, including best actor and best actress, best drama and best writing. My loyalties are slightly split because Better Call Saul also got nominated for best drama, writing and best leading actor, but much as I love Jimmy & friends, I think overall I'm rooting for Team Undercover Spies here, comrades.
Also, the BCS nominations frustrate me a bit because not only they're leaving out Rhea Seaborn, whose season the second one was, for supporting actress, but pick Jonathan Banks as Mike over Michael McKean as Chuck for supporting actor. Call me crazy, but I think acting nominations shouldn't be about which character is more beloved or likeable. Chuck does some awful things in s2. Micheal McKean also gets a hell of a lot acting to do and layers to sell (what he pulls off in the last two episodes of s2 especially!), while there's no s2 equivalent to s1's grand Mike vehicle, Five-O, and while Jonathan Banks continues to do his solid stoic supporting act superbly, he didn't do anything we hadn't seen before in several seasons of Breaking Bad and now Better Call Saul.
Mind you, the perennial favorite Game of Thrones illustrates that likeability trumping acting thing in this years' nominations as well. Yes, Peter Dinklage is awesome in general, but in this season Tyrion didn't have much to do. And Emilia Clarke over Sophie Turner, seriously? Must be the dragons. Lena Headey, otoh: deserved. And because they didn't nominate Alison Wright for best supporting actress in a drama series in The Americans or Rhea Seaborn for Better Call Saul, see above though perhaps it was because she went from supporting to virtual co-lead in s2, I can even root for her.
Next goal: get the Emmy crowd to watch Black Sails. Considering they've kept nominating Downton Abbey long beyond its expiration age, they're bound to be Maggie Smith fans, so pointing out her kid is doing amazing things as the lead could help...
(Key difference between the Steves of the 80s: while in E.T., the sequence where Elliot's home is invaded by white decontamination suit wearing government officials is viscerally scary, in the end said officials aren't depicted as evil but benevolent. They really want to help E.T. (and Elliot). Meanwhile, in a Stephen King novels, you can rely on such types being really truly evil, and probably co-responsible for the horror of the day in the first place. So far, Stranger Things, despite paying visual homage to E.T. like no one's business, seems to be on the King end on the spectrum, content wise.)
And speaking of the 80s - the most joyful thing when this year's Emmy nominations were released for me was that The Americans finally got five of those, including best actor and best actress, best drama and best writing. My loyalties are slightly split because Better Call Saul also got nominated for best drama, writing and best leading actor, but much as I love Jimmy & friends, I think overall I'm rooting for Team Undercover Spies here, comrades.
Also, the BCS nominations frustrate me a bit because not only they're leaving out Rhea Seaborn, whose season the second one was, for supporting actress, but pick Jonathan Banks as Mike over Michael McKean as Chuck for supporting actor. Call me crazy, but I think acting nominations shouldn't be about which character is more beloved or likeable. Chuck does some awful things in s2. Micheal McKean also gets a hell of a lot acting to do and layers to sell (what he pulls off in the last two episodes of s2 especially!), while there's no s2 equivalent to s1's grand Mike vehicle, Five-O, and while Jonathan Banks continues to do his solid stoic supporting act superbly, he didn't do anything we hadn't seen before in several seasons of Breaking Bad and now Better Call Saul.
Mind you, the perennial favorite Game of Thrones illustrates that likeability trumping acting thing in this years' nominations as well. Yes, Peter Dinklage is awesome in general, but in this season Tyrion didn't have much to do. And Emilia Clarke over Sophie Turner, seriously? Must be the dragons. Lena Headey, otoh: deserved. And because they didn't nominate Alison Wright for best supporting actress in a drama series in The Americans or Rhea Seaborn for Better Call Saul, see above though perhaps it was because she went from supporting to virtual co-lead in s2, I can even root for her.
Next goal: get the Emmy crowd to watch Black Sails. Considering they've kept nominating Downton Abbey long beyond its expiration age, they're bound to be Maggie Smith fans, so pointing out her kid is doing amazing things as the lead could help...
no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 11:21 am (UTC)ETA: Remembered one of the better choices: Tatiana Maslany, finally. (And just in time, too, I heard next season is supposed to be the last.)
no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 01:23 pm (UTC)Quite. I'm still bearing an unreasonable grudge against poor Emilia C. for getting cast as Sarah Connor and barely stop myself from growling "ursurper" anyway...
Tatiana Maslany: absolutely. If she wins, it'll be more than deserved.
no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 03:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 05:32 pm (UTC)Anyway, it's very evident that the Emmys weren't really built to contemplate a GoT style ensemble.
It's a pity for many of the smaller parts, especially. Maybe they should award accolades by house? Tyrell and Lannister would have been totally qualified.
no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 01:00 pm (UTC)I'm impressed so far, especially with the acting from the young cast members. (Not that the adults aren't good, too, but I don't usually expect excellent performances across the board from a bunch of twelve-year-olds.)
no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 01:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 01:14 pm (UTC)And as much as I love Smith herself, I'll have to completely agree with "nominating Downton Abbey long beyond its expiration age" because seriously, these nominations have been a bit of a travesty for a while now. At least it's finally over. But it seems like they are proving the point that there's way too much to watch so the voters tend to default to stuff they expect to be good quite often.
no subject
Date: 2016-07-18 01:20 pm (UTC)