The 2024 Primetime Emmy nominations were announced on Wednesday. James Poniewozik and Margaret Lyons, two television critics for The New York Times, discussed who made it and who didn’t, why Emmy categories are increasingly irrelevant and which nominations made them smile.
JAMES PONIEWOZIK Happy Emmy day, Margaret! It seems like we were just talking about the Emmys — which we kind of were, the most recent awards having been handed out in January because of a strike delay.
That strike pause — coupled with the recent retirement of some hall-of-fame shows like “Succession” — may have something to do with one of the larger trends this year: The cupboard feels a little bare. There’s plenty of good-enough TV (dare I say Mid?) on the prize list, not a lot of great. (Though we can discuss the exceptions: Very happy to see recognition for “Reservation Dogs.”)
Still, there are simply a lot of awards, so there’s always something to talk about. It was a big year for “The Bear” in comedy (is it one?) and “Shogun” in drama series (it sure felt like a limited series when I watched it complete its story). It feels like there has been a lot more talk this year about categorization and category-gaming, but let me know how you’re feeling.
MARGARET LYONS The categories are illegible and increasingly nonsensical. What do we gain by, for example, putting “Finding Your Roots With Henry Louis Gates Jr.” in competition with “How To With John Wilson”? The double-dipping between talk and variety is snoozy, and the category gaming for “The Bear” and “Shogun” feels if not sleazy, then at least kind of dumb! The Emmys wax and wane in terms of legitimacy, and I wonder if it’s even possible for a structured awards format like this to retain meaning when TV itself is more flexible, its genres more porous.
PONIEWOZIK Yes, the way to eliminate the arbitrary category divisions would be … just not have them. Just have best series! Best cinematography! Best directing! Unless we resurrect Aristotle to sort this out, I think any proposed tweaking (sort series by run time? broadcast vs. cable vs. streaming? weight class?) would just invite other absurdities. But the Emmys exist to give out Emmys, and I assume reducing the number of them would be the Hollywood equivalent of campaigning on entitlement cuts.
But whether or not “Shogun” is a drama series, it at least classed up what was shaping up to be a pretty weak category. Although I would have hoped that it would have left room for the excellent “The Sympathizer” in limited series; instead, that show got noted only for its weakest aspect, the multiple stunt-casting of Robert Downey Jr.
LYONS Jim, free your mind from the shackles of “best”! My dream Emmys would honor however much excellence was present in any given year. If five great dramedies blow us all away, then five great dramedies get Emmys; if everyone’s mid, we’ll try again next year. Think of it as higher but wider standards. It’ll never happen — but then again, I thought the Emmys would never wake up to Matt Berry’s performance on “What We Do in the Shadows,” and I am thrilled to be wrong.
PONIEWOZIK Margaret, I just want to hear a Matt Berry acceptance speech. He doesn’t even have to win — he could give Jeremy Allen White’s if necessary!
There was a lot that made me smile on this list. The gorgeous animated series “Scavengers Reign” may have been cut short on Max, but the Emmys didn’t forget it. D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai broke into the comedy acting category for the last season of “Reservation Dogs” (though Devery Jacobs should have as well). And all hail the reality-hosting nomination for Alan Cumming, a peacocking Shakespearean hoot on “The Traitors.”
LYONS Along with “Scavengers,” I was jazzed to see “Blue Eye Samurai” get a nod — a gorgeous, violent historical epic that will be up against “Bob’s Burgers” because, again, Emmy categories are bad.
I was also glad to see the documentary mini-series “Telemarketers” nominated; that was one of my favorites last year, a show that was about a lot of things at once without being messy or unfocused. I also loved John Early’s special “Now More Than Ever,” which is nominated for outstanding writing for a variety special — a category that also includes the Oscars.
I am mystified by the lack of recognition for “The Righteous Gemstones.” Who’s missing for you?
PONIEWOZIK I have some snubs too. But I believe that if I complain about what should have been on a list, I have to say what I’d take off to make room. Only life can pay for life. So: Put the inventive “I’m a Virgo” on the outstanding comedy list and cut the try-hard period satire “Palm Royale.” Sub in Jharrel Jerome of “Virgo” for any of Larry David, Steve Martin or Martin Short. (You are national treasures! You don’t need this!) Swap out the fancy mediocrity “The Gilded Age” for the bananas cringe-horror of “The Curse.”
Then there are the just plain surprises. “Elsbeth” has been such a full-employment program for top-notch guest stars that I was expecting it to get multiple nods, say Linda Lavin or Jane Krakowski. And speaking of “The Curse,” no Emma Stone? Does TV awards’ deference to movie stars count for nothing anymore?
LYONS Wild that “The Curse” came up empty and also shocking to me that “Expats” met the same fate. I thought Lulu Wang’s direction there was breathtaking.
If there was a show this year that was undeniable, though, it was “Baby Reindeer,” and indeed that notched a ton of nominations.
PONIEWOZIK “Baby Reindeer” was what I wanted more of this year — something that grabbed me and slapped me awake.
Instead, this felt a bit like a half-season of TV, and I can only get half-passionate about this Emmy list. Like Randy Jackson of “American Idol,” I ain’t mad at it. Most of what was good got recognized. “The Bear” may be a comedy, it may be a drama — it is the savory cannoli of television — but it was one of the best shows of the season. (Keep in mind we are talking the glorious Season 2, not the step-down of Season 3.) Ultimately that’s what matters, not how you organize the menu.
Source: Television - nytimes.com
