Emmy Awards

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Television

      Super Emmy: Is the Time Now Right for This Former Disaster?

      by

      Fifty years ago, the Emmy Awards implemented a change deemed such a disaster it was quickly eliminated.For the 1974 ceremony, the Television Academy created a “Super Emmy” that pitted winners in the comedy and drama balloting against each other. For example, the “M*A*S*H” star Alan Alda took home two trophies that year: one for best comedy actor and a second in a head-to-head showdown with Telly Savalas, who had already won the drama lead acting award for “Kojak.”The stated goal was to streamline the televised ceremony — the category honors were given out before the telecast and only the Super Emmys were awarded on air. But Alda and his fellow winner Mary Tyler Moore joined critics like John J. O’Connor of The New York Times in panning the stunt, and organizers retreated.Yet a half-century and a reshaped television environment later, the Super Emmy, that strange visitor from the 1970s, might be one of those once-bad ideas whose time has finally come.Not that the Emmys are looking to prolong the show, which will air Sunday on ABC. Unlike the Oscars, TV’s most prestigious award remains pretty rigidly held to its allotted time, so adding a category would likely require pushing another out of the main broadcast.But a Super Emmy would do more than merely add a “Highlander”-style bolt of excitement — “There can be only one!” — to a generally predictable telecast. It would also acknowledge the blurring of lines in TV’s categorical designations, which often makes it hard to differentiate between drama, comedy and limited series.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Television

      Michael Crichton’s Estate Calls New Show an Unauthorized ‘ER’ Remake in Lawsuit

      by

      The best-selling author’s estate has filed suit over “The Pitt,” an upcoming series, claiming that it is an unauthorized reboot of the hit hospital drama.The estate of Michael Crichton filed suit against Warner Bros. Television on Tuesday, claiming that its upcoming Max series, “The Pitt,” is an unauthorized “ER” reboot that fails to credit him and compensate his heirs.The suit accused Warner Bros. and R. Scott Gemmill, the showrunner of “The Pitt,” of breaching a contract that requires Crichton’s consent for any remakes of the hit hospital drama. The estate also sued John Wells, an executive producer, and Noah Wyle, set to star and serve as an executive producer.“The lawsuit filed by the Crichton Estate is baseless,” Warner Bros. Television said in an emailed statement, calling “The Pitt” a “new and original show.” The company said it would “vigorously defend against these meritless claims.”The complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, claims that in 2020, Warner Bros., Gemmill, Wells and Wyle began developing a reboot of the show without informing Sherri Crichton, the author’s widow and the guardian of his estate. Gemmill and Wells were executive producers on “ER,” and Wyle was a star of that show.When they told her about the project, nearly two years into development, Crichton’s estate was prepared to approve a reboot based on the condition that he would be credited as a creator, in addition to a set of financial terms. But Warner Bros. later walked back on many of its promises, the lawsuit said.After negotiating for nearly a year, the parties did not reach an agreement, according to the suit. But Warner Bros. “simply moved the show from Chicago to Pittsburgh, rebranded it ‘The Pitt’ and has plowed ahead without any attribution or compensation for Crichton and his heirs,” the complaint said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Television

      Matt Berry Is Afraid of Heights, Not Comedy

      by

      His performance as a debauched vampire in “What We Do in the Shadows” earned him an Emmy nod. It has also often had him dangling 50 feet off the ground.Many actors will claim to have been surprised by an Emmy nomination. Matt Berry seems to mean it. While “What We Do in the Shadows,” the gleefully grotesque FX vampire comedy, has piled up a score of Emmy nominations, none were for performance.So when Berry’s agent called in mid-July and asked to FaceTime, Berry, a prolific singer-songwriter who was busy at his drum kit recording a new folk-pop album, had no idea why.“I can honestly tell you I was not expecting an Emmy nomination,” he said. But it was — a nomination for best lead actor in a comedy series, his first in any category.Berry, 50, an English actor best known for cult comedies like “Garth Marenghi’s Darkplace” and “Toast of London,” stars as Laszlo Cravensworth, a 300-year-old English aristocrat turned vampire. An avatar of decadence with a thing for orgies and cravats, he is played by Berry with a debauched joy and an accent that somehow suggests cut glass, crushed velvet and many, many quaaludes.Berry, whose gift is for making the most outlandish circumstances feel oddly plausible, recently wrapped the show’s sixth and final season. He didn’t seem to regret it. “I’m one of those that is very keen to cut loose when I’m onto a good thing,” he said. And despite the occasional wire work — he has an entirely serious fear of heights — “Shadows” had been good.Reached at his home in Bedfordshire, England, Berry discussed Victorian style, vampirism’s upsides and the most outlandish things the show has ever made him do. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Television

      For Aja Naomi King, an Emmy Nomination Is a Seismic Event

      by

      The earth shook as she talked about receiving her first Emmy nod, for her role as Harriet in the Apple TV+ show “Lessons in Chemistry.” Literally.A few minutes into a conversation with Aja Naomi King, a first time Emmy nominee for her graceful, purposeful supporting turn in the Apple TV+ limited series “Lessons in Chemistry,” the earth began to move. “Oh my God. Earthquake! Earthquake!” King said. Once the ground quieted, she collected herself.“Sorry,” she said. “I just really got the fullness of that shake.”An Emmy nomination? That has been earthshaking, too. King’s Instagram post about the news is an outpouring of exuberant run-on sentences punctuated by a heart emoji. “If you made it to the bottom of this post you deserve an award,” she wrote.King, 39, graduated from the School of Drama at Yale in 2010. She had been working professionally for over a decade, most notably in the tangy ABC procedural “How to Get Away With Murder,” when she was cast in “Lessons in Chemistry.” Based on the best seller by Bonnie Garmus, the show tells the story of Elizabeth Zott (Brie Larson), a onetime chemist who becomes the host of a 1960s cooking show.King plays Elizabeth’s close friend Harriet. Described in the novel as a middle-aged white woman, Harriet was reimagined as a young Black mother and an aspiring lawyer who fights to save Los Angeles’s Sugar Hill neighborhood from the incursions of the freeway system.When Elizabeth, concerned for her career, declines to participate in the fight, King’s Harriet confronts her. “You’re always talking about the things that keep women down, but who does that include?” Harriet says.While King was initially concerned that Harriet would be a mere foil for Elizabeth, she was gratified by what she described as “the fullness of Harriet’s Black womanhood” that the show allowed for.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Television

      ‘Reservation Dogs’ Showed D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai What Is Possible

      by

      The actor received his first Emmy nomination for his performance on the acclaimed Native comedy. In an interview, he talks about breaking down stereotypes, and possibly reviving his character.Much like his “Reservation Dogs” character, D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai grew up wondering if he was a good guy.If his dedication to his craft and his community is any indication, the 22-year-old actor of Anishinaabe, Guyanese and German descent seems to be a pretty upstanding citizen. The day we chat about his Emmy nomination for lead actor in a comedy series, for example, he is visiting his parents in his native Toronto (from his adopted hometown, Los Angeles) and has spent most of the morning chauffeuring his auntie around on a several-hours-long excursion. After all, mothers, grandmothers and aunties are considered the bedrock of Indigenous communities.That’s a fact any “Reservation Dogs” fan would know. With the groundbreaking FX series, the creators Taika Waititi and Sterlin Harjo provided a rare look at everyday life on an Oklahoma Indian reservation through the eyes of four teens reeling in the aftermath of a friend’s suicide. Harjo, who also served as showrunner, has said there was only one way to do it: with an all-Indigenous team of writers, directors and regular actors who could authentically tell this story.Alongside his young co-stars, Woon-A-Tai made uncharted television territory feel warm, raw and utterly relatable, garnering “Rez Dogs” broad acclaim as well as four Emmy nominations this year, including a best comedy nod. His portrayal of Bear Smallhill also earned him an Emmy nomination, placing him alongside Lily Gladstone (“Under the Bridge”) and Kali Reis (“True Detective: Night Country”) as the first Indigenous actors to be nominated in 17 years.In an interview, he talked about breaking down stereotypes, possibly reviving his “Rez Dogs” character and being a good, healthy Indigenous man. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.Despite critical acclaim, “Rez Dogs” was notably overlooked by the television academy for its first two seasons. What does it mean to you to break through with a best comedy nomination and one of the few Indigenous acting nominations in Emmys history?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Television

      Phil Donahue, Daytime Talk Show Host, Dies at 88

      by

      Phil Donahue, who in the 1960s reinvented the television talk show with a democratic flourish, inviting audiences to question his guests on topics as resolutely high-minded as human rights and international relations, and as unblushingly lowbrow as male strippers and safe-sex orgies, died on Sunday at his home on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. He was 88.His death was confirmed by Susan Arons, a representative of the family.“The Phil Donahue Show” made its debut in 1967 on WLWD-TV in Dayton, Ohio, propelling Mr. Donahue on a 29-year syndicated run, much of it as the unchallenged king of daytime talk television.Almost from the start, “The Phil Donahue Show” dispensed with familiar trappings. There was no opening monologue, no couch, no sidekick, no band — just the host and the guests, focused on a single topic.At the time, audiences were expected to be seen and not heard, unless prompted to applaud. Mr. Donahue changed that. He quickly realized from chatting with audience members during commercial breaks that some of them asked sharper questions than he did. And so he began his practice of stalking the aisles, microphone in hand, and letting those in the seats have their say. He also opened the telephone lines to those watching at home. Electronic democracy, as some called it, had arrived.Few subjects, if any, were off limits for Mr. Donahue, who was said to have told his staff, “I want all the topics hot.” It mattered little that at times the subjects made some viewers, and local station managers, squirm. His very first guest was guaranteed to stir controversy: Madalyn Murray O’Hair, at the time America’s most famous, and widely unpopular, atheist.Mr. Donahue’s very first guest was Madalyn Murray O’Hair, at the time America’s most famous, and widely unpopular, atheist.via Everett CollectionWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in Television

      For Nava Mau, ‘Baby Reindeer’ Felt Private. Then It Blew Up.

      by

      Mau is up for an Emmy for her performance in the hit Netflix series, making her the first transgender person to be nominated for a limited series acting Emmy.Voting is underway for the 76th Primetime Emmys, and this week we are talking to several first-time Emmy nominees. The awards will be presented Sept. 15 on ABC.The experience of filming “Baby Reindeer” was so meaningful for Nava Mau, she said, that she would have been fine if it had never come out. But it did in April, and then the seven-episode thriller did what few could have predicted: It became a global phenomenon. The breakout television series of the year so far, “Baby Reindeer” is among Netflix’s most watched shows ever.Its success is even more surprising given the intensity of its central themes: sexual assault, shame, stalking and self-loathing. Based on the real experiences of its creator, writer and star, Richard Gadd, it follows a struggling comedian named Donny who is traumatized by a predatory producer and later stalked by a sad woman named Martha, played by Jessica Gunning. “Baby Reindeer” is one of Martha’s nicknames for Donny.Mau played Teri, a successful therapist and the love interest for Donny, whom she met on a transgender dating site. Teri sees the world more clearly than the other characters but experiences trauma of her own. In July, Mau received her first Emmy nomination, for best supporting actress in a limited series, one of 11 nods for the show. She is the first transgender person to be nominated for a limited series acting Emmy.Mau, who was born in Mexico City and raised in Texas and California, said the story resonated with audiences for the same reasons it resonated with her when she read the script.“Richard demonstrated such courage in portraying these characters as truthfully and beautifully as they possibly could have been,” she said in an interview. “There’s such ugliness in the story and such pain, and yet the humanity of every character is never sacrificed. I think that kind of storytelling allows for people to lower their defenses and really engage with the themes and the emotions that are being presented to them.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      Gena Rowlands, Actress Who Brought Raw Drama to Her Roles, Dies at 94

      by

      Gena Rowlands, the intense, elegant dramatic actress who, often in collaboration with her husband, John Cassavetes, starred in a series of introspective independent films, has died. She was 94.The death was confirmed by the office of Daniel Greenberg, a representative for Ms. Rowlands’s son, the director Nick Cassavetes. No other details were given.In June, her family said that she had been living with Alzheimer’s disease for five years.Ms. Rowlands, who often played intoxicated, deranged or otherwise on-the-verge characters, was nominated twice for best actress Oscars in performances directed by Mr. Cassavetes. The first was the title role in “A Woman Under the Influence” (1974), in which her desperate, insecure character is institutionalized by her blue-collar husband (Peter Falk) because he doesn’t know what else to do. The critic Roger Ebert wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times that Ms. Rowlands was “so touchingly vulnerable to every kind of influence around her that we don’t want to tap her because she might fall apart.”Her second nomination was for “Gloria” (1980), in which she starred as a gangster’s moll on the run with an orphaned boy.Ms. Rowlands and John Marley in “Faces,” which Renata Adler of The New York Times called “a really important movie” about “the way things are.” Like many of her movies, it was directed by Ms. Rowland’s husband, John Cassavetes.United Archives, via Getty ImagesBut it was “Faces” (1968), in which she starred as a young prostitute opposite John Marley, that first brought the Cassavetes-Rowlands partnership to moviegoers’ attention. Critics spread the word; Renata Adler described the film in The New York Times as “a really important movie” about “the way things are,” and Mr. Ebert called it “astonishing.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More